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.
1. Officer 1: 31 years old and mother of a six year old
2. Officer 2: 24 years old and sworn in 14 months ago
3. Both in critical condition and fighting for their lives
4. Protesters blocked Entrance and Exit of ER chanting "We hope they die"
5. Manhunt still underway for shooter
6. Maybe this incident says more about the protesters than it does about two young officers who were ambushed because they chose to wear the uniform and become law enforcement officers. D'ya think?
A Kaiser Family Foundation poll out Thursday found 64% of Americans supported the recent protests against police violence, including 86% of Democrats, 67% of independents and 36% of Republicans.
Voting for Democrats to reduce violence on cops is like caving in to extortion demands. Those who are committing such acts don’t support Republicans. They hate Republicans and USA. The worst of these attacks are happening in cities and states run by Democratic Party mayors and governors. It’s the mayor and governor’s responsibility to maintain law and order within their city and state. The Democratic Party in several states have not only allowed these protest to get out of control, but actively restricted the police from enforcing the laws and the local DA’s office has made it easier to get those arrested protestors back out on the street regardless of the seriousness of their crimes. Why would you vote for a political party willing to have their cities destroyed in the hopes of influencing a presidential election in their favor?
Tell, me something victimof GM. Just what online far right propaganda site do you frequent to come up with the above?
I strongly dislike Trump. He has failed as a president. Back in February I said I would vote for a moderate Democrat if they got the nomination or the libertarian candidate if it wasn't a moderate Democrat.
I am likely going to vote for Trump to give a middle finger to these terrorists in our streets. I will not enjoy doing it, but the far left has gone insane on culture and bent over backwards to excuse this BS in our streets.
That seems to be the issue with some of my anti-Trump friends, the demoncrapic party has left them!
Meanwhile, it's the Republican white collar criminals, such as on Wall Street, who get by with stealing million$. They are a heck of a lot smarter than the protesters in the streets.
Those Wall Street criminals are backing Biden just as they backed Hillary in 2016:
"Financial industry cash flowing to Mr. Biden and outside groups supporting him shows him dramatically out-raising the president, with $44 million compared with Mr. Trump’s $9 million."
Cops ambushed and hospitalized. Protestors block ER and attack hospital
1.) They aren't protesters. They are thugs, aka domestic terrorists.
2.) If these thugs were blocking the injured officers' entrance to the hospital, and one or both of the officers later dies, then the thugs are accessories to murder. In many states, that is regarded as first-degree murder. Whether or not they are the ones who pulled the trigger. And also in many states, Murder 1 is a capital offense. As it should be.
Why did Obama bail them out then in 2009? He didn't send any bankers to prison. Most of those "evil coporations" are run by the left and donate to left wing superpacs. Get real and get educated. Shake off the indoctrination.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie
So where do you go to get your indoctrination as to the TRUTH, rather than outright propaganda?
Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi did a pretty good job of explaining it:
Quote:
"Barack Obama ran for president as a man of the people, standing up to Wall Street as the global economy melted down in that fateful fall of 2008. He pushed a tax plan to soak the rich, ripped NAFTA for hurting the middle class and tore into John McCain for supporting a bankruptcy bill that sided with wealthy bankers "at the expense of hardworking Americans." Obama may not have run to the left of Samuel Gompers or Cesar Chavez, but it's not like you saw him on the campaign trail flanked by bankers from Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. What inspired supporters who pushed him to his historic win was the sense that a genuine outsider was finally breaking into an exclusive club, that walls were being torn down, that things were, for lack of a better or more specific term, changing.
Then he got elected.
What's taken place in the year since Obama won the presidency has turned out to be one of the most dramatic political about-faces in our history. Elected in the midst of a crushing economic crisis brought on by a decade of orgiastic deregulation and unchecked greed, Obama had a clear mandate to rein in Wall Street and remake the entire structure of the American economy. What he did instead was ship even his most marginally progressive campaign advisers off to various bureaucratic Siberias, while packing the key economic positions in his White House with the very people who caused the crisis in the first place. This new team of bubble-fattened ex-bankers and laissez-faire intellectuals then proceeded to sell us all out, instituting a massive, trickle-up bailout and systematically gutting regulatory reform from the inside.
How could Obama let this happen? Is he just a rookie in the political big leagues, hoodwinked by Beltway old-timers? Or is the vacillating, ineffectual servant of banking interests we've been seeing on TV this fall who Obama really is?
Whatever the president's real motives are, the extensive series of loophole-rich financial "reforms" that the Democrats are currently pushing may ultimately do more harm than good. In fact, some parts of the new reforms border on insanity, threatening to vastly amplify Wall Street's political power by institutionalizing the taxpayer's role as a welfare provider for the financial-services industry. At one point in the debate, Obama's top economic advisers demanded the power to award future bailouts without even going to Congress for approval - and without providing taxpayers a single dime in equity on the deals."
They want to overturn SALT as well. Only the richer population of blue states want that overturned. The Dems have no problem backing the wealthy as long as they vote blue. The hypocrisy
What have Republicans done to stop welfare Cadillacs, which have been noticed ever since Reagan brought it up?
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.
