by evilgenius » Tue 20 Sep 2016, 14:44:30
So Trump's son says, about immigration (specifically Syrian refugees), that if you had a bowl of Skittles and only 3 of them would poison you, would you eat from the bowl? Obviously, he was trying to say something that he knew would appeal to his dad's supporters, and he phrased it in a manner that would lead the question. In the aftermath, predictably or not, the left has been all about how brown skinned people are not Skittles and how much that is an insult.
What? In the first place, I'm kind of a lefty, and I am very upset with that response. Trump's son didn't make that comparison, not really.
They have managed to confuse the messenger with the message. A much better response to what Trump's son said might have been to compare it to automobile travel. It is perhaps the most dangerous thing anyone can do on an everyday basis. The death toll from the activity is pretty high compared to most other things people do. Still, knowing this, would you get behind the wheel? Immigrants probably pose even less danger than automobiles do to people's lives. The bad Skittles, if you will, on their best day, which took years of planning to pull off - and an untold amount of luck, only managed to kill about 3,000 people. If automobiles kill 40,000 people a year, then they average just under 110 a day. It doesn't even take them an average month to match the bad Skittle's most hard fought for total, which isn't likely ever to be matched given the overwhelming money and effort spent to counter them. And the carnage with cars is continual. It doesn't stop. Nobody is advocating for everyone to stop driving right now. Is it ridiculous to get behind the wheel?
I think the left suffers from a paucity of talent. They would much rather resort to the easy knee jerk response than to refute terrible people with actual answers that shut them down. The way I see it the US is laced with a certain poison, in the form of conspiracy theories which have sought, largely, to explain in primitive terms why people are less well off now than either they think they should expect to be or that they used to be. The basis of these theories is largely nonsense, but carefully mixed in with just enough truth to hit a few nails now and again. They've been around a long time, and have been successively built upon with each passing generation. In that way they seem enough a part of normal conversation as taxes or baseball. And, like taxes or baseball, most people are not experts and feel unequipped to deal with the balance of the issues pertaining to the structure of the necessary arguments. Most people watch it and accept whatever the outcome is. They rank it with candy, in the way that the left wants to be so angry over 'Skittles' most likely, until they are sitting around one day and everyone in a group is suddenly parroting the same things. But it is not candy.