Column: Larry Elder is the Black face of white supremacy.

Page 8 of 41 [ 647 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 41  Next

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

09 Sep 2021, 9:54 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:

I have no idea who Ibram X Kendi or Robin DiAngelo are.


Try and keep it that way, they're poison, and trendy poison in liberal circles for reasons that completely baffle me. Kendi in particular is famous for his Manichean view of race relations, that there is no such thing as being not racist, you are either a racist or an anti racist, and he views any racial disparity as being racist, and will accept no other explanation for it. Under his beliefs, the NBA is racist because there are too many black people in it in relation to their percentage of the population, but he won't ever say anything like that because, as you might imagine, he only applies his standard in one direction. DiAngelo is more like a religious conartist who might actually believe what she's selling, charging companies massive fees to come in and tell everyone how racist they are, and that the more they deny it the more racist that makes them. She subscribes to the more religious version of wokeness where white people are born racist and have to struggle constantly against it, but can never achieve true absolution, her books are absolute dumpster fires, and she's roundly mocked by serious race scholars.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

09 Sep 2021, 10:02 pm

National Review has a story up doing a pretty good summary of my feelings on the egg throwing gorilla incident:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/09/ ... n-america/

Quote:
D o a search for “Larry Elder” and gorilla on the CNN website and nothing comes up. Washington Post? Zilch. Nothing comes up on the New York Times site either, although if you make it to the 15th paragraph of a story entitled “The Vice President pushed back against the effort to recall Newsom in the Bay Area,” you will find a bland passing reference to Wednesday’s disgusting incident. According to our nation’s media leaders, it’s not a story that a white person wearing a gorilla mask attacked Larry Elder, a black man seeking to become the first non-white governor of California, by hurling an egg that touched his head.

If Elder were a Democrat, the attack would have been instantly and with good reason dubbed racist. It would not only be front-page news, it would be just about the only news you were hearing about today on CNN and MSNBC. Charles Blow, Perry Bacon, and Jamelle Bouie would each be writing the first in a series of angry columns about it. So would Gail Collins, Jonathan Capehart, Jennifer Rubin, Michelle Goldberg, Paul Krugman, Maureen Dowd, Dana Milbank, and Ezra Klein. We would be treated to multiple news analyses about the history of the usage of gorilla tropes against blacks. Joy-Ann Reid, Rachel Maddow, and Don Lemon would be doing hour-long broadcasts on the attack, convening panels discussing just how the attack pulls the scab off racism in America, and proves we have so much work left to do in dealing with the problem. Vox would commission a series about California’s grim history of racism dating back to the Chinese Exclusion Act, and Asian-American and Latino writers would hasten to explain that California’s historic hostility to all sorts of persons of color is as traditional as its Tournament of Roses parade. Three-thousand-word essays about the brutal, unknown history of lynchings in the Golden State would be published in The Atlantic and/or The New Yorker. Al Sharpton, exhibiting a combination of exhaustion and despondency, would be a guest on half a dozen cable TV shows.

The woman who threw the egg at Elder would find her picture, her name, and everything she’d ever said on social media scrutinized at great length and on the home pages of the leading news sites. Her appearance would be mocked by late-night comedians. Dozens of reporters would be sent out to learn this woman’s story, to check out where she lived, where she worked, and where she went to school.

Remember what happened when a white woman in Central Park told a black man she would mention his race in the course of reporting his threat to her dog on a 911 call? That was a huge nationwide news story, despite having happened the same day as the murder of George Floyd, and even though the people involved were just ordinary New Yorkers — neither of them an important candidate a step away from one of the highest offices in the country. If Elder were a Democrat we’d be told there is a vast and wide-ranging racist plot to stop California from electing its first black governor. The stakes are a bit higher than “white dog lady calls cops on black bird-watcher.” Isn’t our democracy itself imperiled when a white person in a gorilla mask tries to leverage racism against a popular black candidate?


If a white woman in a gorilla mask threw an egg at Barack Obama or Stacy Abrams, does anyone really doubt it would be front page news coast to coast?


