Re: The People Versus John Oliver: The Murky Ethics Of Modern Comedy

On Apr 9, 2025 at 1:51:41 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
 

On 4/9/2025 3:19 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

  On Apr 9, 2025 at 8:52:18 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
 

  On 4/8/2025 11:13 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

    On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:09:56 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
   

    On 4/8/2025 7:07 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

      On Apr 8, 2025 at 1:58:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
     

      On 4/8/2025 4:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

        On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:13:31 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
  wrote:
       

        On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

          moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

          On 4/8/2025 1:04 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

          On Apr 8, 2025 at 10:00:28 AM PDT, "shawn"
      <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
          wrote:
>

          On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 16:46:14 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
          wrote:
>

          On Apr 8, 2025 at 1:30:43 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous"
    <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:

>

          Take Bill Burr, who insinuated Kyle Rittenhouse was a
  White Supremacist
          during his Netflix special "Bill Burr Presents: Friends Who Kill".
>
          Rittenhouse shot three people, killing two and injuring one
    during a 2020
          fracas tied to the BLM protests. A court of law found him innocent,
          agreeing
          with his self-defense explanation. Elements of the
press and the Left
          insisted his actions were racist, even though his victims
  were white and
          they
>
          couldn't pin any racially-charged comments to the young man.

>
          That's still the most bizarre aspect of that whole case: a white
      guy shoots
          two other white guys and the black grievance brigade
starts screaming
          "raaaaciiism!!"
>
          Come again?

>
          I think it's more of why he traveled across state lines
to supposedly
          protect a business.

>
          And how was *that* racist?
>

          That he ended up shooting some white guys doesn't
          get around the fact that he was there to supposedly protect the
          business from BLM protestors.

>
          So now it's racist to protect your property from vandalism and
    looting if
        it's
          being done by blacks?

>
          Of course it is, if you ignore it when it's being done by whites.

                    He obviously wasn't doing that because the ones he shot were whites.
                    And who the hell would sit back and let their property be looted and
      burned
          just because the perps were white, anyway?

>
        The question of his racism is one of whether he sprang to this
        interdiction because the alleged perps were black.

                Or the only ones burning down cities across the nation that
summer were
      black.
        He went where the problem was.

>
      But what determines his racism is the matter of *why* he went.

            Only if you pre-suppose there was racism no matter what and the
only issue
    was
      finding out its cause.

>
    Yes, we start with a not-too-risky premise that indeed there IS racism
>

    No, YOU start with that because, like most leftists, you think
everything is
    racist.

>
  I don't know which is more puzzling, the idea that there's no such thing
  as racism, or you telling me what I think.

    I'm puzzled by you implicit claim that I've denied the existence of racism.

>
Umm, you said I mustn't "pre-suppose there was racism".

 There's a significant difference between saying "racism doesn't exist" and
"racism doesn't exist everywhere".