Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
this is not the current events forum, it's the politics & other controversies forum.
6 months ago was not the stone age by any means.
Who cares? The point was that this was a trivial incident. Trying to turn it into a grand statement about a certain group of people shows you who the real race hustlers are.
Who cares? The point was that this was a trivial incident. Trying to turn it into a grand statement about a certain group of people shows you who the real race hustlers are.
a dual torture/murder is now a 'trivial incident'?
wowsers
I don't see anyone trying to 'turn it into a grand statement about a certain group of people.' where are you getting that from?
of course it's about the crime. it's right there in the title.
Yes, and the word "speech" is in the title as well. Look, it's obvious to anyone with two brain cells to rub together what the intent of this thread was. I'm going to assume that you're not a moron and that you're being intentionally obtuse, and ignore you.
Who cares? The point was that this was a trivial incident. Trying to turn it into a grand statement about a certain group of people shows you who the real race hustlers are.
I and others see much more to this than the actual crime. It is this scumbags acceptance of the false narrative perpetrated by the race/grievance merchants, and even our own president.
I cannot tell if you really believe some of this, your are dimwitted, being obtuse, or something else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251
We dont see it because your arguments dont make sense, look at the incidents you used as examples.
In two posts I made it fairly clear. Only a total partisan or koolaid drinker wouldn't. Obviously some other posters quoted my posts and understand what I am pointing out. Maybe you should ask yourself why you cannot?
Quote:
Skip gates was within his own home and accused of trespassing/breaking and
entering.
First of all, when I mention these things, it is not with the intent and purpose of re-debating them. It is just showing how racial issues, many only relevant on a local level, gets Obama's attention to the point of injecting himself into them. This is a perfect example.
But let's say you were 100% right that the police should not have arrested Gates despite his indignation and uncooperative attitude.
Do you know how many times per day these type of things occur in a country with 320+ million people and 1+ million cops?
Heck I was once arrested in a case where the cop was overzealous, and it had nothing to do with race because we were both white.
I was outside the business I was managing because a couple of people who were originally inside were fighting outside. An overzealous cop ordered everyone who was not involved in the fight to disperse. While I was not directly involved, but I did have information to give them, and wanted to make sure they understood who the instigator was.
Within a minute I was in handcuffs because when I was then directly asked if I was involved in the fight, I said no. Then boom, the cop went nuts and put me in cuffs. This despite me trying to explain why I was there. Needless to say it was straightened out with a supervisor and I was released, but things like that do happen. (I guess if I was black and had a racial chip on my shoulder, I would have assumed it was because of race).
Anyway, Obama would be spending every minute commenting on local police matters if he injected himself into every one. Instead he selectively involves himself and/or his DOJ primarily when blacks are involved.
Quote:
The Black Panther Incident happened in 2008, before Eric Holder ever took
office.
This is where I have to assume you are being intentionally obtuse. As you should know, cases may happen in year XYZ, but are prosecuted sometimes years later. This of course was the case with the BP's, and Holder chose not to prosecute them even though most thought it was a slam dunk case. Google it, and educate yourself.
Quote:
Trayvon Martin was indeed innocent of the crime ZImmerman accused him of and
Zimmerman himself admitted to engaging with the 17 year old boy. If self defense
argument was basically, "I am losing a fight that I started, so I have a right
to meet force with force".
Again, you seem to wish to debate the merits or lack there of these cases. Instead I am pointing out how Obama rushed to judgment in these cases, always favoring the blacks involved, before all the info was in.
Heck when I first heard about Martin vs. Zimmerman, it sounded bad because of the way the media framed it.
Then when I saw the angelic looking 13 year old kid juxtaposed to Zimmerman's mug shot, I thought this thug probably killed this poor kid in cold blood.
Little did I know that as time passed, it would be Martin who turned out to be the thug, and Zimmerman was defending himself.
My point is that I am not the president, so my inclination to jump to conclusions in this case would not have served me well. Yet Obama himself did the same thing, and helped to create a narrative of a lynch mob mentality.
I could go on, but hopefully you now see my reason for including it as it relates to "if I had a son" ?
Quote:
I have no idea what you mean by "my people" and NAACP speech.
Again, Google can be your friend.
I am going to ask you and a few others of your ilk reading this to seriously consider something. When some of what moderates and conservatives say things that sound like a foreign language to you, have you ever wondered why?
Or do you just dismiss it as a bunch of crazy people who are racist against Obama, and will automatically hate everything he has to say.
