ADVERTISEMENT

More from Dennis Prager

gunslingerdick

Hall of Famer
Feb 16, 2006
40,463
30,028
113
I love this guy's videos.

In this one he discusses how the left and the right typically view America and our history. Do you feel this is accurate?

 
It's just like all of his attempts to divide people. No one is left or right, all the time... NO ONE. So, the entire premise of this is completely fiction. All he does is go to extreme lengths to create an illusion of a social division. He does it well, that's why he's a celebrity and reaping huge financial benefits from the ruse.

I love how he says "The more left one goes, the more negative the assessment." If you're not happy with certain facts, then you're on the left, to this guy. But, he seems keen on taking advantage of the results of that alleged side when the results are historically favorable. Apparently he forgets that if people hadn't been negative or critical toward slavery, it never would have been abolished. Then he takes credit for it, in the present tense, by insisting "America is one of the first to abolish slavery", thus making it great. America was one of the last and was the only one that required a massive, destructive, Civil War to do it. He doesn't base that on conservatism. He goes even more off-course and bases it on the "Judeo-Christian" Bible. The Bible is as much a proponent and endorsement for slavery as it is a liberator. It's all in how you interpret it. It's impossible to measure how much "The Bible" had to do with American commerce benefiting from and finally abolishing African slavery.

This is also interesting, in a broader sense, because it perpetuates another illusion that "Our country/society is better than the others." It is different than the others, no doubt. Some of the differences serve those of us who live here very well. Some don't. But, people rarely differentiate different from better instinctively, when given the latter as the primary adjective. If people are content, and conditioned, that they are already "better", then the motivation to actually improve where needed is diminished. "I'm better than everyone else, why do I need to change?" That is neither "left" nor "right" as far as an attitude. It's more like "Can I improve?" or "I don't really need to improve." If it's easier to say left and right, than it is to say 3 words and 6 words, well, okay. I still think that is misleading. But, notice I use the word "I" and not "us." I try to avoid herd mentality that way.

Prager is a political hack that loves exploiting Americans' need to fight each other for the scraps. In this day and age, with all the exposure to media available, he's doing it well. It's a great financial score if you have, or lack, the conscience to benefit from it. And, it softens the morality conflict when you manage to convince some people that you've correctly assessed the situation. If some people agree with you, then you're not all bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yrusonvus
A recent Facebook post by Prager in regards to Obama's mosque speech.

Dennis Prager
2 hrs ·
You Don’t Know What Obama Said at the Mosque
By Dennis Prager
Tuesday, Feb 9, 2016

If you seek to understand Barack Obama and his views, the best place to go is his speeches. But you have to read them in their entirety, not rely on hearing them or on the media’s summary of them. When you do, you realize how often what Obama says is morally and intellectually confused and even untrue.

The most recent example was his speech last week at a mosque in Baltimore. In addition to reassuring Muslim Americans that they are as American as Americans of every other faith — – a point that any president, Republican or Democrat, would and should make – President Obama spoke a lot of nonsense, some of it dangerous.

President Obama: “So let’s start with this fact: For more than a thousand years, people have been drawn to Islam’s message of peace. And the very word itself, Islam, comes from salam — peace.”

Why did Obama say this? Even Muslim websites acknowledge that “Islam” means “submission” [to Allah], that it comes from the Arabic root “aslama” meaning submission, and that “Islam” is in the command form of that verb.
That’s why “Muslim” means “One who submits,” not “One who is peaceful.”
Obama: “Jefferson and John Adams had their own copies of the Quran.”

The reason Jefferson had a copy of the Quran was to try to understand it in light of what the Muslim ambassador from Tripoli had told him and John Adams. When asked why Tripoli pirates were attacking American ships and enslaving Americans, the Muslim ambassador explained that Muslims are commanded to do so by the Quran: “It was written in their Quran that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman [Muslim] who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to Paradise.”

That’s why Jefferson and Adams had Qurans.

Obama: “And how do we move forward together? … It can’t be just a burden on the Muslim community — although the Muslim community has to play a role.”

Most Americans would say that the American Muslim community has to play “the” role, not “a” role in preventing violent Islam from capturing the minds of American Muslims, and in helping authorities identify extremist Muslims.

Obama: “Second, as Americans, we have to stay true to our core values, and that includes freedom of religion for all faiths.”
This is so obviously true that one wonders why the president felt it necessary to mention it.

Obama: “There are Christians who are targeted now in the Middle East, despite having been there for centuries, and there are Jews who’ve lived in places like France for centuries who now feel obliged to leave because they feel themselves under assault – sometimes by Muslims.”

