What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Thoughts On This Statement - Rittenhouse Case And White Supremacy (1 Viewer)

How much do you think the Kyle Rittenhouse case had to do with white supremacy?

  • Had a huge amount do do with white surpremacy

    Votes: 2 1.8%

  • Had a good amount do do with white surpremacy

    Votes: 8 7.3%

  • On The Fence

    Votes: 2 1.8%

  • Had not much to do with white supremacy

    Votes: 8 7.3%

  • Had very little to do with white supremacy

    Votes: 90 81.8%
  • Total voters
    110
Joe Bryant

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I read this statement online and wanted to get thoughts on it here.

"The Kyle Rittenhouse case had nothing to do with white supremacy. The people he killed were white."

Now we all know, anytime "nothing" or "everything" is part of the statement, there are going to be holes. Few things are all or nothing. 

But in general, how much do you think the Kyle Rittenhouse case had to do with white supremacy?

I realize this is a sensitive and serious topic and people have strong feelings. Please be civil and respectful. If you can't do that, please don't post in this. 

 
I think it depends a lot on what you mean by "the Rittenhouse case".  Does that refer to the actual court case?  The actual shootings?  The actions Rittenhouse took prior to the shootings?  The overarching events leading to that night?  My answer would be different depending on the context.

 
Rich Conway said:
I think it depends a lot on what you mean by "the Rittenhouse case".  Does that refer to the actual court case?  The actual shootings?  The actions Rittenhouse took prior to the shootings?  The overarching events leading to that night?  My answer would be different depending on the context.
Click to expand...


It's the internet. We don't get that nuanced. ;)

You're right of course. But the practical reality is we don't get the luxury of being more clear. It just gets talked about as the whole thing. 

 
In the initial onset, I think some media outlets either jumped to the conclusion or wanted to believe very much so that Kyle killed black people that night. Once they put that idea out, white supremacy was the easy narrative to sell because people wanted to believe it. After a year of it though, they were too invested to let it go.

It's like the guy that put a first round pick on Trent Richardson in 2013. It was obviously bad after the first few weeks but he couldn't drop him. He held on for the whole year telling everyone "He's an RB1, you'll all see!!" Even in the end he sits huddled in the corner mumbling about Trent returning to form any day. The media here is way too invested to just let it go. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll be honest. And full disclaimer, I don't follow this closely. But from the tiny bit of info I had, I thought up until a few weeks ago that he'd killed black people just in a shooting spree. :(   :bag:  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I voted "not much."  The legal case against Rittenhouse had nothing to do with white supremacy.  But white supremacy played an irrationally large role in the public perception of the case, and that should count for something.

 
squistion said:
The author, Drew Holden, writes for The Federalist, appears on Fox News and is a a former Republican congressional staff member. As such, I don't feel that he is most objective observer and commentator of how "some" of the media framed it. 
Click to expand...


We'll disagree. In my opinion, that's exactly how some of the media framed it. The best part of threads like those is it's not up for debate what was posted. The posts themselves, may be opinion or even wrong, but it's a fact they were posted. 

 
GoBirds said:
Why is there “not much” and “very little” as essentially the same option and no “nothing to do with “ option? Seems to lead towards linking to white supremacy doesn’t it? 
Click to expand...


Because the other end of the scale was not "all" or "everything". 

 
squistion said:
The author, Drew Holden, writes for The Federalist, appears on Fox News and is a a former Republican congressional staff member. As such, I don't feel that he is most objective observer and commentator of how "some" of the media framed it. 
Click to expand...


Also, do you equally dismiss information from people as not an objective observer who appear on MSNBC or have worked as a Democratic congressional staff member?  I don't. 

Seems like an interesting take. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe Bryant said:
Also, do you equally dismiss information from people as not an objective observer who appear on MSNBC or have worked as a Democratic congressional staff member?  I don't. 

Seems like an interesting take. 
Click to expand...


They would be as objective or as non-objective as Drew Holden as far as media coverage is concerned. 

 
squistion said:
It was such a ridiculous question I didn't think you were actually serious. 😆

No, I am not a member of this violent anarchist anti-fascist organization. 
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply. It was a very serious question. 
 

I appreciate your passion even if we disagree almost entirely. Have a great day. 

 
Why is there not an option for “Had nothing to do with white supremacy”? 
 

Every option implies that white supremacy was at play at varying degrees.

