Comments by "Jim Werther" (@jimwerther) on "PragerU"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ShnoogleMan
If your point is that your mind is permanently closed, then nothing will penetrate, facts be damned.
Adam Smith is known as the Father of Economics, Milton Friedman won a Pulitzer Prize for his work, and Sowell is the premier public intellectual of the last half century. The last two were full fledged Chicagoans, which is to say fully committed to empirical evidence, which is how Friedman saw the light after having started as a Keynsian, and Sowell did as well after having been a Marxist. They had open minds, and brilliant ones, and were thus led to the economic truth. No one ever managed to best either one in a debate, despite many trying over the decades.
Now that Friedman has passed, the leftists who melted in his presence have posthumously gone after his legacy, which is the only way they could try to diminish him, callous and crass as such a move is. Presumably they will try to do the same with Sowell down the road. Undoubtedly, the blind leftists who have no use for facts will take succor from such attempts.
As to your last point, it is not realistic to engage in a full debate on ideas in a YT comment section. Given a faceoff at opposing podiums, I would be happy to explain the facts as they are, but given the limitations of this forum, as well as the wide scope of your false claims, it seemed most sensible to just point the reader in the appropriate direction, and hope anyone with an open mind takes it from there.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Nuna1888
He is as disingenuous a person as there is. He made his money partially by inheriting a fortune from his father and lucking out with the expansion of the real estate market. His hyper-aggressive approach, which made him so much money when real estate was booming, drove him into bankruptcy when real estate collapsed. Why did he survive? The banks bailed him out, because he was Too Big To Fail.
Along the way, he ripped off everyone he ever did business with. He ripped off small businessmen, and ripped off average Joes when he tool their life savings for frauds like "Trump University". He also promoted himself as a major supporter of charities, but he was lying.
He evaded the Vietnam War by getting one of his father's rich contacts to write a fake report of bone sputs in his heels. I wonder which American went in Trump's place, and whether or not the guy came home from Vietnam.
Trump has viciously attacked anyone who disagrees with him for any reason. See the vile things he said about his opponents in the 2016 Republican Primary. Want an example of a lie? He accused Bush of lying to get us into war with Iraq - that's a lie. He accused Cruz of being ineligible to become president - that's a lie. He accused Cruz's father of killing JFK - that's a lie.
After becoming president, Trump immediately lied about the crowd size of his inauguration, and persisted from there. The Washington Post counted somethinf like 18,000 lies during his four years. Now the Washington Post is completely dishonest themselves, and therefore we need mot take their word for it. But look through their list. Do you not believe that, say, 1 out of 20 of their claims are accurate? If so, then that would make 900 lies in four years in office.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheBlueArmageddon
Most of Prager U's work is excellent, although a handful of their videos have been off base. I would say that their batting average vastly exceeds that of the New York Times, which refers to six months of out-of-control rioting as "mostly peaceful protests" despite dozens murdered, thousands of businesses destroyed, curfews needing to be imposed, and $5b worth of damage, and still refers to antifa, which is a Marxist domestic terrorist collection, as "an anti-fascist group". But do you go to some anti-NYT blogger or vlogger every time the "paper of record" writes something? No, of course you don't.
Some 400 lb guy wearing pajamas in his mom's basement claims that Prager is not accurate, but you will assume that he is dead on? Based upon what, outside of your bias?
1
-
@TheBlueArmageddon
If 95 two-seater Cessnas took off this morning and landed safely, while five jumbo jets crashed into the ocean, would the headline be that today's takeoffs were "mostly successful landings"? Offsetting the numbers of mass riots in large cities by counting every time that 12 people walk around a traffic circle in Sheboygan is a perfect example of the dishonesty of the mainstream media.
There is no way around the fact that daily riots for six months in which citizens have to cower in their houses while police are instructed not to do their jobs, with dozens slaughtered openly in the streets and hundreds of cops attacked, with thousands of businesses burned to the ground and $5 billion in damage caused, should not be described as "mostly peaceful protests". Please point to the public safety issue in which a 5% failure rate is considered a wonderful thing. And again, that doesn't even account for the false equivalence of mass riots in a major city with seven people walking in a circle on a street corner in Moose Jaw.
As to your favorite pajama-clad blogger, do you really expect me to spend hours watching his material? Anyone can "prove" anything when no one is there responding. Videos like the type you describe abound on the internet, proving wonderful items like the earth being flat and the CIA conducting the attacks against America in 2001. The idea is to seek out opposing opinions.
If you would like to make a specific claim against any Prager video, I will be happy to respond. As I wrote earlier, not everything they espouse is wholly accurate, but they are far more reliable than are the leftists in the mainstream media.
1
-
@TheBlueArmageddon
The NYT, WP, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and other leftist media constantly refer to "mostly peaceful protests". They refer to a domestic terrorist Communist group, antifa, as an "anti-fascist" group. They falsely claim that police shootings and killings disproportionately affect the melanized, despite the facts showing the precise opposite to be the case.
Six months of riots - that's true, it happened. I did not mean to imply that in any one given place every honest citizen had to hide from the mob. But curfews in large cities were a regular feature during that time period, as the police were told to stand back and let the rioters riot.
The media has continued to talk about a "racial reckoning", despite the facts showing that being melanized is a statistical advantage in this country, when dealing with prospective employers, with college admissions, with law enforcement, and with virtually every other measurable metric.
The media has treated BLM as if it were a civil rights group, instead of the anti-American, violent, Marxist hate group it truly is. And that despite BLM making almost no attempt whatsoever to disguise its true aims.
Despite your claim, I have always made a point of reading and hearing both sides. I currently have paid subscriptions to the NYT, WP, and LA Times.
I watched a single John Oliver video, and it was so packed full of dishonesty that I could barely make it through. I wish I could remember what the topic was; it goes back a few months. Do you really believe that he is telling it down the center?
You claim to have made "hundreds" of specific claims, while in fact you have made zero. You have this Prager video here making points which you dislike, you have had every opportunity to specify objections about this video or any other, yet you have refused to do so.
Let me note that I pointed you directly to an article made by a respected academic in a legitimate publication, which contains verifiable data and is very well written, yet you absolutely refuse to take a gander. At the same time, you claim to keep an open mind, seeking information from all sides, which you clearly don't. Watching a PragerU video, then running off to your basement friend and choosing to believe his "rebuttal", is hardly called hearing all sides.
Remember, I'm the one who receives the NYT, LA Times, and WP daily. I'm also the one who spent a decade listening to a show on my local NPR affiliate. No, I don't feel compelled to watch some guy's video. But can you say that you willingly take in both sides? I think the answer is obvious.
Again, if you choose to make a specific claim - even one, which you have not yet done - I would be happy to respond.
1
-
1
-
1