barepixels wrote:
People between 18 to 24 are STUPID

Was She wrong?

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
trump has proved himself to be stupid, incoherent, incapable, corrupt and incompetent.

On numerous occasions Biden couldn't even remember which office he was running for.  I can cut him slack on forgetting which town he was in, as he often did, but forgetting which office you are running for?

barepixels wrote:
You seem to be familar with that speech when you said it's out of context.

So please tell us what exactly what does Karmala Harris means when she said "people between 18 to 24 are stupid"

I am all ears

BTW no offense to 16 years old, but I simply don't think they've on average learned enough in life and about politics, to be able to vote.

Please, don't miss quote me like you do with other people.   I said, "... that were conveniently cut short and limited in context."

I know you are a smart enough guy from conversations in the old days, so I know that you are able to see what Carlson did there.  Before jumping on his band wagon, you could have researched the rest of the speech and seen the context for yourself.  As the guy below you is so fond of saying, I am not here to do your research for you.  If you want to make a claim, back it up.  CARLSON IS NOT CREDIBLE.  He is a fear monger and a shock jock.  His opinions are designed to enrage people that are predisposed to what he is selling.  He is not balanced nor does he make any effort to be.

I am not in favor of giving 16 year olds the vote either.  I doubt many people are.  That doesn't mean they can't be heard on issues that matter to them.  After all, they have been through a significant portion of their normal schooling.  They are in large, a quarter of the way through their Junior year.  In 18 months or so, they will graduate.  Are saying they aren't anywhere near ready to set out to college, the military, or the workforce?  Are you saying that the education system has failed them?  Because that is a different thing then what is being said by Carlson.

I remember when I was going to be old enough to fight in Vietnam, but not old enough to vote.   I was old enough to die for my country but not old enough to have a beer.  A 14 year old isn't old enough to form adult opinions but he is old enough to serve adult time. Sometimes you have to consider the stereotypes are problems in themselves.

trump was defended by his followers by saying he was just joking, even though the guy has a zero sense of humor.  But, in a form that could be predicted, you, the right, will attack every word or phrase you can dig up on Harris from now to eternity, and not even consider the context, just as you didn't in this one.   You (we) did it to Bill Clinton.  You (as did I, on occasion) to Obama.  You will do it to Harris and Biden, because the only thing you guys have, which I walked away from, is to make the other side the Boogie Man.  The majority doesn't want your policies.   The Republicans take abortion and the ACA to the Supreme Court hoping, if not knowing, they will lose.  Soon, all those rich Republican women are going to find out just how hard it is to get a safe abortion and the Republican taxpayer is going to find out how expensive it is to take care of babies nobody wants and suffering the consequences of a large part of the population that can't get health insurance without a handout from the government.

I can hardly fault 18-24 year olds for making stupid decisions while I sit and watch the Republicans tear down the democracy.

JustHenry wrote:

On numerous occasions Biden couldn't even remember which office he was running for.  I can cut him slack on forgetting which town he was in, as he often did, but forgetting which office you are running for?

I understand that you are too willing to believe lies and doctored tape.  I doubt you ever lived a day as a person with a speech impediment.  Though I also doubt you ever lived a day in which every word you wanted at any given minute was on the tip of your tongue and came every time, perfectly pronounced without pause or hesitation.  If you were such a speaker, you wouldn't be here.

You are incapable of understanding the difference between faulty speech and rambling, incoherent, repetitive, verbal stupidity?   Joe can speak eloquently off the cuff, though not perfectly.  trump has no such ability.  trump says nothing many times over.  The difference between their speaking ability is night and day.  Joe's errors are a tooth pick to trump's verbal logjam.

All the assholes over the last four years that made a big deal of trump's misspellings and his in-comprehendible tweets were unreasonable and yet you want to prove you are no better by attacking the weaknesses we all have because we are merely human.  A decent person could have and should have understood his intent and meaning when trump said, "Despite the constant negative press covfefe".   Not that he should have been a constant little cry baby on twitter.  Attack their policies.  I don't care.  Don't be an ass going after inconsequential slip ups.  Find something that matters to bitch about, instead of Carlson's petty demagoguery.

