In this thread, the "experts" own Lobs

[Walrus]

I was wrong, systemic racism does exist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quFJMQ3_14s

[twocoach]

I was wrong, systemic racism does exist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quFJMQ3_14s

Tucker Carlson is such a tool. Lies layered on top of assumptions layered on top of bullshit.

Talk fast, link random unconnected topics next to each other to disorient and confuse and then claim to have made some miraculous mental achievement in logic. Lather, rinse, repeat.

And how hilariously obvious of you to magically change the stance you have argued over for months because of one FoxNews video that you agreed with.

[chiknbut]

I was wrong, systemic racism does exist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quFJMQ3_14s

Tucker Carlson is such a tool. Lies layered on top of assumptions layered on top of bullshit.

Talk fast, link random unconnected topics next to each other to disorient and confuse and then claim to have made some miraculous mental achievement in logic. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Walrus/Lobby:

1. Knows what you've posted is true and is just trolling or...

2. Is too dumb to know.

Take your pick. Not sure which one is better.

[Deleted User 310]

I was wrong, systemic racism does exist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quFJMQ3_14s

Tucker Carlson is such a tool. Lies layered on top of assumptions layered on top of bullshit.

Maybe....but what he is talking about does happen. I am not saying it is wrong, because i understand in theory why it occurs. Colleges are trying to create diverse campus environments because they see a value in having different types of students on campus learning together.

Marc Lamont Hill discuses it in this video with Candace Owens and provides good explanation with elaboration beyond what i am capable of doing on my own...the conversation about access to colleges starts at 33:30 in the video.. it is maybe a 15min or so segment of the full video....but tbh the entire video is worth watching.

https://youtu.be/HjDUUU-Z-aI

[twocoach]

I was wrong, systemic racism does exist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quFJMQ3_14s

Tucker Carlson is such a tool. Lies layered on top of assumptions layered on top of bullshit.

Maybe....but what he is talking about does happen. I am not saying it is wrong, because i understand in theory why it occurs. Colleges are trying to create diverse campus environments because they see a value in having different types of students on campus learning together.

Marc Lamont Hill discuses it in this video with Candace Owens and provides good explanation with elaboration beyond what i am capable of doing on my own...the conversation about access to colleges starts at 33:30 in the video.. it is maybe a 15min or so segment of the full video....but tbh the entire video is worth watching.

https://youtu.be/HjDUUU-Z-aI

Like with Trump, if you took a written transcript of a Tucker Carlson rant and read it out loud at a normal speaking pace, people around you would be worried that you had a stroke.

[Deleted User 310]

I dont know what trump or tucker has to do with the issue of college admissions practices....like i said above, they have a good discussion about it for about 20min within the video if you care about the topic.

I was never a Marc Lamont Hill fan back in his CNN days, but he has grown on me over the years....also never been much of a Candace Owens fan, but i do like to hear her perspective on many issues.

[Walrus]

I dont know what trump or tucker has to do with the issue of college admissions practices....like i said above, they have a good discussion about it for about 20min within the video if you care about the topic.

When people can't explain logically why they disagree, they bring up things non-relevant, name-call, or try to slander the person.

It is a good discussion -- I listened to much of it. Best quote I remember from it: "If you make decision based on race, it is racism.”

[Deleted User 310]

I dont know what trump or tucker has to do with the issue of college admissions practices....like i said above, they have a good discussion about it for about 20min within the video if you care about the topic.

When people can't explain logically why they disagree, they bring up things non-relevant, name-call, or try to slander the person.

It is a good discussion -- I listened to much of it. Best quote I remember from it: "If you make decision based on race, it is racism.”

I dont agree that is necessarily racism. I think there is a difference between racism and racially motivated decisions or race being a factor in decisions. As long as it is not malicious in intent.

I like Marc's point that we let certain factors be used (other than race) with little push back for college admissions exceptions or for choosing student A over student B other than just GPA and SAT score (good at sports, legacy students, donor family members, etc). Race being a factor in certain decisions doesn't bother me if it is reasonable.

I think throughout the video Candace brings up reasonable points of pushback against Marc Lamont Hill. The school admissions thing i tend to side more with Marc on most of it. I also liked the tid bit on how SAT scores arent great predictors of success. I would like to learn more about those stats and how that test can tend to favor certain students based on where they went to school/etc.

[chiknbut]

I admit I didn't watch the whole thing, but I think Marc Lamont Hill was incredibly gracious in this discussion. It can't be easy to try and have an intellectual debate with someone who is this disingenuous.

[twocoach]

I dont know what trump or tucker has to do with the issue of college admissions practices....like i said above, they have a good discussion about it for about 20min within the video if you care about the topic.

When people can't explain logically why they disagree, they bring up things non-relevant, name-call, or try to slander the person.