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

09 Sep 2021, 10:18 pm

Dox47 wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Having a politician make a comment is quite different from having an anonymous protestor in a crowd make a comment. What an elected official or candidate does is news. What his audience does may or may not be news.


You really don't see the double standard when an anodyne comment is parsed in the worst possible ways and gets wall to wall media coverage, while someone physically attacking a black candidate while wearing a gorilla mask doesn't even ripple the waters?


I don’t think it is a liberal v conservative double standard, but a public v private citizen one. The two are traditionally treated very differently under the law. With a public figure the news is, in theory, about holding leaders accountable for their objectionable behavior. The news has traditionally shied away from blasting private citizens across the news for objectionable but legal activity because it exposes them to lawsuits. I say traditionally because social media is changing the equation, but it makes me very uncomfortable when private citizens are called out publicly. Public figures sign up for scrutiny; private citizens don’t.

Maybe my recollection of what the reporting usually looks like is wrong. Find me reporting that focused on the racist behavior of a specific protestor. Not by a candidate, but by a private citizen against a candidate.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

09 Sep 2021, 10:26 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
I don’t think it is a liberal v conservative double standard, but a public v private citizen one. The two are traditionally treated very differently under the law. With a public figure the news is, in theory, about holding leaders accountable for their objectionable behavior. The news has traditionally shied away from blasting private citizens across the news for objectionable but legal activity because it exposes them to lawsuits. I say traditionally because social media is changing the equation, but it makes me very uncomfortable when private citizens are called out publicly. Public figures sign up for scrutiny; private citizens don’t.


Do you not recall the Tea Party era, when the media would collectively clutch their pearls every time a protester was spotted with a poster of Obama with a Hitler mustache in the crowds?


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

09 Sep 2021, 10:35 pm

Dox47 wrote:
National Review has a story up doing a pretty good summary of my feelings on the egg throwing gorilla incident:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/09/ ... n-america/

Quote:
D o a search for “Larry Elder” and gorilla on the CNN website and nothing comes up. Washington Post? Zilch. Nothing comes up on the New York Times site either, although if you make it to the 15th paragraph of a story entitled “The Vice President pushed back against the effort to recall Newsom in the Bay Area,” you will find a bland passing reference to Wednesday’s disgusting incident. According to our nation’s media leaders, it’s not a story that a white person wearing a gorilla mask attacked Larry Elder, a black man seeking to become the first non-white governor of California, by hurling an egg that touched his head.

If Elder were a Democrat, the attack would have been instantly and with good reason dubbed racist. It would not only be front-page news, it would be just about the only news you were hearing about today on CNN and MSNBC. Charles Blow, Perry Bacon, and Jamelle Bouie would each be writing the first in a series of angry columns about it. So would Gail Collins, Jonathan Capehart, Jennifer Rubin, Michelle Goldberg, Paul Krugman, Maureen Dowd, Dana Milbank, and Ezra Klein. We would be treated to multiple news analyses about the history of the usage of gorilla tropes against blacks. Joy-Ann Reid, Rachel Maddow, and Don Lemon would be doing hour-long broadcasts on the attack, convening panels discussing just how the attack pulls the scab off racism in America, and proves we have so much work left to do in dealing with the problem. Vox would commission a series about California’s grim history of racism dating back to the Chinese Exclusion Act, and Asian-American and Latino writers would hasten to explain that California’s historic hostility to all sorts of persons of color is as traditional as its Tournament of Roses parade. Three-thousand-word essays about the brutal, unknown history of lynchings in the Golden State would be published in The Atlantic and/or The New Yorker. Al Sharpton, exhibiting a combination of exhaustion and despondency, would be a guest on half a dozen cable TV shows.

The woman who threw the egg at Elder would find her picture, her name, and everything she’d ever said on social media scrutinized at great length and on the home pages of the leading news sites. Her appearance would be mocked by late-night comedians. Dozens of reporters would be sent out to learn this woman’s story, to check out where she lived, where she worked, and where she went to school.