JustHenry wrote:
[...]
“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group.  But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.  You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did.  You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”

of course Trump thinks the neo -nazis in that group were "very fine people". His actions speak soooo much louder than his words. To this day he refuses to condemn white supremacy --- his "Proud Boys" are proof.

He thinks Robert E. Lee-- a traitor, guilty of treason,  who led an armed rebellion against the United States and was responsible for the deaths of literally THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of loyal Americans  a man who fought to PRESERVE SLAVERY--- is a "very fine person" too...

Trump is a racist pig. From the days the justice department sued his company for blatant racial housing discrimination in the 1970's to today, his history as a vile, hate filled racist is there for all to see.

JustHenry wrote:
One of my favorite Biden gaffs was asking the guy in the wheelchair to stand up so everyone could see him.  Doctored tape?  Hardly.
You want to talk about doctored tape, selective editing and taken out of context?  Try "There were very fine people on both sides".  Here is Trump's full quote that gets edited down by the left. 
“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group.  But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.  You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did.  You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”

It says wonderful things about you that you have your "favorite gaffes."  Very mature.  You will make many compelling arguments with your petulant silliness.   Yet you decry the misrepresentation of trump by doing the same goddamn thing, in a thread rising from a comment about the stupidity of 18-24 year olds, you demonstrate where they get their stupidity from.

For decades the country has turned away from the disgrace that Robert E. Lee and the south was, and ignored the white south using these statues and fables of glorious times to remind black people that they ain't nothing.  Like it or not, trump single handily destroyed your precious myth of the slave holding states having any respectability.  He brought the racists and the Nazi's (You know who the Nazi's were right?) out of the closets.  He made it acceptable for men chanting racist slogans (remember those words?  Do they help put trump's words into context?) to march down the street calling for the preservation of racism's heroes?  "Jews will not replace us?  That is the same as "Leave Lee's statue alone?"  (Yes, it probably is.)  Now, the statues are disappearing anyway.  They protected nothing.  They expedited the demise of their symbols. Not very smart, was it?  They provided all the reason that good people needed to demand the removal of these relics of a system that never should have been.  Just like Dylan Roof was the cause for the confederate symbolism to come under attack in your state.  The worst of America awoke the decency in decent people and exposed the fundamental flaw in America- the white supremacist.  Every time racists people crawl out of the mud and from under their rocks, they erode their safe havens.

You again displayed your inability to practice critical thinking.  trump demonstrated multiple times his commitment to racism and white supremacists.  How many times has Biden shown indifference to the handicapped?  Your "favorite gaffe" of Biden was a blunder while trump intentionally made fun of a handicapped person.  trump refused to condemn white supremacism.  Has Biden?  trump has been showing us exactly who he is.  Consequently, the interpretation of the short phrase from trump's racist statement and words, did summarize trump's policies and attitudes.  It's no wonder that you take no offense to either the shorthand summation of trump's words or the entire quote.  You already outed yourself.

Do you consider Robert E. Lee, a traitor to the country and a brutal man to slaves, to be the fine man that southern revisionism paints him to be?  Or are you uniformed about exactly what kind of man he was?  Or do you also believe the myth that the civil war was a matter of state's rights? 

There are no very fine people on the side of bigotry, white supremacism, fascism or among those who glamorize the confederacy and the old south.  Not a single fine person.  None at all.


https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar … ee/529038/

https://www.ajc.com/news/crime--law/aft … Qbn6jAhAN/

rfordphotos wrote:
of course Trump thinks the neo -nazis in that group were "very fine people". His actions speak soooo much louder than his words. To this day he refuses to condemn white supremacy --- his "Proud Boys" are proof.

