Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

She-Guevara racist white nationalist

1235722

Comments

  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic

    Race, totally unfair throwing all those facts and maff at me. You know I have limitations. I get it, whitey really voted for Hussein Obama. The only question is, which whitey?



    The real surprise there was Florida, but not entirely. It's a weird place except for the Canes. I think the prospects of the first black prez really activated the left and people voted. Similarly, I think a lot of red whitey had been sitting on the sidelines, and the democrats helped activate them with Trump. People who, before, didn't feel vested in the political process suddenly became interested in politics. I think 8 years of Obama had a lot to do with that, and a lot of that was just being there saying anything about race (not you). In other words, my hypothesis, which is worth about as much as my membership dues to HCH, is that there was really nothing a liberal black guy in the white house could say or do or comment about race (not you) issues that would not have stirred the pot in some segments of our society, not all of which is the hillbilly souf. That said, I think we are all in agreement that the democrats' most fearsome enemy is themselves. They are the Jasson Guessers of American politics, constantly killing their own feet. And they're likely to do it again IMO.

    It isn't an issue of race. It's an issue of cucks vs non cucks. As you can see from that map, the usual suspects voted blue, and they continue to because they live in areas infested with left wing politics.
    Ok!!!!!!!!!
  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic
    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    I just love how the left thinks cops are sitting at briefing talking "lets go shoot some minorities" Such a crock of shit. Tired of the left against America. Creepy's just hoping to pick up some money from the blood and guts.

    Oh piss off. Nobody says or thinks shit like that. It pretty much undermines your blind allegiance to law enforcement that you can't write a more cogent response.
    That's just what you'd tell a jury and you Damn well know it. Just as you talk about Zimmerman. Looking at people even following them is no reason to attack them and you know it yet you make excuses for it. So is smashing someone's head on the concrete deadly force or not?
    Sure. Sounds good.
  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic

    Sledog said:

    I’d recommend a “morning show” linked thread: Race &Friends.

    Race, GayBob. WestLinn and HoustonHuskyFS can apologize for trump every morning!

    Imagine the internet traffic. It would be like shooting white trash in a barrel. If only Roger Ailes were still alive. He’d have thought if it first.


    No Sledog?

    I'm out
    I don't apologize for Trump because his election is entirely the lefts fault. Their constant push toward communism, racial division and the destruction of America is what caused the phenomenon called Trump. You thought you could steal an election. Now you think you can pull off a coup. You commie shits did this to yourselves. Now it's time for you to reap what you have sewn!

    FAYCS!

    This is true, but the push toward communism and racial division is pure rhetoric. It's their fault because they propped up a shit for a candidate who cannot hide her disdain for ordinary people with ordinary intellects, and who got sucked in to the social issues side of her party's constituency. Her husband in his prime would have been very hard to beat following the Bush term, because he's actually a centrist and, on some issues, is downright conservative. Remember, for all of his education and polish, Bill is an Arkansas boy, born and raised in the souf.

    Of all the shit people can hang on Obama, in my view one of the most disingenuous is the racial division shit. What he did to fan the flames of racial tension in this country is to get elected in the first place. Country wasn't ready for a black guy in office unless he had walked, talked and danced like a hard-core right winger, and even then, it would have been a problem. Kreist there were effigies of him being lynched all over social media during his term. His Princeton-educated wife couldn't do anything right in the eyes of many, and is compared negatively to a woman who doesn't speak and who used to pose for pictures with her clothes off. Family values right? I know we're all a little gun shy about the R word around here, but to deny that it was still a big problem here at the time of his election is fs. Sure people use and abuse it like few other things; but racism in American, or the worsening of it, is not Obama's fault. That is straight up fs and anybody who believes it is fs. I personally know a lot of people who have issues with black people, and I'm a fucking lawyer in Seattle.

    More than any other prez in my lifetime (by a long shot), Obama has engendered among people I encounter (including a lot of family) a combination of (1) emotionally-driven hatred and (2) for reasons they can't really articulate, other than made-up or flatly wrong shit. Don't twist; I'm not a big Obama guy or defender. I hate tax and spend politicians, and he is one. But anyone who can't admit that his mere election and his name were enuff to re-open old wounds and bring to the surface old biases is just fs. I am related to people who manage to get up every day and be an adult who believe the most crazy shit about that guy, but never had much to say about the guy who got us into Iraq on shit information and really stirred up the bottom in the middle east .... smfh.

