29 thoughts on “Food for thought . . .

  1. I’m pretty sure now that a great percentage of the people who depend on CNN and MSNBC for information think that the dead guys were black.

    Like

      1. Your link didn’t “link”.

        I have not seen anything other than Blake with a policeman on either side of him while one shoots him six times in the back. And that he is paralyzed from the waist down.

        Who are the journalists and “leading Democrats”?

        Liked by 2 people

        1. The link works perfectly for me, but here are the money quotes:

          “Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Sean Patrick Maloney released the following statement after Kyle Rittenhouse was found not guilty on all charges: “It’s disgusting and disturbing that someone was able to carry a loaded assault rifle into a protest against the unjust killing of Jacob Blake, an unarmed black man, and take the lives of two people and injure another — and face absolutely no consequences.”

          As John Sexton notes, there are “Two very basic errors in” Maloney’s “first sentence. Jacob Blake isn’t dead and, by his own admission, he wasn’t unarmed….how do you make a mistake like that in the first place? The best you can say is that the DCCC wasn’t alone. The same mistake got made last night on ESPN.” “NBC Sports” also “published this false claim yesterday. It’s still up and not corrected as I write this. Yahoo News made the same claim.” Likewise, “ABC News’ Terry Moran yesterday” was “talking about the ‘police killing’ of Jacob Blake,” which never occurred, as you can see from this video.

          MSNBC erroneously referred to the “late Jacob Blake,” and earlier, Maya Wiley talked on MSNBC about Jacob Blake being killed by police as the context in which the Rittenhouse shootings supposedly happened. In a video, Maya Wiley “states that the police killed Jacob Blake. That must be news to the very much alive Jacob Blake,” notes Sexton…

          “Newspapers like the Daily Mail also mistakenly referred to Jacob Blake as being dead. And CNN’s Anderson Cooper reportedly referred to Jacob Blake’s death on air yesterday.”

          Like

          1. OK. Thanks.

            In other words, a couple of screw ups regarding his death.

            Was Blake armed or was he trying to reach into his car for a gun? The two police were right on his back and could have yanked him back and subdued him.

            6 shots in the back seems pretty excessive.

            But that is where we are.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. Don’t change the subject. You criticized Mr. Price and demanded proof of his assertion. Now you have it, but want to argue over its significance.

            Like

          3. Blake wasn’t reaching for a gun, he was holding a knife. At close distances(traditionally 21 feet) a knife is regarded as equally a threat as a gun.

            Prior to the arrival of the police, Blake had beaten and raped his estranged girlfriend, He was attempting to leave in her minivan with her two children, one of whom I think was his.

            Blake refused to submit to arrest when the police arrived, brandishing the knife. He broke free of the officer and went around the front of the van to the driver side. He briefly put the knife down on the floor of the van while trying to get in. When the officer tried to pull him back, he picked the knife up again.

            So, what was the officer supposed to do? Engage in a wrestling match with a deranged man with a knife? Let him drive off with the kids?

            Oh, and if one shot is justified, when whole magazine is as long as the threat remans.

            Like

          4. RE: “That was the point after all.”

            No. The point was that you made a technically invalid criticism.

            Like

          5. ” . . . you made a technically invalid criticism.”

            Uh, no he did not.

            Bruce’s sweeping and silly accusation is clearly false. There is no evidence to support the nonsense offered. Understandable mistakes by one or two speakers or journalists ON A DIFFERENT QUESTION is not evidence that it is true. Technically.

            By the way, numerous studies of what people know versus what is true shows that viewers of MSNBC, CNN and PBS are much better informed than the sad people who eat up the lies on Fox News. Even Jonah Goldberg and Steven Hayes have had enough as they explain here . . .

            https://thedispatch.com/p/why-we-are-leaving-fox-news

            Liked by 1 person

      1. Absolutely disagree. It is only an extremist left wing far from reality phony narrative that extremists think will garner points and votes.

        Like

        1. Uh, Bob, you did not even try to answer the question posed. Why do you disagree with the point of the post?

          I invite you to think for a minute – would a young black man sauntering around with an assault rifle been able to walk around in that situation without the police taking action. Would he be able to simply go home after killing two people? Would this jury have acquitted him and accepted that he was an innocent victim in the story. I submit to you and your common sense that it would have been very different. And that is the point of the post.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. Why do you think the narrative is wrong? Other than that you personally disagree with it.

          An armed civilian in a SUV follows a person walking home in the rain at night. The police dispatcher suggested he stay in his vehicle until police arrive.

          He gets out of his car anyway and pursues Martin. They meet, Martin probably figured he was going to get killed by this burly stranger who has been following him.

          He defends himself by attacking before the gun comes out or possibly as the gun comes out. We don’t know.

          Rittenhouse was considered an active shooter in a chaotic scene. People try to disarm him and die.

          Or is this not what you think happened?

          Liked by 2 people

  2. She goes off the track right in that first line where she uses the word ‘think.’

    You can’t think that there is any parallel between a thug who ambushes a citizen who is observing suspicious activity(scouting out burglary opportunities) to report it to the police and a person attacked by a deranged mob already engaged in mass arson.

    But the left is perfectly capable of bending reality in their minds to fit their preconceived narrative.

    Like

    1. The quote was spot on. You called Martin a thug.
      Why?

      A deranged mob already engaged in violence…you obviously mean the mob with Babbitt preparing to probably kill the officer since he was by himself.

      You really try to bend the stories to fit your agenda.

      And I think you really believe them yourself.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Martin was at his father’s place because he was suspended from school because burglary tools were found in his locker.

        And no, the Kenosha riots had nothing to do with Jan 6, though again that seems to be your excuse for every abuse by the left.

        Like

        1. Hey, you bring up Babbitt at every single turn.

          Why?

          And some tools found in his locker makes him a thug?

          I had tools in my locker in school. Maybe you never did.

          But at least we know your definition of a thug.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Burglary tools, (a pry bar and long, heavy screwdriver) not tools to fix a bicycle.

            But he was a thug because he attacked someone for looking at him.

            Like

          2. No, demonizing the demon.

            Martin could have walked home. He could have called the police when he got there if he was innocent and truly concerned.

            Instead, not knowing Zimmerman was armed, he laid in wait and ambushed Zimmerman to administer a beat down. Even with Zimmerman clearly defeated and pinned on his back, Martin continued to pummel Zimmerman.

            So, what was Zimmerman to do? Let the beating continue until he was unconscious and unable to defend himself?

            Martin was the aggressor, and took it on himself to punish Zimmerman for watching him while waiting for the police to arrive.

            Choose your martyrs better.

            Like

    2. RE: “She goes off the track right in that first line where she uses the word ‘think.’”

      Exactly right. One can “think” apples and oranges are the same because they are both edible.

      Like

    3. I am not surprised to see you following your well-established pattern. You cannot help proving the point I have made several times of racially-tinged double standards among “conservatives.”

      And, it is not just with respect to police and vigilante violence against “thugs.” Here is a recent gem from you in one of your attacks on democracy . . . It is bad because “Urban” people are “corrupt” and – wait for it – “arrogant.” Not like those nice country volk who are “real Americans,” right?

      And while ranting about “thugs” and once again attacking the victim, you are too deliberately blind see the “leftist” truths evident in both the cases in the image –

      (1) guns make every situation more dangerous, and

      (2) there is no place for vigilantes in our system of law enforcement. Taking the law into your own hands does not make you a good citizen. It makes you a criminal.

      It is telling that in both cases the “self defense” plea was based on the fear of being harmed with their own guns.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s