He thinks Robert E. Lee-- a traitor, guilty of treason,  who led an armed rebellion against the United States and was responsible for the deaths of literally THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of loyal Americans  a man who fought to PRESERVE SLAVERY--- is a "very fine person" too...

Trump is a racist pig. From the days the justice department sued his company for blatant racial housing discrimination in the 1970's to today, his history as a vile, hate filled racist is there for all to see.

If you read the quote I posted and come away thinking that is an endorsement for neo Nazis then you have reading comprehension problems.
If you think Robert E. Lee is a traitor;  1) can you show me the clause the states signed when joining the union that said they could never leave that union? and 2) I often hear liberals in California suggesting they split off from the union and create their own country.  Do you consider those liberals traitors?
Speaking of racist pigs, Joe Biden opposed Clarence Thomas, and supported mandatory sentencing and three strikes legislation therefore he must be a racist pig, right?

JustHenry wrote:
If you read the quote I posted and come away thinking that is an endorsement for neo Nazis then you have reading comprehension problems.
If you think Robert E. Lee is a traitor;  1) can you show me the clause the states signed when joining the union that said they could never leave that union?[...]

My reading comprehension is just fine, thanks---

Defending the Confederate States, and their support of slavery? Well, at least you have made your position clear to the rest of us.

As for Robert E. Lee:

Lee isnt a "State". We are not debating whether Virginia had a right to leave the Union----(although we fought a civil war ---indicating to me it wasnt "alright")

We are discussing Lee---
He took an oath when he became an officer in the US Army (after graduating from West Point). He violated that oath. He demonstrated his lack of honor:

Lee graduated and was commissioned a Brevet Lieutenant in the United States Army in 1829, he took the Officer’s Oath: “I do solemnly swear that I will bear true allegiance to the United States of America, and that I will serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies or opposers whatsoever, and observe and obey the orders of the President of the United States and the officers over me according to the rules and articles for the Armies of the United States.”

and his treason:
from the US Constitution:
Article III
   Section 3
        Clause 1
        Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open court.

Since Lee was THE commanding general of the rebel army of Virginia---and he DAMN sure saw to it that Union soldiers died--- He was a traitor, specifically guilty of TREASON, precisely as defined in the Constitution.

rfordphotos wrote:
My reading comprehension is just fine, thanks---

Defending the Confederate States, and their support of slavery? Well, at least you have made your position clear to the rest of us.

As for Robert E. Lee:

Lee isnt a "State". We are not debating whether Virginia had a right to leave the Union----(although we fought a civil war ---indicating to me it wasnt "alright")

We are discussing Lee---
He took an oath when he became an officer in the US Army (after graduating from West Point). He violated that oath. He demonstrated his lack of honor:

Lee graduated and was commissioned a Brevet Lieutenant in the United States Army in 1829, he took the Officer’s Oath: “I do solemnly swear that I will bear true allegiance to the United States of America, and that I will serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies or opposers whatsoever, and observe and obey the orders of the President of the United States and the officers over me according to the rules and articles for the Armies of the United States.”

and his treason:
from the US Constitution:
Article III
   Section 3
        Clause 1
        Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open court.

Since Lee was THE commanding general of the rebel army of Virginia---and he DAMN sure saw to it that Union soldiers died--- He was a traitor, specifically guilty of TREASON, precisely as defined in the Constitution.

When Virginia left the Union, the citizens of Virginia were no longer citizens of the Union.

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:

When Virginia left the Union, the citizens of Virginia were no longer citizens of the Union.

And Lee remained in the US Army---- until he violated his oath and left the Army to join the rebels.

You cannot seriously be defending this traitor. He was DIRECTLY responsible for thousand of deaths. He was defending SLAVERY. He is a man with NO HONOR.

He should have been hung, not memorialized by a bunch of rebels.

barepixels wrote:
I asked a simple question, how is it out of context and what exactly did Karmala Harris means when she said "people between 18 to 24 are stupid" and all I get is paragraph and paragrah of drivels.  lololol

In your original post, you asked zero questions.  In your original post, you made a childishly gleeful petty comment.   You have added nothing to the conversation, or any other, which could be construed as intelligent conversation, up to and including your last post.