    Trump was elected in large measure because he is the pure visual and substantive opposite of Obama and because the democrats now just fucking suck, particularly at elections. The one area where the dems are particularly vulnerable is the gay community, who they can't really ignore or betray (the numbers are too material), but that community tends to suck them into social issues that most people don't care about or aren't ready to deal with. Like Trans Fucking Gender. The republican crazy aunt is the zany religious right, but they're easier to manage because religious people are not as threatening on the surface and thus don't readily offend much of the rest of the base.
    There's plenty of FS in this post, Creepy. Obama fucked up right out of the gate by diving into the William Gates vs the Boston PD scandal, immediately taking the side of the professor, who it turned out was acting like such an asshole, he got himself arrested for not showing ID to prove the home he appeared to be breaking into was his own. No racial divisiveness, huh? Right. And appointing Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch as AGs sure as fanned flames, because neither of them were qualified for the job, nor competent in it, and they acted and conducted themselves like classic FS "diversity hires." In addition to that, his infamous (if not treasonous) Cairo speech where he dove right into the classic liberal theme of "blame America first, and for everything" wrong in the Middle East and the rest of the world, was total and complete FS from Obama himself, especially because the speech was vetted by - and probably written by - the Muslim Brotherhood, representatives of overwhelmingly brown folk versus the white folks of European descent. And that's not racially divisive, Creepy? And let's not forget his knee-jerk "but Christians have done lots of bad things, too" moral equivalency bullshit, either. As if Christians are the ones blowing up buses, churches, mosques and police stations in 2018, no different from the bad shit Christian regimes did during the Dark Ages. But 500 years is like, yesterday, right? Pure horseshit.

    That weak-kneed, self-loathing, Ivy League chickenshit positioning made me - a two time Obama supporter - despise him for his lack of balls, regardless of party or skin color. In the end, Obama was the appeasement-loving schmoozer his critics painted him as, to the point I can't defend him anymore. But if you choose to be superficial about it, go ahead and argue that anyone who criticizes Obama is really just racist, utterly oblivious to how patently racist that position is, in and of itself.
    Though I don't view what I wrote or think about Obama as superficial, but instead pointing or appealing to the real and substantive ongoing issues and challenges in the black community, I don't disagree with much of what you wrote. I think my angle is based more on the idea that the racial issues were still there, and (1) the mere occurrence of the first black pres, and (2) coupled with his slide back left with some of the things you point out (albeit in the context of some unfortunate civil unrest), led to what I perceive among many US citizens as a "you see? i told you a black president would lead this way!" reaction, as if it were a mistake to elect a black guy. Where we get sidetracked on HCH is much like the country today: it's so polarized that if you don't come out of the gates swinging and screaming like OBK then you're an unmitigated left-wing, communist apologist. I mean, in this thread alone, we have a guy denying that groups publicly hung Obama and his wife in effigy lynch style, who missed that I have never once in my life voted for a non-judicial Democrat for any office anywhere ever. I am also pretty fiscally conservative dood and a somewhat establishment-loving prick. So nobody's getting my angle on this from some left-wing banana Rainbow Coalition point of view.

    And I completely agree that pointing to the Crusades as evidence that Christians can be just as violent as radical Islam is fs, if not unhelpful.

    Like I said, I agree with most of what you wrote.
  • Options
    TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,739
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    "I think my angle is based more on the idea that the racial issues were still there, and (1) the mere occurrence of the first black pres, and (2) coupled with his slide back left with some of the things you point out (albeit in the context of some unfortunate civil unrest), led to what I perceive among many US citizens as a "you see? i told you a black president would lead this way!" reaction, as if it were a mistake to elect a black guy."

    I think there are two distinct reasons why this happened with Obama.

    1. Many of his supporters projected onto him their own desires for it to be their turn to be in control, have "their" guy in charge, and act like a sugar daddy president who would flip the script in their favor and deliver all the privileges and perks they believe exist for the group in power to them. That obscene wishful thinking I don't blame Obama for.

