John and I were prevented from recording last week, but he’s back! John is taking a break from the hustle and bustle of Queens and instead comes to us from Key West, Florida, where he tells us the sun is shining, the roosters are crowing, and people have harsh words for Ron DeSantis. We’ve got a spicy melange of topics for you this week, so let’s get into it.
I think the first debate should be before their respective conventions. That way America can see both these geezers in action and if either one or the other or both is appalling enough, their respective parties can have time to discuss amongst themselves whether they'll revolt and pick someone else. I think Nikki Haley was right about something: If only one party boots their candidate and picks anyone else, they're gonna win. And if both boot them, it's a tossup. She thinks the next Prez will be a woman; either her or Kamala Harris. She said this before she dropped out so I don't know if she still believes that, nor am I at all certain that Harris could beat Trump (but I think almost anyone else could). But I do agree with her that whoever boots their guy wins. Rightly wrongly. It makes sense, given how unpopular they both are except with their far-right and far-left bases.
[Time 40:00]; McWhorter discusses experience of Jewish vs. Black students at Harvard. Prior to DEI, the generic HR rules banning discrimination based on race, ethnicity and religion were simple universal rules that were relatively easy to enforce and follow. In order for DEI to work properly, directors would need information from God. Even intelligent and ethical humans could not properly administer DEI so as to achieve true fairness.
[Time 17:00]; Complaint for McWhorter - I am not a Kindle user. I pre-ordered “Pronouns”. Maybe I can find a Kindle App for iPhone and take photos and print those. I look forward to book release.
Thanks for reviewing films. Since Covid shut down so many SF theaters, I fell out of movie-groove and have seen none of films discussed. I too have grown tired of the 300-hour long movie award ceremonies. These programs need to be cut in half. And no fist-fighting at the ceremonies, please.
The quibbling with color blindness is interesting. It becomes clear then that we just don't want to be like Amy Wax. Therefore we need to hold on to something, however undefined, that shows we're not suggesting there's no racism problem at all. It's always interesting when people can't follow through on their own insights. The real problem is that Coleman Hughes and John Roberts are simply right, not just because of the way the Constitution was written, and what the fourteen amendment implies for everyone, but mainly because we have de facto had half a century of reverse systemic racism now and it needs to stop. This is just difficult for people to realize because the delusion of institutional racism persists indefinitely, against all quotidian experience and empirical evidence. Only idiots accept the presence of outcome disparities as direct evidence for discrimination, but this is what the entire nation has been hiding behind. John would do well to just be done with it entirely. It doesn't mean he'd turn into a compassionless dirtbag on every human concern, like Clarence Thomas. It would just be an internally consistent position. It would say: Yes, we are judging you by the content of your character when we lock you up at multiple times the rate of other racial groups (Black on Asian versus Asian on Black crime is 50:1), and we're doing it while more black women get a college degree than white men do, thanks to either the reverse discrimination or because black women are smarter and more industrious than white men, which is something we could try to study. It shouldn't be that difficult for an independent mind to grasp, I feel.
Really interesting argument by John ("Trump can't debate") about why not to debate. I agree with his premise; I'm not sure about the conclusion. If I trust "our democracy", shouldn't voters be exposed to that?
OTOH, I suspect James Madison would want the Electoral College do it's Constitutional job and to vote for neither of these two clowns.
John’s defense of Biden’s coming “I won’t debate the orange man” smacked of partisanship, subconscious or otherwise. As a master of language, John and other liberals know that a cognitively impaired Biden will show very poorly against Trump. I despise the orange man but it is clear that his ability to speak and communicate is vastly better than Biden. Trump gives 2 hour rallies where he speaks extemporaneously speak to thousands. Biden can barely speak a sentence without misspeaking, mumbling, speaking nonsense ect. The Democratic Party has taken a massive risk running him again and now they will try to hide a very debilitated candidate from the public but it won’t work.
I think that a debate is even more necessary for this election than in previous presidential elections because of constant dishonesty by both parties and hysterical assertions about the end of democracy. We deserve to see the candidates in a live public forum responding to questions. However, I am expecting Biden’s handlers to make an excuse for him to skip the debates. They already came up with a weak excuse to not do the softball Super Bowl interview.