One would have expected that after mentioning “Christians targeted now in the Middle East,” he would have mentioned “Jews targeted now in the Middle East.” That, however, would presumably have been too controversial to say. So, the president mentioned the many Jews in France “who now feel obliged to leave” their country because “they feel themselves under assault” — and then came the corker: “sometimes by Muslims.”

Sometimes? French Jews have recently been murdered, tortured and harassed more than at any time since the Holocaust. And virtually every one of those attacks has been perpetrated by Muslims.

Obama: “We have to be consistent in condemning hateful rhetoric and violence against everyone. And that includes against Muslims here in the United States of America.”

Two facts are relevant here. One is that religious hate crimes are exceedingly rare in America. The other is that in 2014, the last year for which we have data, Jews were targets of hate crimes four times more frequently than Muslims.

Obama: “I often hear it said that we need moral clarity in this fight. And the suggestion is somehow that if I would simply say, these are all Islamic terrorists, then we would actually have solved the problem by now, apparently.”

The president has made extensive use of the straw man — a false target that he then attacks. This is one such example. No one has ever said that if the president were to identify Islamic terrorists by name instead of nameless “violent extremists,” “we would actually have solved the problem by now.”

What drives most Americans crazy is that the president of the United States refuses to name the enemy. And this rewriting of reality filters down. Increasingly, for example, when (and if) 9/11 is taught in American schools, the attackers are never identified as Muslims.

Obama: “And, by the way, the notion that America is at war with Islam ignores the fact that the world’s religions are a part of who we are.”
Another straw man. No American of any stature has said that “America is at war with Islam.”

Obama: “In the discussion I had before I came out, some people said, why is there always a burden on us? When a young man in Charleston shoots African-Americans in a church, there’s not an expectation that every white person in America suddenly is explaining that they’re not racist.”

This point alone should have been publicized by the media — that the president of the United States tells Muslims that they have no moral obligation to condemn violence committed in the name of Islam.

Obama: “American Muslims are better positioned than anybody to show that it is possible to be faithful to Islam … and to believe in democracy.”
That is actually true. Given that theocracy, not democracy, is a central tenet of Islam, if an Islam compatible with democracy ever develops, it will probably develop in America.

Obama: “These are the voices of Muslim scholars, some of whom join us today, who know Islam has a tradition of respect for other faiths.”
Another falsehood. Islam has no such tradition. Islam has always demanded that Jews and Christians be treated as humiliated second-class citizens — when not forced to choose between conversion or death.

Now you know what President Obama said at the Islamic Society of Baltimore. But if you just read or listened to the mainstream media, you would have missed it because none of this was reported. It was all about, as the headline in USA Today put it, “At Baltimore mosque, Obama condemns anti-Muslim bigotry.”

bit.ly/Mosque-Speech
 
Isn't this Dennis Prager the same pretentious birdbrain who equates secularism with socialism? The same jackass who spews hatred while espousing the Bible? The same closeted homo who regularly tosses the salads of idiot right-wing politicians?

He must be some kind of contortionist to have his head that far up his ass.
 
i don't know if the majority of people feel like this...i sorta feel like strum in that not all are right or left.

why do i get the impression that the right always focuses on what's wrong???

and i'm not just talking since 2008.
 
i don't know if the majority of people feel like this...i sorta feel like strum in that not all are right or left.
Sorry. You gotta choose. You're either on the right and believe that America is the greatest country that ever was or will be and has never and will never do anything wrong. Or you're on the left and want to banish this country to the 9th circle of hell before you build a time machine to go back and skull-f@%# all the founding fathers. No tweeners.
 
Sorry. You gotta choose. You're either on the right and believe that America is the greatest country that ever was or will be and has never and will never do anything wrong. Or you're on the left and want to banish this country to the 9th circle of hell before you build a time machine to go back and skull-f@%# all the founding fathers. No tweeners.

i can appreciate this
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raising Heel
Another good video from Prager University. This one focuses on Race In America.

That's actually a very helpful and informative film. It shows we are going in the right direction. What people like Prager are basically stating, or implying with this is; "See! We're just fine the way we are." Well, we are better, but we should always seek to continue to improve. But, we wouldn't have gotten here if we'd chosen to keep things as they were. If we had remained complacent- that we were a fully equal society by letting African-descent people off their plantations- then socially it would mirror 1865. In fact, if you go deeper, we never would have unchained them to begin with if we were a superior society all along. That's partly why it took so long, and required 600,000 people to die, and immeasurable social upheaval and property destruction, in order to finally get them "freed." Well, that and all the profits from it.

Society, like everything else, is never static. It is always changing.

I don't agree with Obama's claim that "racism is in our DNA", either. But, apparently it is human nature to be tribal. I'm not sure if that is encoded on the helix or not. I would have chosen a better term or phrase to keep the motivation going in the direction we are going. It's not a bad idea to congratulate ourselves along the way, too. A little reward never hurts. But, to quote a wise man, "You do the right thing, because it's the right thing to do." That is its own reward.