    2. His back slide happened because once he won re-election, he instantly set about to develop and protect his legacy and for almost everything else, he called in sick and acted like a lame duck President for essentially his entire second term. I think it's fair to call him "lazy" or "out-to-lunch" for the bulk of his second term, and that I do blame Obama for. Books and articles I read reveal that Michelle was the chief caretaker of his legacy and let it be known that they wouldn't take any chances or do anything bold during his second term, for fear of it staining his legacy. Well Michelle, not showing up for work is no way to build or preserve a legacy, but have it your way. Like with Browning, the less he does, I supposed the less potential damage he can cause to himself. Whatevs. Barry screwed the pooch for his second term, and again, I do blame him for that.
  • Options
    TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,739
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    One thing I really, really would like to know is why, if Trayvon Martin's case was the genesis for BLM, do we hear about Micheal Brown all the time, and rarely, if ever, hear about Trayvon? I believe it's because Trayvon's case doesn't neatly fit into the "oppression" narrative like the media believes Brown's does, because Brown was shot by a cop, i.e., the White Supremacist State!

    Sadly, there's far more to be digested and learned from Trayvon's case, IMO, yet it's kicked to the curb in favor of the case that isn't even a case. And the band plays on.
  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic

    @creepycoug wrote: "I'm not going to re-litigate the Trayvon Martin case here, though I still think Zimmerman is a little banana busy body and caused something that wouldn't have happened w/o his "intervention." Mike Brown was not a good case for the BLM cause in my view. But for every one of those, there are 50 like South Side Flats and Eric Garner, the latter of which was particularly egregious."

    I agree with you, CC, on both Martin & Brown. The Martin case makes me sick to this day when I think about it, because I would've reacted similarly to Trayvon if somebody was stalking me like Zimmerman was, and I've got a teenage son growing up in an increasingly dangerous city where that kind of confrontation is becoming more and more common. The fucking DC whores raising their hands for Mike Brown should be ashamed of their ignorant selves, but they and their acolytes on MSNBC and CNN continue to parade Michael Brown around as a victim, perpetuating the lie that he was shot down in cold blood.

    Where I disagree vehemently is that for every Michael Brown there are 50 Eric Garners. That's completely wrong, backwards and smacks of mass-media propaganda and pollution. If I read you right, you're arguing that the cops are wrong and using excessive force 50 times more than they should or its justified? You either can't be serious, or I'm not understanding your argument. The actual number is about 2% of all shootings of all people, black or white, are found to be unjustified or using excessive force. Quadruple that number and you're still under 10%. Point is there is no epidemic of unjustified shootings of black people and/or white people going on in the USA, and there hasn't been for decades. We all have cameras now, and that's why this shit has blown up and made the front pages, over-representing the problem in relation to all other competing news events. Turns out that Racism sells! What do you know?

    Thoughtful response. Yeah, that was probably a little imprecise hyperbole on my part to make the point. Stipulated. What I'm generally referring to is the number of black males (btw, deadly force by police, black or white, is almost always male) killed by police relative to their percentage of the population. I've seen the % range from 25% relative to the 12% baseline up to in excess of 35+%. There's a discussion to be had about why that is, but as a society we shouldn't just shrug out shoulders and not look into root causes other than black people are just more prone to get into trouble. Also, and probably more to the point, amongst all unarmed black persons killed by police, a higher % of them (black males) are unarmed as compared to their white and hispanic (even the evil white hispanics like @creepycoug ) counterparts. This is significant because, as you know, it's the killing by police of unarmed black men that stirs up Sharpton, Jackson, the ACLU and BLM protests. I was in Miami for both race riots, and in each case a Cuban cop filled a black kid's back full of lead. In one case, the kid did have a weapon (but it wasn't drawn), and in the other he was riding off on a motorcyle. In neither case, as I recall, had either kid done anything to harm or threaten harm to any person. This was the late 70s and very early 80s, so we don't have to focus on those incidents too much; as you point out, things have changed.




    I've also seen studies that show blacks are way disproportionately represented among all manner of 'run ins' with the police, although admittedly I've seen other studies that show it's not quite the problem we think it is, and yet others that question whether we really have a handle on any of these statistics at all ... that is, the problem could be worse or not as bad as we think.

    And, then again, none of this has anything to do with the point @RaceBannon brought up about one's fate with the prosecutors and juries. The bar, and really the whole system, should be embarrassed, because whatever shitshow the cops are responsible for pales statistically to how the judicial system dispenses 'justice' among the races. Those numbers are ugly.
  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic

    "I think my angle is based more on the idea that the racial issues were still there, and (1) the mere occurrence of the first black pres, and (2) coupled with his slide back left with some of the things you point out (albeit in the context of some unfortunate civil unrest), led to what I perceive among many US citizens as a "you see? i told you a black president would lead this way!" reaction, as if it were a mistake to elect a black guy."

