Latest Protests

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

Not sure, I know my university riots were pretty conservative.

Throwing water balloons at the school mascot does not a riot make.....

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

White people riot all the time, hell I've been tear gassed in a riot before. They just do it for superficial reasons and not perceptions of inequality.

I think you guys are also missing the point that a big reason people flip out when it looks like the killing was justified is a lack of trust in the police by some minority communities.

oh great...he's turning into Brian Williams

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

White people riot all the time, hell I've been tear gassed in a riot before. They just do it for superficial reasons and not perceptions of inequality.

I think you guys are also missing the point that a big reason people flip out when it looks like the killing was justified is a lack of trust in the police by some minority communities.

We all know the riots stem from feelings of mistrust of the police.

Where you and I disagree, is the validity of that mistrust.

I see no reason why these people don't trust the Charlotte police. Black cop, black chief of police, the chief saying the family will be shown the video making it clear he had a gun that for some idiotic reason, he wouldn't put down.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

White people riot all the time, hell I've been tear gassed in a riot before. They just do it for superficial reasons and not perceptions of inequality.

I think you guys are also missing the point that a big reason people flip out when it looks like the killing was justified is a lack of trust in the police by some minority communities.

Maybe white Canadiens when Montreal lost the the Stanley Cup eh ?

The people that are riptong and looting and smashing cop cars and beating white people aren't looking for justice . But they do deserve justice
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

White people riot all the time, hell I've been tear gassed in a riot before.

I'm thinking you were probably just peeling an onion....

Originally Posted by spence

I think you guys are also missing the point that a big reason people flip out when it looks like the killing was justified is a lack of trust in the police by some minority communities.

Nobody here is missing that, what your missing is that leadership is not trying to reverse that lack of trust. Obama says dumb things and does dumb #^&#^&#^&#^& when it comes time to lead in areas of racial tensions.

Add the fact the media likes to sensationalize stories and create added tension, and you end up where we are today.

Take the shooting in Tulsa. CNN ran the story with one picture, the guy with his hands up like he was doing nothing wrong and got shot. Everybody gets fired up OMG the police shot an unarmed man who had his hands up.

But if you look at the video, which wasn't linked in the story. It shows the police multiple times yelling at him to stop as he walks back to his car, then he puts his hands down and it looks like he is reaching for something....that's when he got shot. To late though....the damage has been done and social media is on fire.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by buckman

I'm sure I don't need to remind you guys but rioting and looting and poor black neighborhoods isn't a new phenomenon . I'm sure we can all recall what happened with Rodney King . That was 1992, so yes they happened before Obama . But I really thought we were on the mend. I believe most of it is media driven. All you have to do is watch CNN.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don't forget what happened to Reginald Denny too....that should be included in the discussion.

I agree that a lot of the problems we are having are driven by the media.

I also think that every time we needed Obama to step up and lead when it came to possible racial conflicts....he didn't, and actually made things worse. (i.e. Cops were stupid, if I had a son he'd look like..., etc.)

The president needs to unite...he his the president of the entire US, not just those he chooses.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

I'm sure I don't need to remind you guys but rioting and looting and poor black neighborhoods isn't a new phenomenon . I'm sure we can all recall what happened with Rodney King . That was 1992, so yes they happened before Obama . But I really thought we were on the mend. I believe most of it is media driven. All you have to do is watch CNN.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We have never achieved perfect harmony. But we were not nearly this racially divided during the Clinton or Bush years.

Clinton's term saw little division, racial or otherwise (I never, ever felt like he despised everyone who didn't vote for him).

Same for the first few years Bush's presidency. Then the Iraq War became unpopular, and liberals went berserk with hatred of Bush. Worse, when liberals wanted out of Iraq, Bush not only didn't withdraw, but he forced the dems in the Congress to support the Surge, which worked. That made the liberals hate him even more.

Looking for a way to win, liberals figured out that if instead of uniting us, if they divided us into different buckets, and made people in each bucket despise each other, they could cobble together enough victim groups to equal 51% of the voters. Having had some early success with that strategy, they are sticking with it.

Look no further for proof, than this ridiculous myth that white cops routinely go out hunting for young black men. Yes, even one murder by a police officer, is one too many. But even though that almost never happens, it gets all of the media attention. Despite the huge numbers of blacks getting killed by other blacks, that problem gets little attention. Because it doesn't support The Narrative.