I’m choosing not to vote. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe Bryant said:
I'll be honest. And full disclaimer, I don't follow this closely. But from the tiny bit of info I had, I thought up until a few weeks ago that he'd killed black people just in a shooting spree. :(   :bag:  
Click to expand...


Depending on the media you follow you might still believe this.  In part that is what is dividing Americans.  Creating a belief that anyone from "the other side" is the enemy.

 
It had nothing to do with it . Thanks to the media spewing propaganda. People as intelligent as Joe bought into the false narrative.  Shows how powerful propaganda can be.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
James Daulton said:
Other than Kyle's maybe proud boy tie, what other ways has the media linked this to white supremecy?

I didn't get the impression this case had anything to do with white supremecy. 
Click to expand...
I don't have any idea how a white guy who shoots three white people in self defense becomes a racial issue. That's why I'm looking at the media and some real dumb celebrities. 

The "what if he was black" angle could be the dumbest take of this whole thing. 

 
Philo Beddoe said:
Did you read through the Twitter link Joe posted?
Click to expand...
I read through some of it.  But I watched NBC news every evening and don't remember a single mention of the trial and white supremecy.  Sure left wing talking heads with 16 hours of show to fill probably said something about it from time to time.  But that's certainly not close to the majority MSM coverage.

 
James Daulton said:
I read through some of it.  But I watched NBC news every evening and don't remember a single mention of the trial and white supremecy.  Sure left wing talking heads with 16 hours of show to fill probably said something about it from time to time.  But that's certainly not close to the majority MSM coverage.
Click to expand...
I’m glad you admit the NYT, PBS & AP are left wing talking heads.

 
I don't watch any cable news, but I do read a lot of news, and a lot of twitter.  This case has been framed a racial matter by many on the left, and many in the MSM, and I just do not see it at all.  The kid was embraced by white supremacy adjacent groups after the incident, and he strangely has become a hero of some on the right, but none of the facts of the case itself have anything to do with white supremacy.

I say this as someone who has typically supported Democrats and Democratic policy.  This case was completely misrepresented by MANY on the left, and by many in the MSM.  

 
Max Power said:
I don't have any idea how a white guy who shoots three white people in self defense becomes a racial issue. That's why I'm looking at the media and some real dumb celebrities. 

The "what if he was black" angle could be the dumbest take of this whole thing. 
Click to expand...


killface said:
I wouldn't tie it to white supremacy at all but just the white power structure.  Kid like that is going to get an easier ride...
Click to expand...


See, this would be a more interesting poll: Riitenhouse case and White Privilege

 
killface said:
I wouldn't tie it to white supremacy at all but just the white power structure.  Kid like that is going to get an easier ride...
Click to expand...
So are you saying he got off because he was white? I'd disagree. Given the same circumstances, the same witnesses, the same prosecution and the same defense team, I would argue if Rittenhouse were black you'd get the same verdict

 
Joe Bryant said:
Also, do you equally dismiss information from people as not an objective observer who appear on MSNBC or have worked as a Democratic congressional staff member?  I don't. 

Seems like an interesting take. 
Click to expand...
I absolutely question the objectivity of media members who are clearly partisan.  Do I listen to them?  Sure.  Do I consume their narrative as if it is gospel truth?  No chance.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Also, do you equally dismiss information from people as not an objective observer who appear on MSNBC or have worked as a Democratic congressional staff member?  I don't. 

Seems like an interesting take. 
Click to expand...
Made that argument this week.   There are a lot of posters here who will immediately dismiss something because of the source.  I dont know of they are unable or unwilling to put their own thoughts to it. 

And I voted nothing to do with supremacy. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
It was such a ridiculous question I didn't think you were actually serious. 😆

No, I am not a member of this violent anarchist anti-fascist organization. 
Click to expand...


For the love of God, they are NOT anti-fascists: :doh:   

They are PRO Marxist/Communists.  The only sense they are "anti-fascist" is they see Fascism as a direct competitor to the power and control THEY want AND to fool rubes into thinking they are some benevolent organization fighting for YOU.  They aren't. They're fighting to implement their own form of fascism.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
supermike80 said:
Made that argument this week.   There are a lot of posters here who will immediately dismiss something because of the source.  I dont know of they are unable or unwilling to put their own thoughts to it. 

And I voted nothing to do with supremacy. 
Click to expand...
Where was that option? 
 

If it was there and I missed it my apology to Joe, when I looked it wasn’t an option. 

 
supermike80 said:
Made that argument this week.   There are a lot of posters here who will immediately dismiss something because of the source.  I dont know of they are unable or unwilling to put their own thoughts to it. 