    I think there are two distinct reasons why this happened with Obama.

    1. Many of his supporters projected onto him their own desires for it to be their turn to be in control, have "their" guy in charge, and act like a sugar daddy president who would flip the script in their favor and deliver all the privileges and perks they believe exist for the group in power to them. That obscene wishful thinking I don't blame Obama for.

    2. His back slide happened because once he won re-election, he instantly set about to develop and protect his legacy and for almost everything else, he called in sick and acted like a lame duck President for essentially his entire second term. I think it's fair to call him "lazy" or "out-to-lunch" for the bulk of his second term, and that I do blame Obama for. Books and articles I read reveal that Michelle was the chief caretaker of his legacy and let it be known that they wouldn't take any chances or do anything bold during his second term, for fear of it staining his legacy. Well Michelle, not showing up for work is no way to build or preserve a legacy, but have it your way. Like with Browning, the less he does, I supposed the less potential damage he can cause to himself. Whatevs. Barry screwed the pooch for his second term, and again, I do blame him for that.

    Yep. Agree with both of those points.

    And like you, I have no idea whatsoever why they chose the Brown case as their poster child. Brown was a legitimately bad kid, and the cop in that case was in a bad spot, and Brown was, as I recall, coming towards him and wouldn't back off. There were probably other avenues for the cop to choose, but it's just not the case I'd have picked.

    The Garner case was more compelling. You had, what, 3, 4 cops on the ground with this guy who was guilty of what, selling cigs w/o a permit on the street corner, he's completely locked down and telling the guy he can't fucking breath, and by all accounts (and what resulted) the guy just choked down harder. I'd have picked that one second because, as you might argue, there is no obvious racial motive ... you could argue it was just one asshole cop who might have done it to a white guy. One wonders though. Btw, this is not entirely unlike what happened to Anthony Vontoure.

    Treyvon is the case. And just look at some of the responses in this thread ... "well within his rights", "Treyvon shouldn't have assaulted Martin" ... and THAT guy whines like a little bitch when you wonder if he has a problem with race. That was all profiling, all day long, and we all know he started something that a skinny kid didn't let him finish and he popped him for it. This is @SFGbob 's hero.
  • Options
    2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Is tequila just talking to himself on this thread? To much tl,dr
  • Options
    SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 31,920
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Standard Supporter
    edited September 2018
    Blacks have more run ins with the cops because blacks as a whole commit a hell of a lot more crime and live in higher crime areas where more police are usually deployed.

    Factor in the fact that cops are more likely to view young black males as criminals, especially if they are sporting a certain look, and on account of this higher rate of criminal activity by blacks and you have the factors that explain the higher rate of blacks having run ins with the cops.

    Racism plays some role in this but even black, Hispanic and Asian cops, especially in urban areas, quickly realize that it ain’t whitey that’s committing most of the crime, especially the violent crime.
  • Options
    SledogSledog Member Posts: 30,639
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes

    One thing I really, really would like to know is why, if Trayvon Martin's case was the genesis for BLM, do we hear about Micheal Brown all the time, and rarely, if ever, hear about Trayvon? I believe it's because Trayvon's case doesn't neatly fit into the "oppression" narrative like the media believes Brown's does, because Brown was shot by a cop, i.e., the White Supremacist State!

    Sadly, there's far more to be digested and learned from Trayvon's case, IMO, yet it's kicked to the curb in favor of the case that isn't even a case. And the band plays on.

    Don't forget Trayvon was shot by that new super race the White Hispanic.
  • Options
    SledogSledog Member Posts: 30,639
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    SFGbob said:

    Blacks have more run ins with the cops because blacks as a whole commit a hell of a lot more crime and live in higher crime areas where more police are usually deployed.

    Factor in the fact that cops are more likely to view young black males as criminals, especially if they are sporting a certain look, and on account of this higher rate of criminal activity by blacks and you have the factors that explain the higher rate of blacks having run ins with the cops.