Remember what happened when a white woman in Central Park told a black man she would mention his race in the course of reporting his threat to her dog on a 911 call? That was a huge nationwide news story, despite having happened the same day as the murder of George Floyd, and even though the people involved were just ordinary New Yorkers — neither of them an important candidate a step away from one of the highest offices in the country. If Elder were a Democrat we’d be told there is a vast and wide-ranging racist plot to stop California from electing its first black governor. The stakes are a bit higher than “white dog lady calls cops on black bird-watcher.” Isn’t our democracy itself imperiled when a white person in a gorilla mask tries to leverage racism against a popular black candidate?


If a white woman in a gorilla mask threw an egg at Barack Obama or Stacy Abrams, does anyone really doubt it would be front page news coast to coast?


That’s the thing, I really don’t think it would be. Do you remember any such news stories? I don’t. I am aware that multiple attacks have occurred because of more generalized research I found later, but I can’t recall any single racist protestor ever getting national coverage when either were campaigning.

Racist or homophobic protest groups get coverage, but not single individuals. Show me my memory is wrong.

The Central Park incident I think is distinguished by the involvement of social media. The news didn’t turn a camera on her, the other private citizen involved did. He blasted the video, not a news agency. Social media made it viral, and it was only picked up by major news because it already was a story. That whole social-media-to-news thing is out of hand and damaging. A fickle click bait populace shouldn’t decide what is news.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Last edited by DW_a_mom on 09 Sep 2021, 10:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

09 Sep 2021, 10:40 pm

Dox47 wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
I don’t think it is a liberal v conservative double standard, but a public v private citizen one. The two are traditionally treated very differently under the law. With a public figure the news is, in theory, about holding leaders accountable for their objectionable behavior. The news has traditionally shied away from blasting private citizens across the news for objectionable but legal activity because it exposes them to lawsuits. I say traditionally because social media is changing the equation, but it makes me very uncomfortable when private citizens are called out publicly. Public figures sign up for scrutiny; private citizens don’t.


Do you not recall the Tea Party era, when the media would collectively clutch their pearls every time a protester was spotted with a poster of Obama with a Hitler mustache in the crowds?


I honestly do not.

Perhaps it is different because anti - anti-semitism news appeals to both liberals and conservatives who both like to believe the other is more anti-Semitic.

How often did you see news of the gorilla imagery? I never did, but on social media I saw it applied CONSTANTLY against the Obama’s.

Maybe I’m all wet, but it really rattles me when either “side” claims reporting would be different if it was flipped. Most of the time the “it would be different if” claim is the whole point of the story. It’s like a mirror game. We know news media is selective about choosing to report what advances their agenda, whatever that agenda may be. They ALL do it.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

09 Sep 2021, 11:05 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
How often did you see news of the gorilla imagery? I never did, but on social media I saw it applied CONSTANTLY against the Obama’s.


Oddly, I don't recall a lot of monkey stuff aimed at Obama, definitely the secret Muslim/Kenyan thing, and later a ton of "Michelle is a shemale" stuff, but I think I might have missed a lot of the ape comparisons because that was more openly racist and more likely to get moderated on the boards where I was at the time. This might surprise you, but the more respectable right wing forums are super tough on anything even vaguely racist, they don't want their boards to turn into 4chan and potentially give their service providers an excuse to take their sites down, so they're often more stringent about that sort of thing than even mainstream politics forums. The euphemism treadmill is a constant problem with conservative boards because people are always trying to be edgier than everyone else and flirt with the line, so moderation on them is particularly challenging.

Where you do see the gorilla jokes is a variety of forum that I'm going to collectively call "blacks behaving badly", kind of a "people of Walmart" (remember that?) for racists, the most infamous being a collection of Reddit boards know as the Chimpire that was shut down some years ago on that site.

Ironically, it was W who really got the monkey business, remember endless memes like this?

Image


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

09 Sep 2021, 11:54 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
I don’t think it is a liberal v conservative double standard, but a public v private citizen one. The two are traditionally treated very differently under the law. With a public figure the news is, in theory, about holding leaders accountable for their objectionable behavior. The news has traditionally shied away from blasting private citizens across the news for objectionable but legal activity because it exposes them to lawsuits. I say traditionally because social media is changing the equation, but it makes me very uncomfortable when private citizens are called out publicly. Public figures sign up for scrutiny; private citizens don’t.