In general, you post paragraph after paragraph of drivel, unsupported by facts and pages of memes.  lol, memes, and you expect to be taken seriously. lol. 

If you want to engage in intelligent conversation, then provide some.  The video you shared was nothing but propaganda.  The context of the Harris clips were limited because the clips were cut to provide only the context that Carlson wanted.  Simple. 

All of the drivel that has been written in reply to you must be pretty good stuff since you neither refute or counter any of it.  Make an argument, providing sources which indicate that there was some merit to Carlson's hit piece or slither back under your rock of ignorance and be quiet.

JustHenry wrote:
If you read the quote I posted and come away thinking that is an endorsement for neo Nazis then you have reading comprehension problems.
If you think Robert E. Lee is a traitor;  1) can you show me the clause the states signed when joining the union that said they could never leave that union? and 2) I often hear liberals in California suggesting they split off from the union and create their own country.  Do you consider those liberals traitors?
Speaking of racist pigs, Joe Biden opposed Clarence Thomas, and supported mandatory sentencing and three strikes legislation therefore he must be a racist pig, right?

A failure and refusal to condemn white supremacists and neo-nazis is an endorsement.  It is an example of the truism, that evil flourishes when good men do nothing.  We are not obligated to take into consideration each one of your statements in a vacuum, separated from the other statements you have made.

Can you show me a clause that permitted the states to secede?  Once a state secedes from the Union, it becomes a foreign nation and is subject to any action that the government desires to take against it, as permitted by law, be it the imposition of tariffs or to wage war against it.  Prior to 1860 and since 1865, there have been numerous examples of federal troops quelling rebellion within the states.  The Whiskey Rebellion being an instance that went back to our first president.  You may not be aware, but law in the Untied States doesn't have to be written anywhere, much less within the frame work of the Constitution.  We also have law that is derived from custom and judicial precedent. 

In reading the reasoning for South Carolina to secede from the Union, had the logic been permitted to stand, the United States would be like Europe, a continent of tiny countries, warring against each other throughout the 20th century, failing to cooperate for the common good.  Though the South Carolina secession document is full of bullshit about states rights, the slavery issue is paramount to its drafting.  History shows us that the state right South Carolina and the Confederacy was determined to protect was the right to keep negro slaves. The Confederate Constitution is remarkably similar to the United States Constitution except that it codified the perpetual keeping of slaves.  "In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government;"   Your defense of the confederacy is a defense of slavery and the keeping of people as chattel.   How is that different than supporting white supremacy and neo-nazis?

Lee and every other officer in the army that joined the Confederacy is without a doubt a traitor.  Their oath to the United States didn't disappear because their state left the Union.

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open court."  Therefore, a person that talks about the possibility of their state seceding is not a traitor.

You equate the opposition of a man because of his actions and beliefs to be instead a reflection of opposition based on skin color.  Please provide quotes of the racist comments that Biden made regarding Thomas.  Otherwise, you are denying the truth and embracing the lie.   On the other side of the Thomas/Hill conflict was Alren Spector who lead the charge to discredit Anita Hill.  I never hear conservatives calling him a racist.  Would you have preferred that no Senator challenge Thomas regarding woman's rights because of the skin color of Thomas?  That would have been the racist thing to do.

barepixels wrote:
haha you are desperately trying to deflect the topic to Carlson.

This is about what Karmala Harris said and her did.

Karmala Harris said People Between 18 To 24 Are Stupid

then

She called for Congress to change the constitution so 10th graders can vote

Watch from  5:00  to  7:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB5-kGAvNA0

The problem is that you are desperately trying to make this not about Carlson.  Carlson's piece is the only thing you have offered.  Twice.  Because there is no other evidence supporting your opinion?  Which isn't even your opinion.  You just parrot a guy that profits off of lies and division.

