Heather MacDonald of the Manhattan Institute comes off as unrefutable

[-----]

I haven't anyone challenge her statistical data. Most of your mainstream talking heads haven't attempted to touch her stats.



Any thoughts on this video?

 

[EndDomination]

There's a limit to how much people with common sense want to argue with talking points from conservative idiots.
Nothing she said in this video is "irrefutable," she's cherry-picking arguments and data to try and support a ridiculous claim: that police are not racially biased, in their killings of Black people. Note how she combines White and "Hispanic," it is well known that Hispanic and Latino groups in the US are targeted high rates by police officers. She also tries to use a conclusion from a paper that wasn't finished, to argue a point that has come under immense scrutiny and criticism: A 'Harvard Study' Doesn't Disprove Racial Bias in Officer-Involved Shootings
The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander by itself disproves a large number of points she presents. She also adds to her disingenuity by attempting to use rates of criminal charges against Black people, which are magnified by over-policing in Black neighborhoods, racist targeting of Black people and poverty, to argue that its Black people themselves that are the issue.
She's been dragged through the mud and rocks a few times for her ridiculous positions, I'll find some articles to add to this.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

There's a limit to how much people with common sense want to argue with talking points from conservative idiots.
Nothing she said in this video is "irrefutable," she's cherry-picking arguments and data to try and support a ridiculous claim: that police are not racially biased, in their killings of Black people. Note how she combines White and "Hispanic," it is well known that Hispanic and Latino groups in the US are targeted high rates by police officers. She also tries to use a conclusion from a paper that wasn't finished, to argue a point that has come under immense scrutiny and criticism: A 'Harvard Study' Doesn't Disprove Racial Bias in Officer-Involved Shootings
The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander by itself disproves a large number of points she presents. She also adds to her disingenuity by attempting to use rates of criminal charges against Black people, which are magnified by over-policing in Black neighborhoods, racist targeting of Black people and poverty, to argue that its Black people themselves that are the issue.
She's been dragged through the mud and rocks a few times for her ridiculous positions, I'll find some articles to add to this.

Fantastic piece by snopes right there.

 

[-----]

She's been dragged through the mud and rocks a few times for her ridiculous positions, I'll find some articles to add to this.

Please find those articles.

 

[EndDomination]

Please find those articles.

Consistently insensitive and wrong about Compstats – Heather Mac Donald
Know Your Enemy: Heather Mac Donald – Mother Jones
The second article directly talks about the lack of open opposition she has, even if much of what she says is easily refutable.
The war on Black Lives Matter escalates to accusations of aiding and abetting murder
There Is No War on Cops
A New Exhibit in the Case for the Black Lives Matter Movement
'It's Time for Good Cops to Do Something About Bad Cops'

 

[-----]

Consistently insensitive and wrong about Compstats – Heather Mac Donald
Know Your Enemy: Heather Mac Donald – Mother Jones
The second article directly talks about the lack of open opposition she has, even if much of what she says is easily refutable.
The war on Black Lives Matter escalates to accusations of aiding and abetting murder
There Is No War on Cops

I've seen the mother Jones article before. She come off as a bleeding heart sucker love liberal. It seems like Heather Mac almost ZERO opposition.

 

[EndDomination]

I've seen the mother Jones article before. She come off as a bleeding heart sucker love liberal. It seems like Heather Mac almost ZERO opposition.

Read the rest as well. The author of the Mother Jones article certainly does lean left-of-center, but I don't have any issue with what she said.
I posted other articles where different positions have been refuted, but there are very few mainstream academics focused heavily on attacking the underlying disingenuity of her writing.
The only time any of her work is ever mentioned its within conservative propaganda pieces, that may be part of it.
Part of my issue is that (in the case of Black Lives Matter) there should have been a fierce refutation of her work on multiple platforms, alongside censorship.

 

[the cac mamba]

i remeber that name, ive emailed this lady before. she's a fukking c*nt

 

[-----]

i remeber that name, ive emailed this lady before. she's a fukking c*nt

What happened when you emailed her?

 

[wickedsm]

poster a :this this this

poster b: naw, not true, theres many articles out here that refute what this person is saying

poster a: post the articles then

poster b: *posts 6 links from various sources*

poster a: *responds 12 minutes later* i read 1 of those before dont like that source so clearly i am right!


the coli in a nutshell yall.

 

[the cac mamba]

What happened when you emailed her?

nothing she was on tv defending betty shelby and i called her a fukkin pig or something, i dont remember

 

[714562]

Looks like ol' Heather's views don't exist in a vacuum.

Heather Mac Donald - Wikipedia

Mac Donald identifies herself as a secular conservative. She has argued that conservative thinking is superior to liberalism by virtue of the ideas alone, and that religion should not affect the argument and is unnecessary for conservatism.[1] She has criticized the notion of treating boys as a new victim group, and criticized universities for seeking to hire so-called diversity consultants to help boys succeed.[17] She has criticized welfare and blamed philanthropic institutions such as the Ford Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation for suggesting that welfare is a right; in particular, she has criticized welfare as having a negative impact in the sense that "generations have grown up fatherless and dependent".[3] She has written that welfare programs serve as a "dysfunction enabler"[10] and that food stamps cause an "unhealthy dependence".[11][12] She has criticized American immigration policy as "importing another underclass", referring to Hispanics, which has the "potential to expand indefinitely".[4] She has argued that the reduction in crime seen in American cities since 1991 is a result of efficient policing, high incarceration rates, more police officers working, data-driven approaches such as CompStat in which police efforts target high-crime areas, and holding precinct commanders accountable for results.[7] On the subject of terrorism prevention, Mac Donald has defended the Patriot Act and argued a case for secrecy and speed in handling problems as well as the sharing of information between departments within the intelligence community, and advocated that the benefits of government power be balanced against the risks of abuse.[6] She has advocated for religious profiling by the police on the grounds that "you cannot be an Islamic terrorist unless you're a member of the Muslim faith".[8] She has said that the Abu Ghraib prison scandal's fallout was overblown and that opponents of then-President Bush used it to construct an exaggerated "master narrative"; she said that Abu Ghraib was "torture lite" compared with more brutal atrocities such as those of Pol Pot.[5] She defended using torture as an interrogation technique as being necessary in selected circumstances.[5]

. . .

She has been a very vocal critic of the Black Lives Matter movement, and was among the first proponents of the "Ferguson effect".[18][19] She is also an outspoken critic of criminal justice reform, such as the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act, which she testified against in October 2015.[20]

Now let's sit down and put our heads together. What could possibly be the unifying factor between (1) claiming black people's concerns about law enforcement are made up, (2) claiming social welfare program are promoting dependency and fatherlessness, and (3) calling for the profiling of Muslims?

 

[-----]

poster a :this this this

poster b: naw, not true, theres many articles out here that refute what this person is saying

poster a: post the articles then

poster b: *posts 6 links from various sources*

poster a: *responds 12 minutes later* i read 1 of those before dont like that source so clearly i am right!


the coli in a nutshell yall.

:Shanwhat: Men are talking here. Mosy on over to a gossip thread.

 

[Pressure]

Looks like ol' Heather's views don't exist in a vacuum.

Heather Mac Donald - Wikipedia



Now let's sit down and put our heads together. What could possibly be the unifying factor between (1) claiming black people's concerns about law enforcement are made up, (2) claiming social welfare program are promoting dependency and fatherlessness, and (3) calling for the profiling of Muslims?

@DEAD7