[buckman]

Because I'm bored, as you know, I have been googling trying to find a college riot that involved conservatism . So far zip ... But if you want some funny reading, look up Forbes 2015 top ten ridiculous college riots .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by buckman

Because I'm bored, as you know, I have been googling trying to find a college riot that involved conservatism . So far zip ... But if you want some funny reading, look up Forbes 2015 top ten ridiculous college riots .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if you want a REALLY good laugh, go to Collegereform.org

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I have seen surveys that said that almost 1/2 of Repubs. believe Pres. Obama was a Muslim and/or born outside the US. There was 0 proof of that.

I agree anyone running for office should provide the proper docs. So do you think Pres. Obama was elected Pres. w/o having to provide those docs. and if so, w/o anyone reviewing those docs. or looking into his background? I can't imagine that. He was on the Senate Foreign relations committee. I'm sure he was briefed by our intelligence agencies. I would think they would have looked into his background bf those briefings.

I'd be interested in Dennis' thoughts.

I have heard of rumors of studies that state all whites are rassist. I do not believe it to be true.

I have heard rumors of 30% of democrats think the moon landings were faked, pot is good for your lungs, and hemp is indeed the miracle technology of the future.

Originally Posted by scottw

you should check with Hillary and friends...pretty sure she gave rise to the birther phenomenon..she might have your answers as to why there was ever a question....

Queue Sidney Blumenthal

Originally Posted by PaulS

Why does it bother you that I bring it up? And what is the time limit on bringing something up with you not liking it? Does Hillary's sniper comment get an exemption?


I bring it up BC almost 50% of the Republicans believed in it and I think it had/has a huge amount to do with the current racial climate.

I thought the current racial climate was because white cops were indiscriminately killing unarmed peaceful black males?

(and just to be clear, I try not to jump to any conclusions on soemthing like this until more facts are known - as we know most first reports are generally wrong)

Originally Posted by spence

White people riot all the time, hell I've been tear gassed in a riot before. They just do it for superficial reasons and not perceptions of inequality.

I think you guys are also missing the point that a big reason people flip out when it looks like the killing was justified is a lack of trust in the police by some minority communities.

I have not seen many white people riot all the time. Short of TV I have not seen many people riot at all. Not something I participate in - rioting. Something I do hope people participate in, allow the judicial system to do its work. Some of the examples that have incited protests have been legit, some have not. Cool heads have not prevailed in the heat of the moment and more of our kids are getting hurt as a result.

Originally Posted by spence

Not sure, I know my university riots were pretty conservative.

Did you go armed in school with a Dildo to protest Concealed Carry? Would you have for the chicks?

Originally Posted by buckman

Because I'm bored, as you know, I have been googling trying to find a college riot that involved conservatism . So far zip ... But if you want some funny reading, look up Forbes 2015 top ten ridiculous college riots .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hillarious

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Because I'm bored, as you know, I have been googling trying to find a college riot that involved conservatism . So far zip ... But if you want some funny reading, look up Forbes 2015 top ten ridiculous college riots .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Rookies, those aren't riots.

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by spence

Rookies, those aren't riots.

Oh please tell us more.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Panty raid!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[ecduzitgood]

Oh boy...
http://www.abc6.com/story/33163820/n...e-white-people
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37447915

Must be where Jim got his ideas about blacks

2nd link didn't see the 1st one

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37447915

Must be where Jim got his ideas about blacks

2nd link didn't see the 1st one

Just out of curiosity, what do you presume my "ideas about blacks" are?

I want them to all succeed and be happy, to break the cycle of poverty and crime. I doubt you have a problem with that. When I display the brains to take the next step, and connect the dots between black poverty and liberalism, now all of a sudden, I'm a racist.

Good Lord, when I have I ever said something as stupid as "blacks hate white people"?

That legislator has to go.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Just out of curiosity, what do you presume my "ideas about blacks" are?

I want them to all succeed and be happy, to break the cycle of poverty and crime. I doubt you have a problem with that. When I display the brains to take the next step, and connect the dots between black poverty and liberalism, now all of a sudden, I'm a racist.

Good Lord, when I have I ever said something as stupid as "blacks hate white people"?

That legislator has to go.

No you have never said "blacks hate white people"?

More about his information blaming of the welfare system for the past 50 years for the current issues


he should go I agree.. but he wont go his gerrymandering district
most likely wont allow it

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

No you have never said "blacks hate white people"?

More about his information blaming of the welfare system for the past 50 years for the current issues


he should go I agree.. but he wont go his gerrymandering district
most likely wont allow it

"More about his information blaming of the welfare system for the past 50 years for the current issues "

WDMSO, a lot of people agree with that. Not just welfare. But liberalism has played a role in the cultural and economic downfall of blacks in this country, I genuinely believe that. I don't believe it because I hate liberalism, that's backwards. It's because I believe (I know for a certainty) that liberalism has been disastrous, that's why I hate liberalism.