Please provide a link to the bill in Congress that she sponsored or supported to amend the constitution so that 16 year olds could vote.

If you had anything, you would use it instead of deflecting and dancing around, repeating yourself.

barepixels wrote:
Yep, Kamala Harris said that.  Then she called for Congress to change the constitution so 10th graders can vote.  Just too damn funny.

Watch from  5:00  to  7:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB5-kGAvNA0

. . .   Did Kamala Harris tried?  YES

I DID watch. She never said she was in favor of lowering the age to sixteen. She said "I am very interested in having that conversation", and stated some potential grounds for the possibility of lowering the voting age  IN GENERAL, not to age sixteen.

And, skipping over the ungrammatical construction in your latter post: There is NOTHING in Carlson's monologue that says or implies that she actually tried to effect such an action. Inventing "facts" as you go are you?

As a high-school student in danger of being sent off to Vietnam, I was a leader in the movement to lower the voting age to eighteen. The reasoning was simple: Being old enough to die "in service to the country" must certainly bestow the right to help determine policy through our votes.

While I am, by-and-large, a supporter of Harris, I would agree that lowering the age to 16 would not be a good idea, but don't see where she actually said anything to that effect. More likely, she wanted the young girl to be encouraged in her political interest and activism, and there is nothing wrong about letting her down easily and in a way that would encourage her future participation.

Please don't play into Calson's propagandistic distortion of others words and actions to suit his fetid views. You could do better by finding reliable information and making sure you aren't just passing along unexamined B.S.

barepixels wrote:
Carlson did not say "People Between 18 To 24 Are Stupid"  Kamala Harris did.

Did Kamala Harris succeed in changing the constitution so 10th grader can vote? NO.  Did Kamala Harris tried?  YES

You told another lie.  Shame on you.  Carlson agreed with Harris immediately after he cut her clip off.  You didn't watch your own propaganda?

Per the tape on the Carlson propaganda hour:
"... we mold and shape and direct someone to become a productive adult. What's the other thing we know about this population, and it's a specific phase of life. Remember age is more than a chronological fact.  What else do we know about this population, 18-24? (pause)  They are stupid." Audience laughs. The clip ends and Carlson responds laughing, "She is right about that."  ending at 6:37  So, yeah, Carlson did say that 18-24 year olds are stupid, despite another one of your lies. (I added the ellipsis at the start because her sentence was cut to begin there.  The beginning of the paragraph would change the context entirely away from Carlson's lie and barepixil's unwavering belief in the lies he is spoon fed.")

And you still don't know what she said before or after the the beginning and end of the clip, do you?   You still think the only thing she said was, "People Between 18 To 24 Are Stupid," when that is a paraphrase.  Again, you don't give a crap about what was really said or the context and you are too damn lazy and dishonest intellectually to find out.

“What’s the other thing we know about this population? And it’s a specific phase of life. And remember, age is more than a chronological fact. What else do we know about this population, 18 through 24? They are stupid,” Harris said, to wide laughs from the audience.

“That is why we put them in dormitories, and they have a resident assistant. They make really bad decisions. So we focused on that age population. […] When I was at Howard University, and we were in college, we were 18 to 24, and you know what we were called? College kids,” Harris said with a loaded pause.

And what was the context of this speech?  You still don't know because you are too damn lazy and dishonest intellectually to find out.  If you did find out, we would be having a different conversation and if you did find out, you would also see why Carlson's segment was also damn lazy and dishonest intellectually. 

You tied yourself to a source that isn't credible and doubled down.  Consequently, your insistence to be ignorant is proof positive of the conservative effort to destroy this country, and that you have zero credibility to provide accurate, factual or intellectual components to the conversation     Good job destroying your credibility.

You know that 16 year olds are smart enough to know that Carlson took those clips out of context and the 16 year olds are able to look up what was actually said, in context.  Maybe we should let 16 year olds vote and take away your rights.