    Racism plays some role in this but even black, Hispanic and Asian cops, especially in urban areas, quickly realize that it ain’t whitey that’s committing most of the crime, especially the violent crime.

    Oh now stop it! Next thing you're going to say is that some dogs are more vicious than others!
  • Options
    Pitchfork51Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 26,573
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Are you just replacing che with she because she's a chick? That's fucking lame.
  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic
    edited September 2018
    SFGbob said:

    Nowhere in my post is any kind of apology for Sharpton being anything less than a charlatan. I'd have him over for dinner b4 David Duke any day though. I would never equate those two as analogs.

    Yeah you just ran interference for the fact that Obama hired the piece of shit to lead his get out the vote effort by you didn't "apologize" for Sharpton and since you appear to be one of those precise language Kunt's quote where I said you apologized Coug?

    I didn't say you said I apologized for anything; that's my word, used in response to your allegation of white washing. Call it interference if you wish. I see it as no different than Bannon's advice, taken to heart and implemented by Trump, of invoking the religious loons on the right. They both have inconvenient friends. That was the point. Obama has about as much in actual common with Farrakahn and Sharpton as Trump does with Jerry Falwell. In any event, I'm not carrying the torch for the dysfunction in American politics. You can argue that with someone else.

    As to comparing you to the 'racism is over crowd', how so? That wasn't the point at all. The point was even that crowd, who don't believe racism is really an issue anymore, acknowledge that the past has loaded meaning, so, you know, an effigy of a black guy swinging from a tree is a little different than a effigy of Trump that pokes fun of his weight and his comb over.

    There were no eye witnesses to the start of the struggle. A few people saw the thing in mid-fight, conflicting testimony was offered as to who they heard screaming, and some people saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. Testimony was inconsistent about whether he was bashing his head into the sidewalk. None of that means he attacked him. Sure, all you had to do was look at Zimmerman to know he got his ass kicked. But if someone approaches you threateningly, or even grabs hold of you, or starts a fight with you, and you wind up kicking his ass, and he shoots you, you score that as self-defense because you attacked him? Really? The taped 911 call is at least a strong hint that he (1) thought Martin was up to no good (he was not, at least that night, which is all that matters), and (2) he was frustrated that the kid might get away. "Fucking punks ... these assholes always get away." All that transpired, transpired, and the story becomes that Martin, who Zimmerman was following, lurked out of the darkness and 'sucker punched him.' Nobody saw that. What everyone does know is that Zimmerman started following a kid he thought was doing something wrong, who wasn't doing anything wrong.

    Like I said, Martin was no saint, but I grew up with a lot of people whose profiles weren't much better than his, and some worse. They're normal people now. If, sincerely, none of that even gives you pause, coupled with the fact that a 17-year old kid who had a lot of time to get his life going in a better direction got whacked on a night he was walking and minding his own business, then we are different kinds of people and likely will not reach any kind of consensus on pretty much anything. I don't believe that you actually see it that simply, and that instead we are doing the HCH crazy dance.
  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic
    SFGbob said:

    Blacks have more run ins with the cops because blacks as a whole commit a hell of a lot more crime and live in higher crime areas where more police are usually deployed.

    Factor in the fact that cops are more likely to view young black males as criminals, especially if they are sporting a certain look, and on account of this higher rate of criminal activity by blacks and you have the factors that explain the higher rate of blacks having run ins with the cops.

    Racism plays some role in this but even black, Hispanic and Asian cops, especially in urban areas, quickly realize that it ain’t whitey that’s committing most of the crime, especially the violent crime.

    Yes, they do, and we all know that's the larger issue and that there's a complicated history associated with it and there's no cheap fix.


    "Racism plays some role in this." That's really all that I believe and am saying. I suppose if I were black I'd probably take it all a lot more personally and less academically, but it is what it is. And, yes, there is no question that whatever issue exists with cops vis a vis black people is not peculiar to white cops. I saw it in Miami all the time. In fact, my father's brother-in-law, who was Miami Metro for years (and Cuban himself) would tell you it was better to send in cops who were "Americanos", which was our general slang for white Americans, to Liberty City and Overtown than it was to send in a Cuban cop, especially a young Cuban cop. There was a lot of racial tension in Miami when I was a kid. It is appreciably better now, though I wouldn't say black people are appreciably better off. Majority black neighborhoods there are still very, very, very rough places to live.
  • Options
    oregonblitzkriegoregonblitzkrieg Member Posts: 15,288
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Comment
    edited September 2018

    Sledog said:

    I’d recommend a “morning show” linked thread: Race &Friends.