I pose this question because many liberals do not watch FOX news, yet deride it every chance you get. I deride NBC and others, but I also watch them, so I can speak with some actual knowledge, not just partisan bias.
Sure you can claim FOX is conservative, because even if they are balanced, from your perspective having always watched liberal biased news, anything different, even moderate, will seem right leaning.
Example: Several of my liberal friends were discussing Obamacare, and when I mentioned Johnathan Gruber and/or Ezekiel Emanuel, and they looked at me as if I was speaking in tongues. So even though Gruber's videos disparaging the American people as being dumb, and the shenanigans Obama & Co went through to deceive Congress and the CBO to get it passed, they had never heard of him.
Know why?
Because the only news channel initially covering the story and playing the videos was FOX. So here is a huge story involving flat out admitted deceit on the part of Obama & Co, but since the MSM was not covering it, most people who didn't watch FOX were clueless.
For those still clueless, here is some of it in a comedy skit from of all people, Jon Stewart(funny guy);
Now eventually when Pelosi got caught up in the mess when she denied knowing who Gruber was during a press conference( even though it was shown she did know and had previously praised him), then the MSM started to do minimal reporting on it. Yet that was 3+ weeks after the fact FOX had been running the story.
[Of course the refrain from the left was "this is old news", which is a classic tactic on their part. Cover up and deny things for as long as possible. Then when it comes out, quickly move to say it is "old news"] READ - Stonewalled by Sharyl Attikisson for much better insight on this tactic.
Quote:
And Barack Obama has never said Hands up dont shoot as far as I know
.
I never heard him utter those words exact words either. However he rushed to judgment (again very un-presidential) to make public comments which sounded as if he was siding/empathizing with Brown, without all the information. There was little doubt who's side he was on. Or put another way, which way his bias leaned. Hence part of the reason LE generally does not care for him.
So Obama essentially sent 3 representatives to the funeral of a black criminal who attacked a white LEO and was killed in self defense.
Yet he did not even call the family of Kate Steinle who was an innocent American killed by an illegal criminal alien, because of policies he and his party approve of (i.e. "sanctuary cities").
On a side note, I wonder if people can start a sanctuary city for federal tax evaders, and Obama would also support that?
But I digress
Quote:
You think Sharpton is a racist, i do to( more so when it comes to Jewish people
than white), We can agree that he shouldnt be visiting the white House, but the
overall argument you are making here has no merit because you havent provided an
example of a situation similar to the ones above, and even those were bad
examples on your part.
Sure we agree about Sharpton, but what the heck do you mean?
Sharpton is at the epicenter of almost every situation were a black person is harmed (legitimately or not) at the hands of a white person. According to several sources Obama has made Sharpton his go to advisor regarding race relations. As hard as that is to believe, it should come as no surprise. Why you ask?
Just look at Obama's history. His own words in his own books for starters. His wife's proclaimed attitude regarding "being proud of this country for the first time" for another. Most telling is the fact he attended a black liberation theology church for 20+ years listening to regular sermons from a racist anti-white and American preacher.
These are not people who are reflective of typical black society. Yet the professional rabble rouser is now president, and has stirred racial animus up in people who were not inclined to feel that way prior to his sowing of discontent.
Quote:
Holder didnt classify anything, the military did. If you want to argue some
greater military and government conspiracy, then fine,but it is just that, a
conspiracy, with no proof.
NOTE TO EVERYONE: The Koolaid addiction is strong with this one!
The military is not going to go against a narrative the president supports unless they want to lose their promotional opportunities or their current positions. That is not a conspiracy, it is factual. As you may recall, and unlike in the previous examples where Obama rushed to judgment, he asked that we not prejudge this case until all the facts came out.
This despite the fact everyone already knew this guy was a jihadist screaming "Allahu Akbar" when he committed Islamic terrorism.
Do you think for a single second if a guy started screaming "white power" and gunned down blacks, Obama wouldn't immediately (and correctly so) declare it as a hate crime?
But I'm sure in your mind, if the military and or Holder's DOJ decided it was "work place violence", Obama would be just fine with it, right?
No, he has a blind spot when it comes to Islamic/Muslim terrorists, but is lighting quick to declare racial motivation even when it is a black suspect criminal attacking a white LEO.
Also, many of us have not forgotten how Obama & Co declared that the "war on terror" would now be referred to as "overseas contingency plan". And that "terrorism" would be declare "man made disaster".
Why not call a spade a spade like he would if it involves perceived hate crimes?
