A Question of Respect?

[Cow Poke]

So, I'm curious. Which part of my OP was "vilifying" someone. The exchange was indeed between the native american group and the initial video showed a group of young people, many of whom were wearing MAGA hats and the article reported "build that wall" chant. Where exactly is the vilification?

Better, where is the truth?

[carpedm9587]

Better, where is the truth?

THAT is exactly the point. When the evidence clearly supports a conclusion - I'm there. When it does not, I prefer to set my politics aside and simply say "we don't have enough evidence."

The problem here seems to be that I don't think there is enough evidence for some of the claims being made - and others here think that there is. In that disagreement, people apparently are assuming I'm saying "I don't know" because I am somehow partisan. People are entitled to that perception, but it is not true in this discussion - unless I am completely blind to myself and in a state of self-delusion. I'm sure there are more than a few who think that is indeed the case. However, I obviously can make no response to such an accusation - because I would be blind and deluded about it!

[Cow Poke]

Umm... no. Indeed, I think I've been pretty clear about my position with respect to both the kids AND Phillips - and what I think I can conclude from the evidence and what I cannot.

If you think otherwise - then I'd be interested to know which posts you think "paint these kids in a bad light" and which ones "defend/excuse" Phillips?

You pretty much put them in the same category and do everything you can to make it "they BOTH had responsibility".... Phillips is a political activist - a HACK and a liar. You would do well simply to acknowledge that. HE approached THEM.

[Cow Poke]

THAT is exactly the point. When the evidence clearly supports a conclusion - I'm there.

Phillips is a political activist who tends to enjoy making trouble, and his entire life is pretty much a lie. Are you there? Or is it impossible for you to admit the truth simply because he's "Native American".

[rogue06]

Umm... no. Indeed, I think I've been pretty clear about my position with respect to both the kids AND Phillips - and what I think I can conclude from the evidence and what I cannot.

If you think otherwise - then I'd be interested to know which posts you think "paint these kids in a bad light" and which ones "defend/excuse" Phillips?

Let's start with the ones where you convict them of Orwellian "face crimes." You know, where you said they weren't innocent based on the "smirk."

[Cow Poke]

Let's start with the ones where you convict them of Orwellian "face crimes."

So, let's recap....

Phillips is a political activist whose life is basically a lie, is used to causing trouble, and he's the one who approached these kids and stood beating a drum in their faces.
The kids wore hats and smiled.

[rogue06]

So, let's recap....

Phillips is a political activist whose life is basically a lie, is used to causing trouble, and he's the one who approached these kids and stood beating a drum in their faces.
The kids wore hats and smiled.

B...but it was a MAGA cap!1!!1!eleventy-one!!

[carpedm9587]

You pretty much put them in the same category and do everything you can to make it "they BOTH had responsibility"....

You mean like Trump's response to Charlottesville?

And yes - I know that is a blatant example of "whataboutism," so back to your comment...

Phillips is a political activist - a HACK and a liar. You would do well simply to acknowledge that. HE approached THEM.

And my response to this accusation is, "if you think so, then you have not understood my comments. Phillips is an activist. He appears to have misrepresented his military service. I'm not sure what you mean by "hack." I'm going n the assumption that you are using something like this definition:

"Political hack" is a pejorative term describing a person who is part of the political party apparatus, but whose intentions are more aligned with victory than personal conviction. ... When a group of "political hacks" of a similar political affiliation get together, they are sometimes called a "political hack pack."

It is not clear to me that this man has made any significant money with his activism. He is clearly willing to go out and participate when it aligns with his perspective. He is involved with several Native American issues. He doesn't appear to be a particularly pleasant person (as far as I can tell), but I don't know what the basis is for calling him a "hack." I dislike his way of representing his war service, that much is true - but he is certainly not the first person to "fluff themselves up." It doesn't speak well for him, but it also doesn't negate anything else he's ever done.

As for Sandmann, I know little/nothing about him. I have not seen anywhere that his activities/behavior outside of the Washington incident have been scrutinized anywhere near the way Phillips has been. I don't know if he's seen as "the golden child" at school or is he's known as the school bully. Basically, what I know is

a) he stood toe-to-toe, in-your-face with another person (Phillips). I have no idea who initiated that particular exchange.
b) he supports Trump (at least to some degree) based on the fact that he wears a MAGA hat.
c) the things he said/shared in his interview with Guthrie

To that I bring my own experience as a dad, and with MANY youth (Youth Ministry, Boy Scouts, school programs, youth theater programs, Odyssey of the Mind, etc.). Is it possible that look on his was wasn't an "in-your-face" smirk? Maybe. Is it possible he was just trying to "calm the situation?" Maybe. My experience says that part is doubtful, but the fact is it is not impossible. Likewise, is it possible that Phillips went belligerently up to Sandmann and initiated the in-your-face confrontation? Maybe.