Good conversation. And I do agree that Stanley Crouch would have been awesome during these woke times of discourse.
The "colorblind" word is subjective because of how it is perceived and spoken about from all sides. The race industry is a form of capitalism that cannot be completely controlled because of the corruption involved. So the war continues, and people profit from selling certain narratives.
The 2024 election is probably going to be a lot more polarizing than 2016. I cannot wait to see John's reaction after the results. I still remember his reaction after Trump won the first time. It was priceless.
Below is the Bloggingheads episode of Glenn and John speaking about Trump's victory in 2016.
Was it this way in the 80s? Yes, in the other direction. Reagan, Madonna’s Material World, movie stars like Stallone, and Schwarzenegger in pro state, pro military action movies. That was the 80s version of DEI woke at least in terms of general pop culture. No idea how that would manifest in academia.
The SAT is back. But I understand that since it is electronic, and can be scored in real time the test will change depending on how well or poorly a student is doing. In other words, easier questions will pop up in the test if the student is doing poorly and vice-versa.
In essence, each student can end up taking a different test. It is also being "dumbed-down" with certain sections left out for everybody.
Glenn and John, you both make good points about why there should or should not be debates. Which simply highlights the fact that neither candidate running for the office of the American presidency CAN debate. High school debate teams across the country continue to actively participate in rigorous debates. Is there even any way to talk about how profoundly bizarre this situation is? Maybe the candidates could pick student proxies to stand in for them.
It seems clear that Biden's campaign will refuse a debate. Biden's response to Robert Hur's report suggests that Biden is having trouble distinguishing between reality and his imagination. Biden had a quick press conference after Hur's report was released, and Biden said that he was very angry at Hur for asking Biden when Biden's son had died. The transcript showed that Hur had not asked Biden about when his son had died, but that Biden had been the person who brought up the topic in response to another question. Biden imagined that Hur had asked about when his son died even though he had not done so. If Biden is unable to distinguish reality from his imagination, then he might make decisions based on what he imagines has happened instead of making decisions based on reality.
Ads ? ... on a paid subscription ??
I think the first debate should be before their respective conventions. That way America can see both these geezers in action and if either one or the other or both is appalling enough, their respective parties can have time to discuss amongst themselves whether they'll revolt and pick someone else. I think Nikki Haley was right about something: If only one party boots their candidate and picks anyone else, they're gonna win. And if both boot them, it's a tossup. She thinks the next Prez will be a woman; either her or Kamala Harris. She said this before she dropped out so I don't know if she still believes that, nor am I at all certain that Harris could beat Trump (but I think almost anyone else could). But I do agree with her that whoever boots their guy wins. Rightly wrongly. It makes sense, given how unpopular they both are except with their far-right and far-left bases.
I get John’s fear about a debate but his argument is so specious as to be in bad faith. Glen’s collapse is embarrassing. A bad moment.
[Time 40:00]; McWhorter discusses experience of Jewish vs. Black students at Harvard. Prior to DEI, the generic HR rules banning discrimination based on race, ethnicity and religion were simple universal rules that were relatively easy to enforce and follow. In order for DEI to work properly, directors would need information from God. Even intelligent and ethical humans could not properly administer DEI so as to achieve true fairness.
[Time 24:00]; Here is a “Ending sentence in preposition joke” - from a birthday card:
Girl 1: Where is the birthday party at?
Girl 2: Don’t end a sentence in a preposition.
Girl 1: Where is the party at, bitch?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92NpzXXpQtg
Discuss
[Time 17:00]; Complaint for McWhorter - I am not a Kindle user. I pre-ordered “Pronouns”. Maybe I can find a Kindle App for iPhone and take photos and print those. I look forward to book release.
Thanks for reviewing films. Since Covid shut down so many SF theaters, I fell out of movie-groove and have seen none of films discussed. I too have grown tired of the 300-hour long movie award ceremonies. These programs need to be cut in half. And no fist-fighting at the ceremonies, please.