Do you not recall the Tea Party era, when the media would collectively clutch their pearls every time a protester was spotted with a poster of Obama with a Hitler mustache in the crowds?


I honestly do not.

Perhaps it is different because anti - anti-semitism news appeals to both liberals and conservatives who both like to believe the other is more anti-Semitic.

How often did you see news of the gorilla imagery? I never did, but on social media I saw it applied CONSTANTLY against the Obama’s.


Try taking the politics out of the situation being discussed...
Lets start with a simple question: Would you agree that a political candidate being the victim of assault[1] (having an object thrown at them) would be "newsworthy"?
Now, let's add: Would you agree that having shots reportedly fired (albeit from a pellet gun)[2] at a security person and driver who were with a politician would be "newsworthy"?

From here, we'll specify the race of the politician: "African American" - does this make the event more, or less, "newsworthy"?
Then we'll add the race of the attacker: "White" - does this make the event more, or less, "newsworthy"?
Finally we'll note that the attacked was wearing a "monkey" mask - does this make the event more, or less, "newsworthy"?

As an additional exercise, would the political alignment (of either the assailant or victim) have any bearing on whether this was "newsworthy"?

DW_a_mom wrote:
Maybe I’m all wet, but it really rattles me when either “side” claims reporting would be different if it was flipped. Most of the time the “it would be different if” claim is the whole point of the story. It’s like a mirror game. We know news media is selective about choosing to report what advances their agenda, whatever that agenda may be. They ALL do it.


How about a very simple comparison, removing certain factors from the question... What makes this attack less "newsworthy" than a similar attack on a left-aligned politician in another country? We don't need to concern ourselves with "race" (either victim or assailant), and can merely consider the different approach taken when a "left-aligned" politician has an egg thrown at them, compared to the same with a "right-aligned" politician - Of course, there is the added factor that one event occured outside the country, having no impact on it, whilst the other was an event in the country, and would therefore have more impact on the country...

[1] Appropriate Assualt and Battery laws are reasonably well explained at https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/penal-code/240/
[2]
Quote:
Later, Elder tweeted that in the morning someone also fired a pellet gun at his security detail. LAPD confirms it is looking into a report that a driver and security team member for Elder were struck but not seriously injured around 10:45 a.m. on Melrose Avenue.

Source: https://abc7.com/politics/larry-elders-venice-event-cut-short-due-to-angry-crowd/11009110/



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

10 Sep 2021, 12:49 am

Dox47 wrote:

Ironically, it was W who really got the monkey business, remember endless memes like this?

Image


Well that will challenge the theory its always racist, won't it? I don't remember the memes, but seeing them leaves some food for thought. I suppose "intent" is the deciding factor, although we all know how fickle reading "intent" can be.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

10 Sep 2021, 12:59 am

Brictoria wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
I don’t think it is a liberal v conservative double standard, but a public v private citizen one. The two are traditionally treated very differently under the law. With a public figure the news is, in theory, about holding leaders accountable for their objectionable behavior. The news has traditionally shied away from blasting private citizens across the news for objectionable but legal activity because it exposes them to lawsuits. I say traditionally because social media is changing the equation, but it makes me very uncomfortable when private citizens are called out publicly. Public figures sign up for scrutiny; private citizens don’t.


Do you not recall the Tea Party era, when the media would collectively clutch their pearls every time a protester was spotted with a poster of Obama with a Hitler mustache in the crowds?


I honestly do not.

Perhaps it is different because anti - anti-semitism news appeals to both liberals and conservatives who both like to believe the other is more anti-Semitic.

How often did you see news of the gorilla imagery? I never did, but on social media I saw it applied CONSTANTLY against the Obama’s.


Try taking the politics out of the situation being discussed...
Lets start with a simple question: Would you agree that a political candidate being the victim of assault[1] (having an object thrown at them) would be "newsworthy"?
Now, let's add: Would you agree that having shots reportedly fired (albeit from a pellet gun)[2] at a security person and driver who were with a politician would be "newsworthy"?