    Race, GayBob. WestLinn and HoustonHuskyFS can apologize for trump every morning!

    Imagine the internet traffic. It would be like shooting white trash in a barrel. If only Roger Ailes were still alive. He’d have thought if it first.


    No Sledog?

    I'm out
    I don't apologize for Trump because his election is entirely the lefts fault. Their constant push toward communism, racial division and the destruction of America is what caused the phenomenon called Trump. You thought you could steal an election. Now you think you can pull off a coup. You commie shits did this to yourselves. Now it's time for you to reap what you have sewn!

    FAYCS!

    This is true, but the push toward communism and racial division is pure rhetoric. It's their fault because they propped up a shit for a candidate who cannot hide her disdain for ordinary people with ordinary intellects, and who got sucked in to the social issues side of her party's constituency. Her husband in his prime would have been very hard to beat following the Bush term, because he's actually a centrist and, on some issues, is downright conservative. Remember, for all of his education and polish, Bill is an Arkansas boy, born and raised in the souf.

    Of all the shit people can hang on Obama, in my view one of the most disingenuous is the racial division shit. What he did to fan the flames of racial tension in this country is to get elected in the first place. Country wasn't ready for a black guy in office unless he had walked, talked and danced like a hard-core right winger, and even then, it would have been a problem. Kreist there were effigies of him being lynched all over social media during his term. His Princeton-educated wife couldn't do anything right in the eyes of many, and is compared negatively to a woman who doesn't speak and who used to pose for pictures with her clothes off. Family values right? I know we're all a little gun shy about the R word around here, but to deny that it was still a big problem here at the time of his election is fs. Sure people use and abuse it like few other things; but racism in American, or the worsening of it, is not Obama's fault. That is straight up fs and anybody who believes it is fs. I personally know a lot of people who have issues with black people, and I'm a fucking lawyer in Seattle.

    More than any other prez in my lifetime (by a long shot), Obama has engendered among people I encounter (including a lot of family) a combination of (1) emotionally-driven hatred and (2) for reasons they can't really articulate, other than made-up or flatly wrong shit. Don't twist; I'm not a big Obama guy or defender. I hate tax and spend politicians, and he is one. But anyone who can't admit that his mere election and his name were enuff to re-open old wounds and bring to the surface old biases is just fs. I am related to people who manage to get up every day and be an adult who believe the most crazy shit about that guy, but never had much to say about the guy who got us into Iraq on shit information and really stirred up the bottom in the middle east .... smfh.

    Trump was elected in large measure because he is the pure visual and substantive opposite of Obama and because the democrats now just fucking suck, particularly at elections. The one area where the dems are particularly vulnerable is the gay community, who they can't really ignore or betray (the numbers are too material), but that community tends to suck them into social issues that most people don't care about or aren't ready to deal with. Like Trans Fucking Gender. The republican crazy aunt is the zany religious right, but they're easier to manage because religious people are not as threatening on the surface and thus don't readily offend much of the rest of the base.
    There's plenty of FS in this post, Creepy. Obama fucked up right out of the gate by diving into the William Gates vs the Boston PD scandal, immediately taking the side of the professor, who it turned out was acting like such an asshole, he got himself arrested for not showing ID to prove the home he appeared to be breaking into was his own. No racial divisiveness, huh? Right. And appointing Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch as AGs sure as fanned flames, because neither of them were qualified for the job, nor competent in it, and they acted and conducted themselves like classic FS "diversity hires." In addition to that, his infamous (if not treasonous) Cairo speech where he dove right into the classic liberal theme of "blame America first, and for everything" wrong in the Middle East and the rest of the world, was total and complete FS from Obama himself, especially because the speech was vetted by - and probably written by - the Muslim Brotherhood, representatives of overwhelmingly brown folk versus the white folks of European descent. And that's not racially divisive, Creepy? And let's not forget his knee-jerk "but Christians have done lots of bad things, too" moral equivalency bullshit, either. As if Christians are the ones blowing up buses, churches, mosques and police stations in 2018, no different from the bad shit Christian regimes did during the Dark Ages. But 500 years is like, yesterday, right? Pure horseshit.

