“You people” on steroids
-
Tribal drift is beside the point. It's enough that people understand the tribes I'm referring to.
@Horace said in “You people” on steroids:
Tribal drift is beside the point. It's enough that people understand the tribes I'm referring to.
Tribal drift? You mean like the Bedouin? They’re known drifters and not only clannish but very tribal as well. Not beside the point at all.
Plains Indians were like that as well.
-
You still haven’t listened to the full quote I see.
“I’m no better than you. I’m a 960 SAT guy.”
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
You still haven’t listened to the full quote I see.
“I’m no better than you. I’m a 960 SAT guy.”
I don't suppose there's any chance you could explain why you think that means "I'm dumb just like you" isn't an accurate paraphrase.
Education is extremely important.
-
If you find the full video he was talking about growing up with dyslexia, responding to a question by the interviewer.
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
If you find the full video he was talking about growing up with dyslexia, responding to a question by the interviewer.
If you listen to the whole interview he explains the various ways in which is mind doesn't work well, which makes him "just like you", directed to the room.
If you're honest, you'll also admit that he wouldn't have given that answer to a room of college graduates, or white collar professionals.
If you're honest, you'll admit that his perceptions of the audience informed his responses.
But I won't hold my breath for an honest engagement here.
Education is extremely important.
-
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
All of right wing media is posting it with the middle sentence taken out (note the …). Also there’s an entire paragraph before the comment about how he can’t read a speech (NOT ‘I can’t read’). Also overselling the extent to which it’s a ‘black audience’. If you listen to the tape it doesn’t sound as bad as they make it out to be
That is true, and much too commonly found in political anklebiting. But he's still a pretty clumsy panderer.
@Mik said in “You people” on steroids:
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
All of right wing media is posting it with the middle sentence taken out (note the …). Also there’s an entire paragraph before the comment about how he can’t read a speech (NOT ‘I can’t read’). Also overselling the extent to which it’s a ‘black audience’. If you listen to the tape it doesn’t sound as bad as they make it out to be
That is true, and much too commonly found in political anklebiting. But he's still a pretty clumsy panderer.
He thought he was being endearing and folksy. He wasn't self aware enough to see what he was betraying. Standard progressive condescension towards minorities, who they believe, deep down, are inferior, especially intellectually.
-
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
You still haven’t listened to the full quote I see.
“I’m no better than you. I’m a 960 SAT guy.”
I don't suppose there's any chance you could explain why you think that means "I'm dumb just like you" isn't an accurate paraphrase.
@Horace said in “You people” on steroids:
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
You still haven’t listened to the full quote I see.
“I’m no better than you. I’m a 960 SAT guy.”
I don't suppose there's any chance you could explain why you think that means "I'm dumb just like you" isn't an accurate paraphrase.
For the same reason they omitted the sentence that changes its meaning. = and !> are two different comparators.
The whole reason we call them illegal aliens is because they’re subject to our laws.
-
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
If you find the full video he was talking about growing up with dyslexia, responding to a question by the interviewer.
If you listen to the whole interview he explains the various ways in which is mind doesn't work well, which makes him "just like you", directed to the room.
If you're honest, you'll also admit that he wouldn't have given that answer to a room of college graduates, or white collar professionals.
If you're honest, you'll admit that his perceptions of the audience informed his responses.
But I won't hold my breath for an honest engagement here.
@Horace said in “You people” on steroids:
But I won't hold my breath for an honest engagement here.
Says the guy who posts a misquote, has it pointed out to him, and still won’t acknowledge it.
The whole reason we call them illegal aliens is because they’re subject to our laws.
-
@Horace said in “You people” on steroids:
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
You still haven’t listened to the full quote I see.
“I’m no better than you. I’m a 960 SAT guy.”
I don't suppose there's any chance you could explain why you think that means "I'm dumb just like you" isn't an accurate paraphrase.
For the same reason they omitted the sentence that changes its meaning. = and !> are two different comparators.
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
@Horace said in “You people” on steroids:
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
You still haven’t listened to the full quote I see.