It is a good discussion -- I listened to much of it. Best quote I remember from it: "If you make decision based on race, it is racism.”

That is 100% not the definition of racism. Taking race into account when making a decision isn't the same as assuming that one race is fundamentally better than another. It's not.

[chiknbut]

I dont know what trump or tucker has to do with the issue of college admissions practices....like i said above, they have a good discussion about it for about 20min within the video if you care about the topic.

When people can't explain logically why they disagree, they bring up things non-relevant, name-call, or try to slander the person.

It is a good discussion -- I listened to much of it. Best quote I remember from it: "If you make decision based on race, it is racism.”

That is 100% not the definition of racism. Taking race into account when making a decision isn't the same as assuming that one race is fundamentally better than another. It's not.

Once again, Walrus/Lobby either knows this and is trolling or is too stupid to understand.

[Deleted User 310]

I admit I didn't watch the whole thing, but I think Marc Lamont Hill was incredibly gracious in this discussion. It can't be easy to try and have an intellectual debate with someone who is this disingenuous.

I really dont think Candace Owens is disingenuous tbh. I have seen her in numerous debate type situations with people of color from the left. This video with MLH is a good one. Another has killer mike, TI, and several others (posted below).

https://youtu.be/jyo_bFBfoOA

Just because she has a different point of view i dont think it necessarily makes her disingenuous. I dont agree with her on many things, but i do think she is well intentioned and i respect her opinions/points of view on things.

[Deleted User 289]

I admit I didn't watch the whole thing, but I think Marc Lamont Hill was incredibly gracious in this discussion. It can't be easy to try and have an intellectual debate with someone who is this disingenuous.

The thing I have trouble with is that while it may be admirable for Candace Owens to be so confident in herself, she is simply not willing to admit if/when she is wrong or admit if she doesn't fully understand the topic she is discussing. I also feel it's important to her to feel as if she's the most important and intelligent person in the room.
Often I find it's almost as if she doesn't have solid interest in anyone's opinion/s if they don't align with her's or if she can't be critical of them to the point of becoming demeaning.
I watched much of the video with her and Marc Lamont Hill. I felt it was a great solid discussion - despite a few examples of what I mentioned above.
I don't particularly care for either of them because of some of the things they have said and done but I do agree with them on many things - and am willing to listen to what they have to say.

[Walrus]

But it's safe to assume that anyone who denies a black person for any reason, is racist? That's the inconsistency problem. It's not racist to turn down a Jew or Asian, but it is racist anytime in involves blacks.

[Mjl]

But it's safe to assume that anyone who denies a black person for any reason, is racist? That's the inconsistency problem. It's not racist to turn down a Jew or Asian, but it is racist anytime in involves blacks.

[chiknbut]

The one part I did watch Hill called Owens out as she stated that every BLM protest ends in a negative result with arrests and looting (paraphrasing here). Hill noted that there's no basis of fact in this, but she wouldn't admit that her use of the word "every/everytime" was the incorrect part. That's just one example of being disingenuous. To her, not unlike Ben Shapiro or Charlie Kirk, it's not really about presenting or defending ideas as much as it is trying to "win" individual points.

[twocoach]

But it's safe to assume that anyone who denies a black person for any reason, is racist? That's the inconsistency problem. It's not racist to turn down a Jew or Asian, but it is racist anytime in involves blacks.

Is this rambling mess in regards to some specific event or just a general collection of words? What are you talking about?

[PhDhawk]

But it's safe to assume that anyone who denies a black person for any reason, is racist? That's the inconsistency problem. It's not racist to turn down a Jew or Asian, but it is racist anytime in involves blacks.

Is this rambling mess in regards to some specific event or just a general collection of words? What are you talking about?

I believe it is poor attempt at making an argument by making an appeal to the extremes. Which is a logical fallacy. Then did a really effective job of making himself look like an asshole by punctuating it with an emoji.

[twocoach]

But it's safe to assume that anyone who denies a black person for any reason, is racist? That's the inconsistency problem. It's not racist to turn down a Jew or Asian, but it is racist anytime in involves blacks.

Is this rambling mess in regards to some specific event or just a general collection of words? What are you talking about?

I believe it is poor attempt at making an argument by making an appeal to the extremes. Which is a logical fallacy. Then did a really effective job of making himself look like an asshole by punctuating it with an emoji.

The slippery slope, overdramatized overreactions are tiring, especially right now when virtually everything is tiring.

[Walrus]

The thing I have trouble with is that while it may be admirable for Candace Owens to be so confident in herself, she is simply not willing to admit if/when she is wrong or admit if she doesn't fully understand the topic she is discussing. I also feel it's important to her to feel as if she's the most important and intelligent person in the room.

That beautifully describes so many on here, which you don't seem to have a problem with. It's only a problem when they say something you don't agree with or makes you uncomfortable, right?