From here, we'll specify the race of the politician: "African American" - does this make the event more, or less, "newsworthy"?
Then we'll add the race of the attacker: "White" - does this make the event more, or less, "newsworthy"?
Finally we'll note that the attacked was wearing a "monkey" mask - does this make the event more, or less, "newsworthy"?

As an additional exercise, would the political alignment (of either the assailant or victim) have any bearing on whether this was "newsworthy"?


I'm going to throw out a new consideration: what SHOULD we should give oxygen to? People behave outrageously because they feel it will increase their odds of getting broader coverage.

I generally feel like its "news" if its criminal and/or involving a large group or organization. Not news if it is one person being outrageous or deplorable.

Quote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Maybe I’m all wet, but it really rattles me when either “side” claims reporting would be different if it was flipped. Most of the time the “it would be different if” claim is the whole point of the story. It’s like a mirror game. We know news media is selective about choosing to report what advances their agenda, whatever that agenda may be. They ALL do it.


How about a very simple comparison, removing certain factors from the question... What makes this attack less "newsworthy" than a similar attack on a left-aligned politician in another country? We don't need to concern ourselves with "race" (either victim or assailant), and can merely consider the different approach taken when a "left-aligned" politician has an egg thrown at them, compared to the same with a "right-aligned" politician - Of course, there is the added factor that one event occured outside the country, having no impact on it, whilst the other was an event in the country, and would therefore have more impact on the country...

[1] Appropriate Assualt and Battery laws are reasonably well explained at https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/penal-code/240/
[2]
Quote:
Later, Elder tweeted that in the morning someone also fired a pellet gun at his security detail. LAPD confirms it is looking into a report that a driver and security team member for Elder were struck but not seriously injured around 10:45 a.m. on Melrose Avenue.

Source: https://abc7.com/politics/larry-elders-venice-event-cut-short-due-to-angry-crowd/11009110/


Well, a different search today and now I see the Elder story covered by several "liberal" sources, so I think it's becoming a mute question. But I also think the standard I suggested early may apply, now that more is known about what happened: its "news" if its criminal and/or involving a large group or organization. Not news if it is one person being outrageous or deplorable.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

10 Sep 2021, 2:25 am

DW_a_mom wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
Try taking the politics out of the situation being discussed...
Lets start with a simple question: Would you agree that a political candidate being the victim of assault[1] (having an object thrown at them) would be "newsworthy"?
Now, let's add: Would you agree that having shots reportedly fired (albeit from a pellet gun)[2] at a security person and driver who were with a politician would be "newsworthy"?

From here, we'll specify the race of the politician: "African American" - does this make the event more, or less, "newsworthy"?
Then we'll add the race of the attacker: "White" - does this make the event more, or less, "newsworthy"?
Finally we'll note that the attacked was wearing a "monkey" mask - does this make the event more, or less, "newsworthy"?

As an additional exercise, would the political alignment (of either the assailant or victim) have any bearing on whether this was "newsworthy"?


I'm going to throw out a new consideration: what SHOULD we should give oxygen to? People behave outrageously because they feel it will increase their odds of getting broader coverage.

I generally feel like its "news" if its criminal and/or involving a large group or organization. Not news if it is one person being outrageous or deplorable.


Let's re-read that first question, then:
Brictoria wrote:
Would you agree that a political candidate being the victim of assault[1] (having an object thrown at them) would be "newsworthy"?


Are you saying that what is arguably "Assault" (or, "attempted assault") is not criminal? If it is, then what you stated would suggest that it should have been published.

Or the second question:
Brictoria wrote:
Would you agree that having shots reportedly fired (albeit from a pellet gun)[2] at a security person and driver who were with a politician would be "newsworthy"?


Again, we have a report of an incident of assault that the local police are investigating, so this seems another item which fits your requirement for something to be criminal in order to be published in the media...

There's also the question as to whether the attempt to hit the member of the security team when he approached the assailant could also constitute assault, adding to the reasons it should be published.