Ooops,,,,can I even use that previous sentence since it might be misconstrued as potentially racially insensitive
I will need to check with the PC thought police and grievance merchants, then get back to you.
Quote:
Show me one case where the assumed racial kill was set free or never arrested
and you will have a point.
One does not need to set the bar so low as to meet your criteria as to make it valid. The guy who went on a rampage to kill white people or the guy sawing off one persons head and attempting to do it to more people were arrested.
However they did not have Obama/Holder come up with passionate righteous indignation on how this was emblematic of a problem within our country.
When it comes to racial matters ( almost exclusively related to blacks), he and Holder show more passion and willingness to go down the rabbit hole whether it is warranted or not. Yet when it is against "his own people", good old Holder decided to not prosecute a slam dunk case with video evidence of racial voter intimidation of the BP's.
Quote:
I honestly feel this is fake outrage, No one cared about this until right wing
media started talking about it. further more, flags were flown at half staff
after Fort Hood, so this isnt something to get mad over in the sense you are
claiming.
Interesting you should say that. I have been watching the news for many years, even before FOX came along. I also watch investigative shows like 60 Minutes which make me aware of things (even from a left leaning slanted perspective). That is the purpose of those newscasts and shows, is it not?
Other than Pearl Harbor and 9/11, we have not really had many incidents of our enemies killing our citizens and soldiers here on American soil. For lack of a better way to put it, we are not yet desensitized to it because it is not a common occurrence.
So I do not need fake outrage or the "right wing media" as you put it, to get me going. I have family members who are in the military, but even if I didn't, I would still be over some Islamic terrorist killing our citizens/servicemen over here. A better question is why does it not get you as upset as it does me?
Also regarding this right wing media claim, if a tree falls in the forest, but no one is there to see it, has it still fallen.
[NOTE - how I didn't say hear it]
Of course it has, but those on the left want to imply that the news on FOX is not real. Well even if you think FOX news is for the birds, when they play video of actual events, it is hardly made up. If you don't see it on CBS, NBS, etc. you should be asking why not, instead of trying to discredit FOX for showing it.
Quote:
Because the guy who killed the girl you are talking about was immediately
arrested. He didnt claim it was self defense.
Come on, get real. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
Regardless of whether a person is arrested or not, if the president is going to make such calls/gestures of condolences under certain circumstances, but chooses not to in others, he opens himself up to scrutiny.
I remember Dana Perino saying she was very surprised Obama got involved in the Gates situation (no one was killed or even injured), because if you are going to do it in that instance, how could you then defend not doing it all the time. Having been a WH spokesman, she thought it was a mistake to have done so for that very reason. She of course is exactly correct.
As a quick FYI touching on the previous point - I had no idea there were so many "sanctuary cities" in America until I heard it on FOX news. Since I watch other news sources, I have to ask why they do not cover such things. So should you!
Quote:
You started your post off by saying others my honestly not see why you are
upset, but it is clear you cant differentiate between a crime were the criminal
is arrested and one where another person walks free. do you honestly not see the
difference between the cases you are discussing ?
My list of examples was not limited to only criminals walking free or never being arrested in the first place. Aside from my general acceptance of innocent until proved guilty, I certainly do not think these two thugs would be worthy of mention.
That is except for the fact at least one of them has bought into the false rhetoric and narrative that black lives don't matter to society, so why should white lives.
When you really think about it, how do slogans spoken by people like Sharpton such as "no justice, no peace" help a civil society.
Remember his idea of justice is very different than your or mine. Yet when self styled leaders of the black community, and even our black president help to foster false narratives from their megaphones, it is going to warp peoples minds just like it did with this scumbag.
Granted Sharpton and Obama are not one in the same. However I expect a heck of a lot more for our elected officials than I do from a criminal race merchant like Sharpton. Obama should understand the old saying of, "if you sleep with dogs, you will get fleas".
With almost 100 visits of Sharpton to the WH, Obama certainly has a well deserved few flea bites.
A guy creates a thread to divide, you add more commentary to create division and then you blame it on Obama
You must have studied at Fox News Academy!
A guy started a thread to report the facts and solicit comment.
He or she didn`t create the facts in the case.
Now comes you demanding the guy who never misses an opportunity to take sides against white people and the police be held above accountability.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As hard as that is to believe, it should come as no surprise. Why you ask?
over some Islamic terrorist killing our citizens/servicemen over here. A better question is why does it not get you as upset as it does me?