I know it's improving. But, if you allow too much complacency, then it is stagnant or potentially regresses. It's also helpful to find a balance, or comfortable speed at which we're going forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JuleZ '02 HEEL
Best Prager U video yet. George Will nails it.

Now, THAT one... to me... was dead-on balls accurate. In fact, it gives me a sense of personal balance when I can feel perfectly aligned with a source that I, also, on occasion, am diametrically opposed.

Here's a hilarious clip that shows that theme in action. Triumph shows that, through humor, you can tell the truth more blatantly than ever.

 
  • Like
Reactions: plm
I thought that Facebook post (much of it at least) was pretty silly. It reminds of someone on a message board intentionally being obstinate to make points that aren't there. Then the people who read it actually think that is the narrative instead of what their own intellect would tell them if they read it for themselves. It is actually kind of similar to the UNC academic/athletics issues and the way they have been covered. Put a narrative out that is your opinion, make it sound relatively decent, and people believe that is actually the truth.
 
I thought that Facebook post (much of it at least) was pretty silly. It reminds of someone on a message board intentionally being obstinate to make points that aren't there. Then the people who read it actually think that is the narrative instead of what their own intellect would tell them if they read it for themselves.

Whenever I read anything from Obama, my intellect tells me it's much more dangerous and nefarious than what it looks like on the surface.
 
Whenever I read anything from Obama, my intellect tells me it's much more dangerous and nefarious than what it looks like on the surface.

Obama hasn't been a good President but it is no secret I don't buy into the anti-USA conspiracy nonsense. Prager is a conservative. That posts reads like the typical right wing scare tactic stuff, which fits his message of division. Both parties are filled with this BS so they create the division. It isn't that it has to be there. They want it to be there.
 
Obama hasn't been a good President but it is no secret I don't buy into the anti-USA conspiracy nonsense. Prager is a conservative. That posts reads like the typical right wing scare tactic stuff, which fits his message of division. Both parties are filled with this BS so they create the division. It isn't that it has to be there. They want it to be there.

What you say might be true. But I've seen enough from Obama to not put anything past him. Dennis and I just happen to feel the same about him.
 
Today's installment of Prager U nailing it.


This one got me the most pissed off out of all the ones I've watched. I mean, sure people find all sorts of ways to be offended, and people are going to call other people racist regardless of whether or not they are... but this one is cut and dry math.

The fact that some people don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the way the tax system is set up is bad enough, but now it seems like people are pushing to make it even more out of whack. More benefit to being a lazy/unproductive member of society. The role of "Dick" in this example shows how some are ensuring this tax burden inequality will persist, or even expand going forward. Dick is the average middle class person. If certain politicians can make it so that the average person is slightly better off, then they assume the average person will turn a blind eye to the fact that the Harrys of the world are subsidizing the lives of the Toms, and will allow votes/laws to be passed that ensure that continues (aka - Harry being penalized for working and investing and being forced to help compensate for the laziness of Tom).

Anyone with a brain would watch this and say, "Gee, that doesn't seem like a fair way at all for those three brothers to divide up the costs". But when the same problem/solution is presented on a macro scale, it seems so many people let that logic go out the window.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: gunslingerdick
This one got me the most pissed off out of all the ones I've watched. I mean, sure people find all sorts of ways to be offended, and people are going to call other people racist regardless of whether or not they are... but this one is cut and dry math.

The fact that some people don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the way the tax system is set up is bad enough, but now it seems like people are pushing to make it even more out of whack. More benefit to being a lazy/unproductive member of society. The role of "Dick" in this example shows how some are ensuring this tax burden inequality will persist, or even expand going forward. Dick is the average middle class person. If certain politicians can make it so that the average person is slightly better off, then they assume the average person will turn a blind eye to the fact that the Harrys of the world are subsidizing the lives of the Toms, and will allow votes/laws to be passed that ensure that continues (aka - Harry being penalized for working and investing and being forced to help compensate for the laziness of Tom).

Anyone with a brain would watch this and say, "Gee, that doesn't seem like a fair way at all for those three brothers to divide up the costs". But when the same problem/solution is presented on a macro scale, it seems so many people let that logic go out the window.


hammer_nail.jpg~c200
 
So simple, yet so hard for many to comprehend. And when they can't comprehend, the default defense is... racist!
I think there needs to be a distinction between racist and racially prejudiced, or racial prejudice. Unless we all pluck out our eyes, we're going to "see" aesthetic differences. Referring to them, or making those distinctions, is not prejudiced, but they are racist, or racial
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hark_The_Sound_2010
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT