I don't know if you find this series of blogs interesting or not, but I am going to add another one. Have you noticed that when ever there is a press conference and the news people ask a question about some point where they are trying to get "new" information that there is a pattern to the response.
I noticed this with Obama and most of those who work for him. What they do is to lecture the person who asked the question by going on and on explaining the problem. The person asking the question wants "new" information, but what they get is this lecture about what every one already knows. The fact that they keep doing it makes me think that most of the listeners have no idea what is really going on. Did you notice this pattern? The fact that they go on and on telling you what you already know is part of another plan that they have and that is to run out the clock. I know that when you are watching a football game and the team ahead has the ball in the last few minutes or second that they go into a "rope-a-dope" to run out the clock.
What I can't understand is they the person does not pop in and remind the person giving the lecture that they already know all those facts and what they want to know is what the person is going to do or what their opinion is. Frequently the person makes reference to some unknown person to the affect of "this is what they thing". We already know what the average or typical person thinks and what we want to know is what the person thinks. They never seem to want to draw back the curtain and let the questioner really look in. Most of these people work for us so we have a right to know what they are doing.
Keep you eyes open for this "trick" and when it happens try to look behind the "trick" to what they are trying to hide.
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
Monday, March 9, 2015
Ferguson, Another Way To Look At The Statistics
I have been reviewing the statistics on Ferguson presented by Obama regarding their police department and see that some clarification is in order. There are a lot more statistics about Ferguson that I would like to have, but I will try to work with what I have.
The basic bias of Obama is based on the fact that Ferguson is 2/3 Blank and 1/3 non-black and the people who are arrested for serious crimes arre 90% Black. This does not show or prove that there is something wrong with the police in Ferguson, it only proves that these numbers are not "random". They are clearly different from data from cities that are 2/3 Asian or 2/3 any other race. We need to see if there is some other reason for these statistics other than biased police and I think that I can show that.
Let's start out by looking as some additional facts or statistics about Blacks compared to non-Blacks. It is a fact that Black males drop out of school at much higher rates than do non-Black males. It is also a fact that the crime rate among young males who drop out of school is much higher than those for young males who graduate from high school. My first step is to see how many of young males we have in Ferguson who have dropped out of school. My data shows that 50% of Black males do not graduate and 15% of non-Black males do not graduate. Let's assume that we start with 100 people from Ferguson in the same exact mix as the population. That means we have 67 Blacks and 33 non-Blacks. With me on this? Next, let's see how many drop out we have by using my numbers above. With simple math, we find that we have 33.5 Blacks and 5.0 non-Blacks. What this shows is that if you were walking down any street in Ferguson in the middle of the day that you would find that 87% of the drop outs would be Black and 13% would be non-Black. We all know that these are the two groups who commit a disproportionate percentage of the crime in any city.
Next, did you notice that 100% of the Blacks who have been killed by police around the nation have been resisting arrest? If you did not know that, then you do not have your eyes open. The most recent killing in Madison, Wi is a case where the Black kid attacked the police. I do not know why, but the data shows that Blacks are at least twice as likely to resist arrest than are non-Blacks. If that is the case, let's apply that fact to the above numbers. If 50% of the 33.5 Blacks resist arrest that means 16.75 would have resisted arrest and possibly injured. If 25% of the non-Blacks resisted arrest, that means we would have 2.5 non-whites who would have possibly been injured. This now shows that of those people who were injured while resisting arrest would be 93% Black while non-Blacks only account for 7%.
If you are honest and understand 4th grade math, it will be clear that the statistics that Obama used to try to blame the Ferguson police showed that the police were doing just what they should have been doing and that there is a crime problem in Ferguson and it is due to the conduct of the Black community not the Ferguson police department. The Ferguson police department does not need to be retrained, the Black community has to take responsibility for their anti-social conduct.
PS---I know people who live in Ferguson and they are God fearing church going people who would not even "J" walk. Another way to change the statistics for Ferguson would be for the non-Blacks to commit "more" crimes or for the Ferguson police department to hire more cops to petrol the non-Black neighborhoods where there is little crime. Is this crazy or what?
The basic bias of Obama is based on the fact that Ferguson is 2/3 Blank and 1/3 non-black and the people who are arrested for serious crimes arre 90% Black. This does not show or prove that there is something wrong with the police in Ferguson, it only proves that these numbers are not "random". They are clearly different from data from cities that are 2/3 Asian or 2/3 any other race. We need to see if there is some other reason for these statistics other than biased police and I think that I can show that.
Let's start out by looking as some additional facts or statistics about Blacks compared to non-Blacks. It is a fact that Black males drop out of school at much higher rates than do non-Black males. It is also a fact that the crime rate among young males who drop out of school is much higher than those for young males who graduate from high school. My first step is to see how many of young males we have in Ferguson who have dropped out of school. My data shows that 50% of Black males do not graduate and 15% of non-Black males do not graduate. Let's assume that we start with 100 people from Ferguson in the same exact mix as the population. That means we have 67 Blacks and 33 non-Blacks. With me on this? Next, let's see how many drop out we have by using my numbers above. With simple math, we find that we have 33.5 Blacks and 5.0 non-Blacks. What this shows is that if you were walking down any street in Ferguson in the middle of the day that you would find that 87% of the drop outs would be Black and 13% would be non-Black. We all know that these are the two groups who commit a disproportionate percentage of the crime in any city.
Next, did you notice that 100% of the Blacks who have been killed by police around the nation have been resisting arrest? If you did not know that, then you do not have your eyes open. The most recent killing in Madison, Wi is a case where the Black kid attacked the police. I do not know why, but the data shows that Blacks are at least twice as likely to resist arrest than are non-Blacks. If that is the case, let's apply that fact to the above numbers. If 50% of the 33.5 Blacks resist arrest that means 16.75 would have resisted arrest and possibly injured. If 25% of the non-Blacks resisted arrest, that means we would have 2.5 non-whites who would have possibly been injured. This now shows that of those people who were injured while resisting arrest would be 93% Black while non-Blacks only account for 7%.
If you are honest and understand 4th grade math, it will be clear that the statistics that Obama used to try to blame the Ferguson police showed that the police were doing just what they should have been doing and that there is a crime problem in Ferguson and it is due to the conduct of the Black community not the Ferguson police department. The Ferguson police department does not need to be retrained, the Black community has to take responsibility for their anti-social conduct.
PS---I know people who live in Ferguson and they are God fearing church going people who would not even "J" walk. Another way to change the statistics for Ferguson would be for the non-Blacks to commit "more" crimes or for the Ferguson police department to hire more cops to petrol the non-Black neighborhoods where there is little crime. Is this crazy or what?
Sunday, March 8, 2015
Selma, Was Marching The Solution?
I recall the march in Selma 50 years ago and agree that in those few southern states, Blacks were being denied their rights to vote. Prior to the march, I did not know how bad is was in the south because I lived in California. In most states of the USA, there never had been any Black slavery or were they denied their rights to vote. Places like California and Michigan never had any Black slavery. People need to be reminded of that fact. Think about this fact. Lincoln freed the slaves in 1863 and in 1862 the USA government hung 38 Native Americans who were protecting their land from European settlers. The government wanted to hang 305 Native Americans, but Lincoln reduced the number to "just" 38.
If the marching in Selma 50 years ago finally got the Black community their civil rights, why did so many Blacks try to burn down Detroit or why the Blacks tried to burn down Watts? In these two states that never had any slavery or denial of voting, why did the Blacks act so irresponsible? Another point about Ferguson. The attorney general's investigated the Ferguson police department did not "prove" that the department was bias against Blacks. What it did is to "accuse" the police of being biased. There is a big difference between being accused and convicted in a court of law. What I learned in school was that you are not guilty until "proven" guilty in a court of law where you can challenge your accusers. I have not head from a jury of our peers. Have you?
The statistics that I have seen regarding Ferguson showed that "force" was required in may of the arrests of Blacks. I do not have the statistics, but from my observation of the news, I think that Blacks resist arrest much more often than do non-Blacks. If that were the case, the stats from Ferguson just might be exactly what you would expect.
Selma may have gotten the Black community their right to vote, but it did not teach the Blacks that they need to conduct themselves responsibly. Blacks need to, work hard, do well in school, not use drugs, not commit crimes, not have children out of wedlock, cooperate with the police. These are all things that do not cost a penny so there is no excuse for not doing them. Poverty is thus "not" an excuse. Blacks are not victims of Whites, they are victims of their own conduct. More need to look in the mirror for the answer to their problems. Until the above happens, more free tax money is not going to make the quality of life for Blacks any better.
If the marching in Selma 50 years ago finally got the Black community their civil rights, why did so many Blacks try to burn down Detroit or why the Blacks tried to burn down Watts? In these two states that never had any slavery or denial of voting, why did the Blacks act so irresponsible? Another point about Ferguson. The attorney general's investigated the Ferguson police department did not "prove" that the department was bias against Blacks. What it did is to "accuse" the police of being biased. There is a big difference between being accused and convicted in a court of law. What I learned in school was that you are not guilty until "proven" guilty in a court of law where you can challenge your accusers. I have not head from a jury of our peers. Have you?
The statistics that I have seen regarding Ferguson showed that "force" was required in may of the arrests of Blacks. I do not have the statistics, but from my observation of the news, I think that Blacks resist arrest much more often than do non-Blacks. If that were the case, the stats from Ferguson just might be exactly what you would expect.
Selma may have gotten the Black community their right to vote, but it did not teach the Blacks that they need to conduct themselves responsibly. Blacks need to, work hard, do well in school, not use drugs, not commit crimes, not have children out of wedlock, cooperate with the police. These are all things that do not cost a penny so there is no excuse for not doing them. Poverty is thus "not" an excuse. Blacks are not victims of Whites, they are victims of their own conduct. More need to look in the mirror for the answer to their problems. Until the above happens, more free tax money is not going to make the quality of life for Blacks any better.
Friday, March 6, 2015
Obama's Attack on Netanyahu
I have been following the aftermath of Netanyahu's speech to the Congress in the media and have my own comments. The main thing that Obama said was that "Netanyahu did not say anything new". The boot licking media picked up on his statement and 99% are now repeating it. The problem is that if the media keeps repeating Obama's statement long enough most voters will believe it. I know that I have blogged on this point before, but it looks like I need to do it again.
Netanyahu said that the deal that Obama was working on was a "bad" deal. So what? He said that "no deal was better than the deal Obama was working on". Most voters are so incompetent that they do not realize that "doing nothing" is a decision alternative. Another way to look at this is to think about "delaying" the signing of the treaty and waiting to see if a better alternative is discovered in the future.
I used to teach decision theory in a major university and one of the most common errors made by my students was to omit "doing nothing" as an alternate on their list of possible decision choices. Either Obama is so stupid that he does not understand this simple point or he is too smart and knows that the voters are so stupid that they will accept his omission of "do nothing" from his list of possible decision choices.
How many times has Obama lied to the American people? Too many to count.
Netanyahu said that the deal that Obama was working on was a "bad" deal. So what? He said that "no deal was better than the deal Obama was working on". Most voters are so incompetent that they do not realize that "doing nothing" is a decision alternative. Another way to look at this is to think about "delaying" the signing of the treaty and waiting to see if a better alternative is discovered in the future.
I used to teach decision theory in a major university and one of the most common errors made by my students was to omit "doing nothing" as an alternate on their list of possible decision choices. Either Obama is so stupid that he does not understand this simple point or he is too smart and knows that the voters are so stupid that they will accept his omission of "do nothing" from his list of possible decision choices.
How many times has Obama lied to the American people? Too many to count.
Thursday, March 5, 2015
The Real Problem In Ferguson
Obama's Black Attorney General has gotten just what he wanted. He has brought the legal and financial resources down on the small city of Ferguson. We already know that the government can bankrupt any individual they want by just taking them to court. Even if you are not guilty of anything, you still end up bankrupt in the end. That is exactly the case with the city of Ferguson. There is no way that this small town can afford to challenge the US government in court. If they do, they will end up bankrupt in the end. What the city has done is the only thing that they can do and that is to "kiss Obama's ring" and agree to slap around their own police force.
The real problem in Ferguson is not the police department, it is the conduct of the Black community. Which was worse, the shooting of the Black kid who just robbed the store and attacked the policeman or the Blacks who went native and burned down stores and stole from city merchants. It seems to me that it was the Blacks who committed the crimes, not the police. Why is there no program out of Washington DC that requires the community to slap around the Blacks and make them shape up?
Look at the statistics that the Attorney General presented. It showed that Blacks got arrested much more often than non-Blacks. If you just watch the TV news, you know that Blacks commit many more crimes per capita than non-Blacks, so what is so strange about these statistics? If you took the people who drop out of high school, you would find that they, also, commit many more crime per capita than kids who complete high school. It just so happens that many more Blacks do not finish high school than non-Blacks. Isn't there some kind of connection here? How about kids who are born out of wedlock? They also commit many more crimes per capita than kids born into two parent families. It just so happens that many more Blacks are born out of wedlock than any other group. If that is the case, wouldn't it be natural to expect that those same Black kids would commit more crime per capita? How about the use of illegal drugs? We know that Blacks use illegal drugs more than any other group, so what's new?
If you were to collect the same statistics from Chicago or Detroit or in communities that were over 50% Black, you would find that Blacks would also be committing more crime per capita there too. Crime by Blacks is a serious problem for both Blacks and non-Blacks and we all want it reduced, but slapping around the police in Ferguson is not the answer. It only makes the problem worse because those who are responsible for committing the crimes are being excused. It is like a drunk. A person has to look in the mirror and tell that person that they are a drunk before any change can take place. If we keep excusing the drunk, they will never change and it is exactly the same with the Black community. They are not some kind of victims and we all have to stop letting them get off claiming that they are victims or things will never change. I don't think that the police of Ferguson caused the Black kids to drop out of school or the Black girls to get pregnant out of wedlock. Do you? My family has been here for over 30 generations and before the first Black person arrived here. I want this place to be a good for all of us to live including every race and nationality and to have that, we all need to take responsibility for our conduct and stop claiming that we are victims.
PS----Are you part of the problem? Of your 10 best friends, how many have ever been arrested? How many have done jail time? How many are high school graduates? How many have had children out of wedlock? How many have a steady job? How many do drugs? How many own their own home? Be honest about the "Real Problem".
PS---Think about this. Your town has a serious crime problem and the police "notice" that 90% of the crime is in the Black neighborhood even though your town is only 50% Black. The police spend 75% of their time patrolling the Black neighborhood and arrest twice as many Blacks as they do non-Blacks. To make matters worse, the Blacks resist arrest twice as often as non-Blacks. It is a fact that your are twice as likely to be injured while being an arrested if you resist. Along comes Obama and threatens to bankrupt your city if the police do not treat people who are resisting arrest the same way as those who cooperate. All you want is for crime in your town to be reduced and you think that your police are doing exactly what they should be doing.
The real problem in Ferguson is not the police department, it is the conduct of the Black community. Which was worse, the shooting of the Black kid who just robbed the store and attacked the policeman or the Blacks who went native and burned down stores and stole from city merchants. It seems to me that it was the Blacks who committed the crimes, not the police. Why is there no program out of Washington DC that requires the community to slap around the Blacks and make them shape up?
Look at the statistics that the Attorney General presented. It showed that Blacks got arrested much more often than non-Blacks. If you just watch the TV news, you know that Blacks commit many more crimes per capita than non-Blacks, so what is so strange about these statistics? If you took the people who drop out of high school, you would find that they, also, commit many more crime per capita than kids who complete high school. It just so happens that many more Blacks do not finish high school than non-Blacks. Isn't there some kind of connection here? How about kids who are born out of wedlock? They also commit many more crimes per capita than kids born into two parent families. It just so happens that many more Blacks are born out of wedlock than any other group. If that is the case, wouldn't it be natural to expect that those same Black kids would commit more crime per capita? How about the use of illegal drugs? We know that Blacks use illegal drugs more than any other group, so what's new?
If you were to collect the same statistics from Chicago or Detroit or in communities that were over 50% Black, you would find that Blacks would also be committing more crime per capita there too. Crime by Blacks is a serious problem for both Blacks and non-Blacks and we all want it reduced, but slapping around the police in Ferguson is not the answer. It only makes the problem worse because those who are responsible for committing the crimes are being excused. It is like a drunk. A person has to look in the mirror and tell that person that they are a drunk before any change can take place. If we keep excusing the drunk, they will never change and it is exactly the same with the Black community. They are not some kind of victims and we all have to stop letting them get off claiming that they are victims or things will never change. I don't think that the police of Ferguson caused the Black kids to drop out of school or the Black girls to get pregnant out of wedlock. Do you? My family has been here for over 30 generations and before the first Black person arrived here. I want this place to be a good for all of us to live including every race and nationality and to have that, we all need to take responsibility for our conduct and stop claiming that we are victims.