Liberals want blacks to stay on welfare, and to be angry at those that are responsible for their lot in life. Conservatives want to teach blacks how to help themselves, so they can escape poverty once and for all.

It's that simple. And you can't make it sinister, no matter how hard you, or Paul, try.

[wdmso]

when will anyone get it ..its about not the killings of a criminal or some one with a gun its about killing people who are unarmed I repeat unarmed...

I have said it before My men and I in Iraq had more restraint then some of these police .. and we were in combat , we couldn't just shoot someone because they looked scary or we thought they had a weapon ..

No issues pull a gun on police and they shoot you Fake or real

and these stats have some influence on what we see


Police killed at least 102 unarmed black people in 2015, nearly twice each week. (See which police departments were responsible for these deaths)

Nearly 1 in 3 black people killed by police in 2015 were identified as unarmed, though the actual number is likely higher due to underreporting

37% of unarmed people killed by police were black in 2015 despite black people being only 13% of the U.S. population

Unarmed black people were killed at 5x the rate of unarmed whites in 2015

Only 10 of the 102 cases in 2015 where an unarmed black person was killed by police resulted in officer(s) being charged with a crime, and only 2 of these deaths (Matthew Ajibade and Eric Harris) resulted in convictions of officers involved. Only 1 of 2 officers convicted for their involvement in Matthew Ajibade's death received jail time. He was sentenced to 1 year in jail and allowed to serve this time exclusively on weekends. Deputy Bates, who killed Eric Harris, will be sentenced May 31.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

when will anyone get it ..its about not the killings of a criminal or some one with a gun its about killing people who are unarmed I repeat unarmed...

I have said it before My men and I in Iraq had more restraint then some of these police .. and we were in combat , we couldn't just shoot someone because they looked scary or we thought they had a weapon ..

No issues pull a gun on police and they shoot you Fake or real

and these stats have some influence on what we see


Police killed at least 102 unarmed black people in 2015, nearly twice each week. (See which police departments were responsible for these deaths)

Nearly 1 in 3 black people killed by police in 2015 were identified as unarmed, though the actual number is likely higher due to underreporting

37% of unarmed people killed by police were black in 2015 despite black people being only 13% of the U.S. population

Unarmed black people were killed at 5x the rate of unarmed whites in 2015

Only 10 of the 102 cases in 2015 where an unarmed black person was killed by police resulted in officer(s) being charged with a crime, and only 2 of these deaths (Matthew Ajibade and Eric Harris) resulted in convictions of officers involved. Only 1 of 2 officers convicted for their involvement in Matthew Ajibade's death received jail time. He was sentenced to 1 year in jail and allowed to serve this time exclusively on weekends. Deputy Bates, who killed Eric Harris, will be sentenced May 31.

What don't you get ? Although blacks only comprise about 13% of the population they commit a much much larger percentage of crimes then do whites and Hispanics and this would increase the number of police encounters .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by buckman

What don't you get ? Although blacks only comprise about 13% of the population they commit a much much larger percentage of crimes then do whites and Hispanics and this would increase the number of police encounters .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I would also think the percentage who comply or don't resist arrest may be racially tilted also.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by buckman

What don't you get ? Although blacks only comprise about 13% of the population they commit a much much larger percentage of crimes then do whites and Hispanics and this would increase the number of police encounters .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Police killed at least 102 unarmed black people do you understand we are taking unarmed

or is the above your skittle like
analogy.. for the police

if 3 out the 13% might have a gun shoot 1st ??

[The Dad Fisherman]

And while Charlotte is in total disarray, our Commander in Chief was on Good Morning America today talking about.......his new museum dedicated to his legacy.

Great Friggin Leadership right there....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

And while Charlotte is in total disarray, our Commander in Chief was on Good Morning America today talking about.......his new museum dedicated to his legacy.

Great Friggin Leadership right there....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He has an uncanny ability to forget what his job is supposed to be...what a wasted opportunity we gave him.

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

And while Charlotte is in total disarray, our Commander in Chief was on Good Morning America today talking about.......his new museum dedicated to his legacy.

Great Friggin Leadership right there....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They were at the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture where he was interviewed about the racial unrest.

I'm sure you're not a rabid GMA viewer so I'll assume your bigoted remark was in error.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

They were at the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture where he was interviewed about the racial unrest.

I'm sure you're not a rabid GMA viewer so I'll assume your bigoted remark was in error.