DW_a_mom wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Maybe I’m all wet, but it really rattles me when either “side” claims reporting would be different if it was flipped. Most of the time the “it would be different if” claim is the whole point of the story. It’s like a mirror game. We know news media is selective about choosing to report what advances their agenda, whatever that agenda may be. They ALL do it.


How about a very simple comparison, removing certain factors from the question... What makes this attack less "newsworthy" than a similar attack on a left-aligned politician in another country? We don't need to concern ourselves with "race" (either victim or assailant), and can merely consider the different approach taken when a "left-aligned" politician has an egg thrown at them, compared to the same with a "right-aligned" politician - Of course, there is the added factor that one event occured outside the country, having no impact on it, whilst the other was an event in the country, and would therefore have more impact on the country...

[1] Appropriate Assualt and Battery laws are reasonably well explained at https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/penal-code/240/
[2]
Quote:
Later, Elder tweeted that in the morning someone also fired a pellet gun at his security detail. LAPD confirms it is looking into a report that a driver and security team member for Elder were struck but not seriously injured around 10:45 a.m. on Melrose Avenue.

Source: https://abc7.com/politics/larry-elders-venice-event-cut-short-due-to-angry-crowd/11009110/


Well, a different search today and now I see the Elder story covered by several "liberal" sources, so I think it's becoming a mute question. But I also think the standard I suggested early may apply, now that more is known about what happened: its "news" if its criminal and/or involving a large group or organization. Not news if it is one person being outrageous or deplorable.


I don't see too many changes on where\how it has been reported:
https://ground.news/article/democrats-unleash-bigoted-attack-on-larry-elder_bb7545

With that said, the fact that assault was likely committed (or at least, attempted) by the assailant (or assailants, should the person who fired the pellet gun be a different person) would make it a criminal action which occured, and so under your reasoning should have been reported at\around the time it became known this occurred, not days later (if reported at all by certain media outlets)



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

10 Sep 2021, 3:56 am

@brictoria

Yesterday the obsession was about a gorilla mask. Today there was information that a lot more happened including a rubber bullet attack. That’s how it looks from my vantage point.

You know the old saying, there are two sides to every story, both of them probably true. Insisting that only one view can exist is a waste of time.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

10 Sep 2021, 4:24 am

DW_a_mom wrote:
@brictoria

Yesterday the obsession was about a gorilla mask. Today there was information that a lot more happened including a rubber bullet attack. That’s how it looks from my vantage point.

You know the old saying, there are two sides to every story, both of them probably true. Insisting that only one view can exist is a waste of time.


Perhaps in some quarters the obsession was on the mask... I know my focus was on the actual assault\attempted assault on Mr Elder, and I believe that was what Dox47 was discussing as well - How the assault on a "right-aligned" politician (the fact he was "African American" also plays into this) was getting no media coverage from most "mainstream" outlets, whereas should a similar assault on a "left-aligned" politican occur, those same outlets would be up in arms with outrage over what occurred.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

10 Sep 2021, 4:34 am

Here's an interesting conundrum

If we take race and politics out of the equation.

Then why do Larry Elder's supporters resort to attacking black journalists using racist tropes?
https://www.latimes.com/california/stor ... -supremacy
I thought the "good" conservative folk who support Elder don't see race :roll:



Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

10 Sep 2021, 7:59 am

cyberdad wrote:
Here's an interesting conundrum

If we take race and politics out of the equation.

Then why do Larry Elder's supporters resort to attacking black journalists using racist tropes?
https://www.latimes.com/california/stor ... -supremacy
I thought the "good" conservative folk who support Elder don't see race :roll:


Thank you captain distracto for your irregularly inserted whataboutism...

It would be equally interesting to consider how those who profess to be against racism, exhibiting such pleasure at pointing it out, would react to those amongst them who are known to weaponise the race they assume another person is of, in order to devalue their opinions, or who uses racial slurs (such as commentary suggesting that the nephews and nieces of a person such as Larry Elder would call him "Tom")...



Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

10 Sep 2021, 8:02 am

It seems the LA times mentioned the incident on Twitter.

They certainly selected an interesting image with which to associate the article:
Image
Source: https://twitter.com/SoledadUrsua/status/1436106177574694921