The quibbling with color blindness is interesting. It becomes clear then that we just don't want to be like Amy Wax. Therefore we need to hold on to something, however undefined, that shows we're not suggesting there's no racism problem at all. It's always interesting when people can't follow through on their own insights. The real problem is that Coleman Hughes and John Roberts are simply right, not just because of the way the Constitution was written, and what the fourteen amendment implies for everyone, but mainly because we have de facto had half a century of reverse systemic racism now and it needs to stop. This is just difficult for people to realize because the delusion of institutional racism persists indefinitely, against all quotidian experience and empirical evidence. Only idiots accept the presence of outcome disparities as direct evidence for discrimination, but this is what the entire nation has been hiding behind. John would do well to just be done with it entirely. It doesn't mean he'd turn into a compassionless dirtbag on every human concern, like Clarence Thomas. It would just be an internally consistent position. It would say: Yes, we are judging you by the content of your character when we lock you up at multiple times the rate of other racial groups (Black on Asian versus Asian on Black crime is 50:1), and we're doing it while more black women get a college degree than white men do, thanks to either the reverse discrimination or because black women are smarter and more industrious than white men, which is something we could try to study. It shouldn't be that difficult for an independent mind to grasp, I feel.
Really interesting argument by John ("Trump can't debate") about why not to debate. I agree with his premise; I'm not sure about the conclusion. If I trust "our democracy", shouldn't voters be exposed to that?
OTOH, I suspect James Madison would want the Electoral College do it's Constitutional job and to vote for neither of these two clowns.
John’s defense of Biden’s coming “I won’t debate the orange man” smacked of partisanship, subconscious or otherwise. As a master of language, John and other liberals know that a cognitively impaired Biden will show very poorly against Trump. I despise the orange man but it is clear that his ability to speak and communicate is vastly better than Biden. Trump gives 2 hour rallies where he speaks extemporaneously speak to thousands. Biden can barely speak a sentence without misspeaking, mumbling, speaking nonsense ect. The Democratic Party has taken a massive risk running him again and now they will try to hide a very debilitated candidate from the public but it won’t work.
I think that a debate is even more necessary for this election than in previous presidential elections because of constant dishonesty by both parties and hysterical assertions about the end of democracy. We deserve to see the candidates in a live public forum responding to questions. However, I am expecting Biden’s handlers to make an excuse for him to skip the debates. They already came up with a weak excuse to not do the softball Super Bowl interview.
"Balance of Power"
Good conversation. And I do agree that Stanley Crouch would have been awesome during these woke times of discourse.
The "colorblind" word is subjective because of how it is perceived and spoken about from all sides. The race industry is a form of capitalism that cannot be completely controlled because of the corruption involved. So the war continues, and people profit from selling certain narratives.
The 2024 election is probably going to be a lot more polarizing than 2016. I cannot wait to see John's reaction after the results. I still remember his reaction after Trump won the first time. It was priceless.
Below is the Bloggingheads episode of Glenn and John speaking about Trump's victory in 2016.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjUnA1WUPqU
Was it this way in the 80s? Yes, in the other direction. Reagan, Madonna’s Material World, movie stars like Stallone, and Schwarzenegger in pro state, pro military action movies. That was the 80s version of DEI woke at least in terms of general pop culture. No idea how that would manifest in academia.
The SAT is back. But I understand that since it is electronic, and can be scored in real time the test will change depending on how well or poorly a student is doing. In other words, easier questions will pop up in the test if the student is doing poorly and vice-versa.
In essence, each student can end up taking a different test. It is also being "dumbed-down" with certain sections left out for everybody.
What have you all heard about these things?
Glenn and John, you both make good points about why there should or should not be debates. Which simply highlights the fact that neither candidate running for the office of the American presidency CAN debate. High school debate teams across the country continue to actively participate in rigorous debates. Is there even any way to talk about how profoundly bizarre this situation is? Maybe the candidates could pick student proxies to stand in for them.
It seems clear that Biden's campaign will refuse a debate. Biden's response to Robert Hur's report suggests that Biden is having trouble distinguishing between reality and his imagination. Biden had a quick press conference after Hur's report was released, and Biden said that he was very angry at Hur for asking Biden when Biden's son had died. The transcript showed that Hur had not asked Biden about when his son had died, but that Biden had been the person who brought up the topic in response to another question. Biden imagined that Hur had asked about when his son died even though he had not done so. If Biden is unable to distinguish reality from his imagination, then he might make decisions based on what he imagines has happened instead of making decisions based on reality.