How was his remark bigoted ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by buckman

How was his remark bigoted ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Exactly...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

How was his remark bigoted ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Because to a liberal, any and all criticism of liberalism is racist.

They don't want to win the debate anymore, they want to cancel the debate.

That remark right there, is why Trump won the nomination. Republicans are fed up with getting called a racist, and they want someone will say tell the race huckster (pence in this case), to STFU. That has tremendous appeal.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

They were at the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture where he was interviewed about the racial unrest.

I'm sure you're not a rabid GMA viewer so I'll assume your bigoted remark was in error.

Now we know why there's so much racial tension in the country.

Congratulations on being part of the problem instead of part of the solution
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Not just welfare. But liberalism has played a role in the cultural and economic downfall of blacks in this country, I genuinely believe that.

"Liberals" would disagree with you Jim. "Liberals" would probably have a different notion of culture and economics than you probably have. Culture, for a "liberal," is flexible, fluid, and constantly changing. Supposedly, all cultures for a "liberal" are to be tolerated, even promoted. Of course, that's not really true, but "liberals" believe that's true. And, anyway, it doesn't matter if it's true or not since all cultures will change and disappear anyway. In fact, "liberals" probably believe that being open and loving to all cultures would soften the hard edges of any that might not quite fit with the others. And, with a bit of societal (government) "assistance," the hard edge ones would be transformed to the better. The "better" being what they believe is better. Finally, all the cultures would disappear eventually, even with a bit of government regulation to help their way to extinction.

As for economics, you should know by now that "liberals" have a different notion of economics than you probably have. Whether they admit it or not, their notion of economic well being is not having as much stuff as you personally can afford. There is an inherent inequality in that sort of consumerism. All things should be distributed evenly, including health care as well as all the things that they consider necessary.

The fact that you might be more capable of acquiring wealth should not redound to your personal well being or to your desire for personal luxury. Your talents and abilities should benefit the well being of society at large, and the fruits of your abilities should equally be enjoyed by all. And you, personally, in return will gain not only the appreciation of society, but will be rewarded equally with all the benefits that society has to offer.

"Liberals" would consider welfare an equalization of the distribution of stuff--for the benefit of society. It would be, probably, a temporary fix not to just get some back on their feet, as your notion might be, but at least a temporary societal adjustment until the government assists us all into a truly egalitarian society where welfare would not be needed because everyone will automatically share in the good that society has to offer. In a sense, everybody will be on the greatest, most generous and equally distributed welfare system society has to offer. It will be an economic transformation that eliminates the friction between cultures (most of which, if not all, will have dissolved through government assistance), and will, if disseminated worldwide, end war, famine, human misery in general.

And "Liberals" obviously are not concerned by government debt. That is debt that the people owe to themselves. At least that will be so when the extinction of inequality (income or otherwise) is achieved. Those to whom money is owed will understand that forgiveness of that debt is a forgiveness that they will participate in. After all, they will automatically be given all the good, what's left of it, that society has to offer equally as it is given to everyone else.

So the temporary malfunctions which you call a "downfall" in so-called minority communities is a prerequisite to the coming change. Rather than hating what has happened to blacks under "liberalism," you should appreciate that it is a step toward the coming necessary equality. The upheavals occurring should be assisted in order to stimulate the necessary change in the distribution of society's goods

I don't believe it because I hate liberalism, that's backwards. It's because I believe (I know for a certainty) that liberalism has been disastrous, that's why I hate liberalism.

I think that there is a widespread confusion about what "liberal" means. Most people attribute concepts such as liberty, tolerance, equality, and such good things to what is called modern political liberalism. Actually, it is not liberal in those ways. Those good things are restricted by "liberal" government's regulations. And, probably, necessarily so.

To be truly liberal in the fullest sense would verge on anarchy. If one is truly flexible, tolerant, accepting of all things, one would have no stable foundation for a process of living. Certainly, such a thing as liberal government would be a contradiction. Liberalism can function only in smaller more personal doses. Society at large needs some method of cooperation to exist.

The present method of political liberalism is not liberal in its application. As it is applied, it is very authoritarian. It is somewhat liberal in its approach. It doesn't adhere to any foundational principles. It legislates and adjudicates at will and fancy--by various personal notions of good and justice and so-called equality. However, if there is any observable direction of modern political liberalism, it is toward an authoritarian state which is forming through a process of destruction of the constitutional order by a series of "crises" that is herded by "liberal" helpers and by temporary "fixes," legislative and judicial, which head us into a sort of benevolent dictatorship.

I don't think you hate actual liberalism. Try the word Progressivism. That has a more distinct meaning.