    That weak-kneed, self-loathing, Ivy League chickenshit positioning made me - a two time Obama supporter - despise him for his lack of balls, regardless of party or skin color. In the end, Obama was the appeasement-loving schmoozer his critics painted him as, to the point I can't defend him anymore. But if you choose to be superficial about it, go ahead and argue that anyone who criticizes Obama is really just racist, utterly oblivious to how patently racist that position is, in and of itself.
    Though I don't view what I wrote or think about Obama as superficial, but instead pointing or appealing to the real and substantive ongoing issues and challenges in the black community, I don't disagree with much of what you wrote. I think my angle is based more on the idea that the racial issues were still there, and (1) the mere occurrence of the first black pres, and (2) coupled with his slide back left with some of the things you point out (albeit in the context of some unfortunate civil unrest), led to what I perceive among many US citizens as a "you see? i told you a black president would lead this way!" reaction, as if it were a mistake to elect a black guy. Where we get sidetracked on HCH is much like the country today: it's so polarized that if you don't come out of the gates swinging and screaming like OBK then you're an unmitigated left-wing, communist apologist. I mean, in this thread alone, we have a guy denying that groups publicly hung Obama and his wife in effigy lynch style, who missed that I have never once in my life voted for a non-judicial Democrat for any office anywhere ever. I am also pretty fiscally conservative dood and a somewhat establishment-loving prick. So nobody's getting my angle on this from some left-wing banana Rainbow Coalition point of view.

    And I completely agree that pointing to the Crusades as evidence that Christians can be just as violent as radical Islam is fs, if not unhelpful.

    Like I said, I agree with most of what you wrote.
    Here is why you are left wing. These are the facts:

    * You vote for judicial democrats. You just admitted that. Democrats are rats that use the courts to bypass the democratic process by going over the heads of the voters to implement their SJW agenda.

    * You are flamboyantly open borders. Soros level ghey for it. And you don't give a single fuck about the repercussions of that position, ignoring the evidence that has been streaming out of Europe for the last couple of years.

    * You tend to view things through the prism of race and identity politics. Do you attend white privilege workshops or teach them on college campuses?

    * You support swampy establishment criminals and try to prop them up. But that is to be expected from a swampy lawyer living in one of the kookiest cities in the US.

    * You treat Islam more like a race than a 'religion.' I don't think it's a religion at all, it's a political system masquerading as a religion. But like most SJW's, an attack on Islam is an attack on brown people to you.
  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic
    ^ u sure them' the facts?
  • Options
    SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 31,920
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Standard Supporter

    SFGbob said:

    Nowhere in my post is any kind of apology for Sharpton being anything less than a charlatan. I'd have him over for dinner b4 David Duke any day though. I would never equate those two as analogs.

    Yeah you just ran interference for the fact that Obama hired the piece of shit to lead his get out the vote effort by you didn't "apologize" for Sharpton and since you appear to be one of those precise language Kunt's quote where I said you apologized Coug?

    I didn't say you said I apologized for anything; that's my word, used in response to your allegation of white washing. Call it interference if you wish. I see it as no different than Bannon's advice, taken to heart and implemented by Trump, of invoking the religious loons on the right. They both have inconvenient friends. That was the point. Obama has about as much in actual common with Farrakahn and Sharpton as Trump does with Jerry Falwell. In any event, I'm not carrying the torch for the dysfunction in American politics. You can argue that with someone else.

    As to comparing you to the 'racism is over crowd', how so? That wasn't the point at all. The point was even that crowd, who don't believe racism is really an issue anymore, acknowledge that the past has loaded meaning, so, you know, an effigy of a black guy swinging from a tree is a little different than a effigy of Trump that pokes fun of his weight and his comb over.

    There were no eye witnesses to the start of the struggle. A few people saw the thing in mid-fight, conflicting testimony was offered as to who they heard screaming, and some people saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. Testimony was inconsistent about whether he was bashing his head into the sidewalk. None of that means he attacked him. Sure, all you had to do was look at Zimmerman to know he got his ass kicked. But if someone approaches you threateningly, or even grabs hold of you, or starts a fight with you, and you wind up kicking his ass, and he shoots you, you score that as self-defense because you attacked him? Really? The taped 911 call is at least a strong hint that he (1) thought Martin was up to no good (he was not, at least that night, which is all that matters), and (2) he was frustrated that the kid might get away. "Fucking punks ... these assholes always get away." All that transpired, transpired, and the story becomes that Martin, who Zimmerman was following, lurked out of the darkness and 'sucker punched him.' Nobody saw that. What everyone does know is that Zimmerman started following a kid he thought was doing something wrong, who wasn't doing anything wrong.