The fact is we do not have the part of the video that shows how that part of the interaction began. We know how Phillips interaction with the entire group began (he advanced). We know that there was a period when the drumming/dancing appeared to be festive and mutual (shortly after Phillips advanced). Then we have a jump to the "face-off" and we don't know how that happened. Phillips says he was attemting to continue through the group to get to the memorial, and Sandmann intentionally blocked his way. Sandmann says he was innocently standing there and Phillips confronted him with "in-your-face" drumming. Sandmann's friends are backing his version. Phillip's friends are backing his version.

Phillips has lied before - so could be lying again. Sandmann has a very confrontational body language and facial expression - one I have seen many times - so he could be the instigator. At the end of the day - the best I can say is "I don't know."

Now, if that is "defending Phillips" and "vilifying Sandmann" to you, I'm not sure what else I can say.

[carpedm9587]

Phillips is a political activist who tends to enjoy making trouble, and his entire life is pretty much a lie. Are you there? Or is it impossible for you to admit the truth simply because he's "Native American".

I actually have not factored him being a "native american" once in the discussion, except to note that he was with that particular march.

[Cow Poke]

I actually have not factored him being a "native american" once in the discussion, except to note that he was with that particular march.

Ah, OK, so to what do you attribute your reluctance to call him what he is? Why does he deserve respect?

[carpedm9587]

Let's start with the ones where you convict them of Orwellian "face crimes." You know, where you said they weren't innocent based on the "smirk."

Hey - I'm a dad. I know a smirk when I see one.

Is it possible it wasn't? Sure. However, it's about as likely as my son telling me the truth back when I used to catch him doing something he was not supposed to be doing.

If that's Orwellian to you...

[Cow Poke]

...Phillips is an activist. He appears to have misrepresented his military service....

wow

[carpedm9587]

Ah, OK, so to what do you attribute your reluctance to call him what he is? Why does he deserve respect?

I said nothing about him "deserving respect," so I feel no need to defend that position.

[Cow Poke]

You mean like Trump's response to Charlottesville?

And yes - I know that is a blatant example of "whataboutism," so back to your comment...



And my response to this accusation is, "if you think so, then you have not understood my comments. Phillips is an activist. He appears to have misrepresented his military service. I'm not sure what you mean by "hack." I'm going n the assumption that you are using something like this definition:

"Political hack" is a pejorative term describing a person who is part of the political party apparatus, but whose intentions are more aligned with victory than personal conviction. ... When a group of "political hacks" of a similar political affiliation get together, they are sometimes called a "political hack pack."

It is not clear to me that this man has made any significant money with his activism. He is clearly willing to go out and participate when it aligns with his perspective. He is involved with several Native American issues. He doesn't appear to be a particularly pleasant person (as far as I can tell), but I don't know what the basis is for calling him a "hack." I dislike his way of representing his war service, that much is true - but he is certainly not the first person to "fluff themselves up." It doesn't speak well for him, but it also doesn't negate anything else he's ever done.

As for Sandmann, I know little/nothing about him. I have not seen anywhere that his activities/behavior outside of the Washington incident have been scrutinized anywhere near the way Phillips has been. I don't know if he's seen as "the golden child" at school or is he's known as the school bully. Basically, what I know is

a) he stood toe-to-toe, in-your-face with another person (Phillips). I have no idea who initiated that particular exchange.
b) he supports Trump (at least to some degree) based on the fact that he wears a MAGA hat.
c) the things he said/shared in his interview with Guthrie

To that I bring my own experience as a dad, and with MANY youth (Youth Ministry, Boy Scouts, school programs, youth theater programs, Odyssey of the Mind, etc.). Is it possible that look on his was wasn't an "in-your-face" smirk? Maybe. Is it possible he was just trying to "calm the situation?" Maybe. My experience says that part is doubtful, but the fact is it is not impossible. Likewise, is it possible that Phillips went belligerently up to Sandmann and initiated the in-your-face confrontation? Maybe.

The fact is we do not have the part of the video that shows how that part of the interaction began. We know how Phillips interaction with the entire group began (he advanced). We know that there was a period when the drumming/dancing appeared to be festive and mutual (shortly after Phillips advanced). Then we have a jump to the "face-off" and we don't know how that happened. Phillips says he was attemting to continue through the group to get to the memorial, and Sandmann intentionally blocked his way. Sandmann says he was innocently standing there and Phillips confronted him with "in-your-face" drumming.

Phillips has lied before - so could be lying again. Sandmann has a very confrontational body language and facial expression - one I have seen many times - so he could be the instigator. At the end of the day - the best I can say is "I don't know."

Now, if that is "defending Phillips" and "vilifying Sandmann" to you, I'm not sure what else I can say.

There is SO MUCH here to unpack I don't even know where to start. The fact that you can't see that this was a political activist advancing on another individual, and the crime that other individual committed was "standing toe to toe" and "in your face"????

Phillips advanced on Sandmann ---- in your weird little world, Sandmann should have retreated in tears?

[Cow Poke]

I said nothing about him "deserving respect," so I feel no need to defend that position.

It's the title of the thread, remember?

How bout the other part....

Ah, OK, so to what do you attribute your reluctance to call him what he is?