“I’m no better than you. I’m a 960 SAT guy.”
I don't suppose there's any chance you could explain why you think that means "I'm dumb just like you" isn't an accurate paraphrase.
For the same reason they omitted the sentence that changes its meaning. = and <= are two different comparators.
I understand precious framings. And I understand why you hypocritically omit the previous sentence. But the full quote "I'm like you. I'm no better than you. I'm a 960 SAT guy. I can't read a speech" is taken as a self-effacing reduction of oneself, down to the level of the audience.
-
@Horace said in “You people” on steroids:
But I won't hold my breath for an honest engagement here.
Says the guy who posts a misquote, has it pointed out to him, and still won’t acknowledge it.
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
@Horace said in “You people” on steroids:
But I won't hold my breath for an honest engagement here.
Says the guy who posts a misquote, has it pointed out to him, and still won’t acknowledge it.
I have explained to you that the full quote does not change the context like your tribe wishes it did. Your own quote omits the "I'm like you", while you whine about others omitting important words.
-
The second sentence changes the meaning that’s why. Why do you think they omitted it? That’s a question you’ve dodged several times now.
Also, odd you don’t mention the “I can’t read’ misquote and the omitted paragraph. That’s obviously disingenuous to the point of being a straight up lie.
-
The second sentence changes the meaning that’s why. Why do you think they omitted it? That’s a question you’ve dodged several times now.
Also, odd you don’t mention the “I can’t read’ misquote and the omitted paragraph. That’s obviously disingenuous to the point of being a straight up lie.
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
The second sentence changes the meaning that’s why.
It would have to directly contradict the meaning of the previous sentence, for it to suit your purposes. It does not. The previous sentence stands, and is not contradicted by the next one.
Why do you think they omitted it? That’s a question you’ve dodged several times now.
I'm not an idiot, jon. Of course I know it makes the rhetoric more pointed. It's the same reason you omit the first sentence. It's how you pretend it doesn't exist, or that it somehow gets erased by the next sentence.
Also, odd you don’t mention the “I can’t read’ misquote and the omitted paragraph. That’s obviously disingenuous to the point of being a straight up lie.
"I can't read a speech", it's again a precious framing on your part. I know you don't see how your mind wriggles in these situations, but the lies here are the ones you are telling yourself.
Education is extremely important.
-
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
The second sentence changes the meaning that’s why.
It would have to directly contradict the meaning of the previous sentence, for it to suit your purposes. It does not. The previous sentence stands, and is not contradicted by the next one.
Why do you think they omitted it? That’s a question you’ve dodged several times now.
I'm not an idiot, jon. Of course I know it makes the rhetoric more pointed. It's the same reason you omit the first sentence. It's how you pretend it doesn't exist, or that it somehow gets erased by the next sentence.
Also, odd you don’t mention the “I can’t read’ misquote and the omitted paragraph. That’s obviously disingenuous to the point of being a straight up lie.
"I can't read a speech", it's again a precious framing on your part. I know you don't see how your mind wriggles in these situations, but the lies here are the ones you are telling yourself.
-
I don’t think the word ‘framing’ means what you think it does. “I can’t read” and “I can’t read my speeches” are two very different things.
@jon-nyc said in “You people” on steroids:
I don’t think the word ‘framing’ means what you think it does. “I can’t read” and “I can’t read my speeches” are two very different things.
It's just where you've retreated in a desperate attempt to divert to a meaningless win on a meaningless detail. As per usual. Tell me again how "I'm like you. I'm no better than you" are somehow contradictory and the second sentence erases the first. Tell me that again, I'm enjoying watching this.
-
Anyway, anybody knows that Newsom, in front of an audience of, say, MIT students, would not conceivably use those words. The words would only be used when talking to an audience of presumptively mediocre intellectual ability. They are condescending words. They are head-patting words. They are the words of a man who assumes the audience considers itself intellectually mediocre, and who wants to be non-threatening to such an audience. That's just obvious, but it's something jon would be incapable of admitting. As he calls others dishonest.