And I voted nothing to do with supremacy. 
Click to expand...
This seems fair.   It really comes down to this: do you consume facts or narratives?   I prefer to consume facts and then piece together a narrative.  Many people do the opposite:  anchor on a narrative and then only accept facts that fit their chosen narrative (which is usually emotion- or affiliation-based rather than fact-based).

 
James Daulton said:
I read through some of it.  But I watched NBC news every evening and don't remember a single mention of the trial and white supremecy.  Sure left wing talking heads with 16 hours of show to fill probably said something about it from time to time.  But that's certainly not close to the majority MSM coverage.
Click to expand...


https://twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1461774470113280009?s=20

There was a little bit of Joy Reid. But there was a lot in there of NY Times or NPR or CNN or AP.  :shrug:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is rather disappointing -

Reason

“ACLU-Wisconsin Interim Executive Director Shaadie Ali lamented the "deep roots of white supremacy" in Kenosha that prevented Rittenhouse from being "held responsible for his actions."

"Kyle Rittenhouse was a juvenile who traveled across state lines on a vigilante mission, was allowed by police to roam the streets of Kenosha with an assault rifle and ended up shooting three people and killing two," said Brandon Buskey, director of the ACLU's Criminal Law Reform Project. "These are the simple, tragic facts.“

 
Philo Beddoe said:
This is rather disappointing -

Reason

“ACLU-Wisconsin Interim Executive Director Shaadie Ali lamented the "deep roots of white supremacy" in Kenosha that prevented Rittenhouse from being "held responsible for his actions."

"Kyle Rittenhouse was a juvenile who traveled across state lines on a vigilante mission, was allowed by police to roam the streets of Kenosha with an assault rifle and ended up shooting three people and killing two," said Brandon Buskey, director of the ACLU's Criminal Law Reform Project. "These are the simple, tragic facts.“
Click to expand...
Wow.

 
Joe Bryant said:
https://twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1461774470113280009?s=20

There was a little bit of Joy Reid. But there was a lot in there of NY Times or NPR or CNN or AP.  :shrug:
Click to expand...


There were likely thousands of stories written about the trial. Finding a few that mentioned white supremecy isn't surprising.  I was just giving my honest take based on watching Lester Holmes every night.  To me the overall arching theme of the trial was self defense vs provocation by carrying his gun around.

 
James Daulton said:
There were likely thousands of stories written about the trial. Finding a few that mentioned white supremecy isn't surprising.  I was just giving my honest take based on watching Lester Holmes every night.  To me the overall arching theme of the trial was self defense vs provocation by carrying his gun around.
Click to expand...


In Wisconsin and most states, it is perfectly legal to OPEN carry.  THAT is not provocation.

I'm starting to think that many people on the left have no idea what "provocation" actually means.

 
Philo Beddoe said:
This is rather disappointing -

Reason

“ACLU-Wisconsin Interim Executive Director Shaadie Ali lamented the "deep roots of white supremacy" in Kenosha that prevented Rittenhouse from being "held responsible for his actions."

"Kyle Rittenhouse was a juvenile who traveled across state lines on a vigilante mission, was allowed by police to roam the streets of Kenosha with an assault rifle and ended up shooting three people and killing two," said Brandon Buskey, director of the ACLU's Criminal Law Reform Project. "These are the simple, tragic facts.“
Click to expand...
Yes this is very dissapointing.  But Joy Reid, the ACLU, all super liberal.  

 
BladeRunner said:
In Wisconsin and most states, it is perfectly legal to OPEN carry.  THAT is not provocation.

I'm starting to think that many people on the left have no idea what "provocation" actually means.
Click to expand...
I'm saying that that was my impression of what the trial boiled down to.  Not that the provcation angle was ever correct.

Clearly though the more liberal side of the media did indeed play up the white angle more than what I saw.  It's stupid and needs to stop. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Commish
  • Locked
Kyle Rittenhouse Trial: Defense Rests. Resisting the urge to go full HT and just purge this crapshow of a thread.
71 72 73
Replies
4K
Views
88K
Joe Bryant
Joe Bryant
Memphis Foundry
  • Locked
  • Sticky
The Politics Forum Is CLOSED.
Replies
0
Views
3K
Memphis Foundry
Memphis Foundry
GordonGekko
Votes Over "Inclusion" - Transgender Women Must Register For US Selective Service (Draft), But Not Transgender Men (10/11/22 18:47 PST)
Replies
4
Views
441
FairWarning
FairWarning

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top