    Like I said, Martin was no saint, but I grew up with a lot of people whose profiles weren't much better than his, and some worse. They're normal people now. If, sincerely, none of that even gives you pause, coupled with the fact that a 17-year old kid who had a lot of time to get his life going in a better direction got whacked on a night he was walking and minding his own business, then we are different kinds of people and likely will not reach any kind of consensus on pretty much anything. I don't believe that you actually see it that simply, and that instead we are doing the HCH crazy dance.
    Unless Bannon has a body count that I'm unaware of, or you have some evidence that Bannon participated in a racist smear job that he knew wasn't true, comparing Bannon to Sharpton is like comparing apples to dog-shit.

    Your claims about Zimmerman grabbing and holding Trademark are pulled straight out of your ass. And the cuts to the back of Zimmerman's head as well as the dampness of his jacket coupled with the only credible eyewitness testimony provides pretty clear evidence that Trademark was smashing Zimmerman's head against something. Other than the bullet through his chest there was zero evidence that Zimmerman ever hit or struck Trademark. Zimmerman had no marks on his hands. Trademark had cut knuckles. You may not like what Zimmerman did but he was perfectly in his right to do so and had violated no laws with his actions. Also you have no idea if Trademark was up do no good. The fact that he doubled back and attacked someone when he was just feet away from the unit where he was staying tells me he wasn't up to any good.

    Trademark beating on Zimmerman violated all kinds of fucking laws and Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights to plug him.
  • Options
    pawzpawz Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 18,751
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes First Comment 5 Awesomes
    Founders Club
    SFGbob said:

    Blacks have more run ins with the cops because blacks as a whole commit a hell of a lot more crime and live in higher crime areas where more police are usually deployed.

    Factor in the fact that cops are more likely to view young black males as criminals, especially if they are sporting a certain look, and on account of this higher rate of criminal activity by blacks and you have the factors that explain the higher rate of blacks having run ins with the cops.

    Racism plays some role in this but even black, Hispanic and Asian cops, especially in urban areas, quickly realize that it ain’t whitey that’s committing most of the crime, especially the violent crime.

    Crime is the symptom. Poverty is the problem.

    If you fix poverty, you wont have crime.
  • Options
    SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 31,920
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Standard Supporter
    pawz said:

    SFGbob said:

    Blacks have more run ins with the cops because blacks as a whole commit a hell of a lot more crime and live in higher crime areas where more police are usually deployed.

    Factor in the fact that cops are more likely to view young black males as criminals, especially if they are sporting a certain look, and on account of this higher rate of criminal activity by blacks and you have the factors that explain the higher rate of blacks having run ins with the cops.

    Racism plays some role in this but even black, Hispanic and Asian cops, especially in urban areas, quickly realize that it ain’t whitey that’s committing most of the crime, especially the violent crime.

    Crime is the symptom. Poverty is the problem.

    If you fix poverty, you wont have crime.
    If poverty were the cause of crime why didn't you have more crime when the poverty rate was much higher? Why did you have an explosion of the crime rate during periods when the poverty rate was falling?
  • Options
    2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    SFGbob said:

    pawz said:

    SFGbob said:

    Blacks have more run ins with the cops because blacks as a whole commit a hell of a lot more crime and live in higher crime areas where more police are usually deployed.

    Factor in the fact that cops are more likely to view young black males as criminals, especially if they are sporting a certain look, and on account of this higher rate of criminal activity by blacks and you have the factors that explain the higher rate of blacks having run ins with the cops.

    Racism plays some role in this but even black, Hispanic and Asian cops, especially in urban areas, quickly realize that it ain’t whitey that’s committing most of the crime, especially the violent crime.

    Crime is the symptom. Poverty is the problem.

    If you fix poverty, you wont have crime.
    If poverty were the cause of crime why didn't you have more crime when the poverty rate was much higher? Why did you have an explosion of the crime rate during periods when the poverty rate was falling?
    Explosion of crime rates? Please to be explaining.
Sign In or Register to comment.