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.
Yes, I watched the video, that is what she said, and like I said, it sounded like a poor choice of words. I don't think that is what she meant. But of course, right wing media is foaming at the mouth because of this comment and we have what we have here. Nothing that surprises me here.
She didn't say "take out their anger" or "voice their frustrations" or "make themselves heard" - or ANYTHING similar to that.
She said DESTROY.
Seriously. Destroy.
Ordinarily, I'd cut a local public figure who has just been thrust into the national media spotlight some slack.
And I would - if she would admit it was a poor choice of words.
But no - she says her words were mischaracterized as if they were taken out of context. They weren't.
Seems to me the no action taken protected people and prevented full scale escalation.
Then you need to go read up about what happened in Camden Yards over the weekend before the game and how the police just stood there and did nothing amid the cries for help from the people.
It was edited to sound like she wanted to give them room to destroy her city, when in fact she thought it was an unfortunate side effect to allowing protests because you 'inadvertently allow those who want to destroy as well.'
.
Now you are editing her words. I can see that you have not looked at the video of her speech.
Get back to us when you have seen the video. I'm sure you will then see how ignorant your post is.
She didn't say "take out their anger" or "voice their frustrations" or "make themselves heard" - or ANYTHING similar to that.
She said DESTROY.
Seriously. Destroy.
Ordinarily, I'd cut a local public figure who has just been thrust into the national media spotlight some slack.
And I would - if she would admit it was a poor choice of words.
But no - she says her words were mischaracterized as if they were taken out of context. They weren't.
You are aware that when someone says their statement was characterized an taken out of context, that means poor choice of words. One doesn't have to say specifically "poor choice of words" to mean that, right wingers are so literal with everything.
Well seeing that right wingers seem to always take everything literally, I can see how her poorly worded statement has confused you. So you keep eating up that right wing media, that is what keeps them rich.
You can spin this however you want, I personally don't care, a riot is a riot is a riot. All I know is where my friend lives in Baltimore is quiet and no issue with rioting.
Seems all those dems took her for her word also....you know those rioting....burning stuff and such...
Ohhh you care, or you would not be defending what she stated...
If it's on video, allow her to go back and watch it and then tell everyone how her words were taken out of context. That should be pretty amusing to watch.
A phrase some politicians could stand to learn is, "I was wrong. I should not have said that."
You give 'them' (politicians) too much credit... to say 'I was wrong' means they took responsibility for their own actions, opposed to blaming someone else for their mis-quote...
Well seeing that right wingers seem to always take everything literally, I can see how her poorly worded statement has confused you. So you keep eating up that right wing media, that is what keeps them rich.
You can spin this however you want, I personally don't care, a riot is a riot is a riot. All I know is where my friend lives in Baltimore is quiet and no issue with rioting.
So then tell us just what did she mean ?
What does "give them space to destroy" really mean ?
The Mayor isn't telling us. She's now denying she said that.
It doesn't matter if I think the violence is justified; it doesn't matter if you think it's justified -it isn't.
What matters is that the rioters think it's justified, and if we want these riots to stop, we have to convince the disaffected that we as a nation tolerate no double standards. This is being discussed as a racial incident (yet another one under Obama the Great Healer, but that's another discussion), but this is not a racial incident when you drill all the way to the bottom of it, in my opinion.
The fundamental reason that this is happening is a lack of confidence. To wit, confidence that when police officers behave in a criminal or suspect manner that they will be treated the same way the rest of us would be treated: as criminal suspects.
This isn't fundamentally a matter of racial animus so much as it is a matter of frustration with a perceived double standard in a country that says everyone will be treated the same.
(Oh, and I will brook no bull**** from anyone who tries to allege that I am anti-cop. Most of my Friends are in law enforcement or are retired law enforcement and a family member is in a Police Academy as I write this. You can be in favor of police reform without being "anti-cop".)
Mayor - Black
Police Chief - Black
Majority of City Council - Black
Tell me again what is wrong with Baltimore's policies? Officers involved in the Freddy Gray thing were black too.... some of them at least.
Also rioters are specifically targeting white people for robbing/pelting with garbage/car attacks.
Tell me why it isn't about race?
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.