PS----Are you part of the problem? Of your 10 best friends, how many have ever been arrested? How many have done jail time? How many are high school graduates? How many have had children out of wedlock? How many have a steady job? How many do drugs? How many own their own home? Be honest about the "Real Problem".
PS---Think about this. Your town has a serious crime problem and the police "notice" that 90% of the crime is in the Black neighborhood even though your town is only 50% Black. The police spend 75% of their time patrolling the Black neighborhood and arrest twice as many Blacks as they do non-Blacks. To make matters worse, the Blacks resist arrest twice as often as non-Blacks. It is a fact that your are twice as likely to be injured while being an arrested if you resist. Along comes Obama and threatens to bankrupt your city if the police do not treat people who are resisting arrest the same way as those who cooperate. All you want is for crime in your town to be reduced and you think that your police are doing exactly what they should be doing.
Tuesday, March 3, 2015
Intellectual Debating #2
I don't know if you have read #1, but now I am ready with #2. This one will be a little shorter and I think that it will help to call attention to more of the tricks people use in a debate when they should just try to be honest.
Here goes again. Have you ever been in a discussion or a serious debate about some serious problem like auto thief or shooting deer out of season that focused on "one" person? You gave a very good speech on how this person needed to be dealt with in the most serious way. After that, some person in you group pips up that they knew of a person who stole more cars or killed many more deer out of season than the person who you were challenging. Have you heard someone do this? I know that you have. For some reason, they seem to think that if a "worst" person exists in the world that it affects your original argument. I know that you have seen this trick used. Did you challenge the intellect of the individual? You should have. These are the kind of stupid voters who need to be stamped out. I am getting a little off target, but the above is a very common response from liberals when you challenge one of their "do gooder" programs.
There is a debate going on about the Moslem terrorists where most people are coming to the conclusion that these are some very bad people. They are right out of the middle ages. Our President Obama is also very good at the above debating trick. Remember when he lectured the American citizens that we needed to "get off their high horse". He then went back at least a 1,000 years in human history to bring up the "crusaders" and how they went into the "holy lands" to drive out the Moslems who had previously driven out the Jews and Christians. Oh, Obama forgot to mention the part about the Moslems first driving the Jews and Christians out of their homes.
I can remember how many times that I have heard liberals use the above debating trick against former President George Bush. What ever bad thing Obama or anyone in his administration does, some liberal claims that President George Bush did something even worse. Think about it? If a person only kills one person and we know of someone who has killed 10 people, does that make the killing of one person any less serious or important? I don't think so! Does is add anything to the discussion? I don't think so again!.
The purpose of these blogs is to open you eyes to some of the dishonest tricks used in debates so that when you see one, you can call the person out or at least not be swayed from the facts.
Here goes again. Have you ever been in a discussion or a serious debate about some serious problem like auto thief or shooting deer out of season that focused on "one" person? You gave a very good speech on how this person needed to be dealt with in the most serious way. After that, some person in you group pips up that they knew of a person who stole more cars or killed many more deer out of season than the person who you were challenging. Have you heard someone do this? I know that you have. For some reason, they seem to think that if a "worst" person exists in the world that it affects your original argument. I know that you have seen this trick used. Did you challenge the intellect of the individual? You should have. These are the kind of stupid voters who need to be stamped out. I am getting a little off target, but the above is a very common response from liberals when you challenge one of their "do gooder" programs.
There is a debate going on about the Moslem terrorists where most people are coming to the conclusion that these are some very bad people. They are right out of the middle ages. Our President Obama is also very good at the above debating trick. Remember when he lectured the American citizens that we needed to "get off their high horse". He then went back at least a 1,000 years in human history to bring up the "crusaders" and how they went into the "holy lands" to drive out the Moslems who had previously driven out the Jews and Christians. Oh, Obama forgot to mention the part about the Moslems first driving the Jews and Christians out of their homes.
I can remember how many times that I have heard liberals use the above debating trick against former President George Bush. What ever bad thing Obama or anyone in his administration does, some liberal claims that President George Bush did something even worse. Think about it? If a person only kills one person and we know of someone who has killed 10 people, does that make the killing of one person any less serious or important? I don't think so! Does is add anything to the discussion? I don't think so again!.
The purpose of these blogs is to open you eyes to some of the dishonest tricks used in debates so that when you see one, you can call the person out or at least not be swayed from the facts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)