Pelosi insider trading facts are wild

Nobody can defend this, not even Nancy Pelosi herself. Karoline Leavitt lays it out in no uncertain terms. If Nancy Pelosi is making that kind of scratch (pardon the vernacular), she is clearly cheating.  And if she is cheating at that, you know that the Democrats are cheating at everything else. Remember when Donna Brazile pre-fed Hillary Clinton the debate questions in 2016? Yep. Party of cheaters.

Almost perfect

Dave Rubin shares a clip of a 5th grade teacher calmly arguing facts in the face a near-hysterical, blind anger about the truth of sex and gender. His argument is almost, but not quite perfect.

The part that's missing is a simple explanation of the consequences (both intended and unintended consequences) of not adhering to facts.  To do so without getting into the slippery slope arguments is still entirely possible, and necessary. That's the important part that's missing, otherwise, very well done.

Karine Jean-Pierre can't stand up to facts

Without her notes full of vapid talking points, I'm not sure how Karine Jean-Pierre stands up at all.  Even with them there to assist her, she should crumble under the weight of the facts.

The fallacy of the logic and facts approach

You have to talk to people in terms that they will understand.  I don't mean intellectually understand, I mean in a way that resonates with them.  The problem with conservatives is we believe in facts and we believe in logic. Facts and logic can bring you to the truth, but that in itself is not a universal truth because many people operate illogically.  That's a fact conservatives often overlook.  The logic and facts approach is pure fallacy in many situations.

When talking to a woke liberal, we often forget that facts don't matter to everyone.  What resonates with people are things that affect them emotionally.  Take for example the notion that inflation has recently been at historical highs. Telling someone that fact has far less emotional impact than saying simply "I can't afford eggs anymore."  Implicit in that latter statement are a couple of fundamental notions that all revolve around empathy;

• it is likely they are in the same boat, or a similar one and have similar complaints
• complaining sounds whiney and woke liberals love that (snarky but not untrue)
• they can sympathize and feel bad for you (woke SJWs have to have an underdog to protect)

You have not only started a discussion with something that they can empathize with and also get behind trying to solve.  It's the start of a more pliable conversation instead of a debate.  You have started on what is probably common ground or at least at a place of empathy or sympathy.  The way forward at least exists from that point.  Hammering someone with facts will more have the opposite effect; entrenchment.

We don't do enough as conservatives to understand our audience and with each generation that happens it gets harder and harder to do because each generation has been Overton windowed further away from the fundamental truths of life.  I'm not talking just religion here, I'm talking about even the fundamental basics of common sense (e.g. 2 genders).

We have to understand that we are currently on the losing side of the culture war.  We have not lost but we are losing.  That means we have to work both harder and smarter.  I'm not suggesting I have all the answers as to who.  But I think one of the key notions is that we need better understanding.  We need to understand how to connect, but in order to do that we need to understand the map, the lay of the land as it currently exists.  We cannot change beliefs for the better without having both a starting point and an end point.

Here, as an example of trying to get to that understanding, Ken Ham discusses the state of Gen Z as it pertains to (lack of) religious belief.  It's a specific but excellent example of how to change the direction of society from a massive leftward drift to back on course.

BLM vs. Facts

Dave Rubin interviews Douglas Murray about BLM protests and opinions. Murray comes armed with facts:

When facts don't back Fauci up, make up something

Dr. Fauci, improvising facts.  

Whether or not people are obeying the lockdown is irrelevant.  Texas has no lockdown and they are near the bottom of the cases per day rankings.  Further, where are his 'facts' on people not obeying the lockdowns?  He's just making up stuff to cover his ineptitude. Also, what's with "you're talking too fast" and "I can't see that"? Is he taking elderly lessons from the guy who can't walk up the steps of Air Force One properly?  President Trump should have fired him long ago.

Respect for Charles Barkley

Woke woke? Yes.  Thanks Brandon Tatum for the facts.

You can't handle the truth! (if you have a closed mind)

Arguing with socialists, COVID-19 and George Floyd

Last week on Facebook I got into a bit of an exchange with an uncle of mine who had drifted towards socialism over the years.  He posted a meme congratulating New Zealand on successfully eradicating cases of COVID-19 and claiming that that was real winning.  

I of course came at his meme with facts and pointed out a number of false comparisons in which he was participating - the isolated nature of New Zealand compared to the United States, the minuscule population as compared to the United States and the fact that they achieved it in large part due to closing their borders - something president Trump was derided for doing early on in the pandemic's spread.

It didn't matter, despite the facts he kept coming back.  He blamed Trump supporters for ignoring recommendations.  I pointed out that (1) you cannot blame a leader in a free country for his supporters' actions if they contravene his recommendation to continue to social distance and more egregiously, (2) those people out protesting and even rioting and looting in the name of George Floyd's death as a result of poor policing were  most definitely not Trump supporters.

That was followed by - silence.

If they cannot refute the facts, they go away and come back on another issue because facts don't matter to the ideological left.  All that matters is the ability to rant and throw blame.

By the way, with all these protests and riots, what happened to social distancing?

Why Trump argued the inaugural attendance count

Watch this video to see why Donald Trump disputed the inaugural attendance count - pictures in this video show the crowd size without the media edits. Sure the pictures the media propagated as facts were real, but they were not taken at the height of the attendance. Facts matter.

It's not about facts, it's just about agitation

For these people at least, using the death of a teenager in Ferguson, MO under unfortunate circumstances (largely of his own doing) seems a perfectly reasonable reason to agitate for other political causes. This is sympathetic to neither the family nor the police, and should be seen as disgusting by everyone with an opinion on this situation.

...The protest had many elements of the Occupy Portland movement, which galvanized protesters in the city and formed a network of people who still communicate via mass text message.

As with Occupy, the vast majority of protesters preached peace, but a fringe group of people — some covering their faces with black bandannas — advocated violence and confrontations with police. And like Occupy, the original protest drew a disparate group of people together, not all of whom agreed with one another.

Military veterans called for peace, a communist group called for the overthrow of capitalism, and a group calling for a Palestinian state all held court during a series of speeches on the steps of the state Justice Center in Portland.

Military veterans calling for peace is vague - does it mean in response to this situation or are they complaining about growing U.S. involvement in Iraq? It's unclear, so I'll let that one slide. But communists advocating the overthrow of capitalism? That's an impossible walk from the Ferguson situation but one they are only too happy to pretend isn't. How will overthrowing capitalism do anything for the Ferguson situation? Capitalism is not at fault here. Either a belligerent hooligan is or a racist police officer is. Even if you believe the latter to be true, capitalism does not foster racism any more or less than any other system. Tell me there are no racists in Russia or China or Cuba and I'll laugh at your premise.

Go home communists, you're crazy.

Palestinians? Really? In a country fraught with nationalistic and religious violence you have no moral authority to claim anything about what's going on in one city in America. Secondly, and more importantly, there is ZERO connection between this and the issues related Palestinian statehood. Got that? Zero. Using this as an excuse to get media face time is morally bankrupt. This is not even about solidarity with supposed victims. Why would you require your community to march or protest as an identifiable group rather than as individuals? In order to throw a reminder out there that the Palestinian issue still exists.

Purposely bending an issue not related to your cause to bring attention to your cause is dishonest, and in many cases, like this one it's repugnant in it's disrespect for all parties concerned.

Saturday Learning Series - FrackNation

The much maligned counter-documentary to the misleading and erroneous Gasland, discusses the concept of fracking without the hyperbole.  The comments section on Youtube for this has been deluged with hate comments.  Indeed the poster put it in the comedy section for some reason.  The typical liberal response - the "facts" we like, trump the truth.

Nevertheless, agree or disagree, give the documentary a chance. Don't be closed-minded .