Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,211 Year: 5,468/9,624 Month: 493/323 Week: 133/204 Day: 3/4 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Who's the bigger offender: Conservatives or Liberals?
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1522
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 482 of 773 (889659)
12-10-2021 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 458 by dwise1
12-07-2021 9:13 PM


Re: Racism Is Not A One Way Street
Where did you get your disinformation from? Here's a video taken at the moment that she was shot:
The vid Percy put up showed it from another angle. It confirms everything I said that you're referring to.
As we can very clearly see, when she was shot she was in the middle of climbing through the busted window in the door. To me, it looks like she was about to jump down into the House antechamber on the other side of that busted door, the side that the police were trying to keep secure.
She was ABOUT to. Maybe he could have waited until she completed it. Or maybe, instead of hiding in that little alcove without making a sound, he could have stood out in the open, and called to them repeatedly, pointing the gun at them, telling them they'd be shot of they entered. Maybe firing a warning shot to get their attention, that didn't kill anybody. There were several different things he could have done, besides hiding and killing her as soon as he got the chance.
As we can clearly see, that was not "BEFORE she went through the door", not even close. She was almost completely through it. Yes, she fell backwards, but that was undoubtedly in part due to the moment of the bullet hitting her.
"Almost completely", maybe NOT COMPLETELY would have been a better description.
As we can very clearly see, she was not standing on the mob's side of the door. Nor was she somehow arbitrarily chosen to be shot, but rather the police officer knew that he had to stop every person who tried to climb through, so he was aiming for that window. The reason why she was shot was that she was in that window climbing through it. Why did she do that? Sheer stupidity.
I agree it was stupid. But he might have made a stupid decision as well. Was he stupid for saying he "saved a lot of lives"? That was a subjective claim, not possible to prove or disprove it. He was outnumbered, threatened by a mob. He can say the sound of the shot, the sight of Babbitt falling to the floor, was enough to slow the mob, change the mob's direction etc. and it can be a legitimate claim. It seems to have been accepted without question, even though there's no way to solidly prove it. Let's see now, Kyle Rittenhouse was outnumbered, threatened by a mob. Did Rittenhouse save a lot of lives? I haven't seen all the court transcripts of course, but I feel sure Rittenhouse or his attorneys weren't crazy enough to make that claim, because that would have sent the mainstream media and the Democrat party into one of the biggest frenzies ever known to man. "SAVED A LOT OF LIVES????" They'd scream? "By shooting someone it saved a lot of lives??" This is clearly the reason we need more gun control since we're seeing this BRAND NEW kind of craziness from Republican gun nuts!!!" Do you agree that either BOTH of them saved a lot of lives, or NEITHER of them did? If you say only Byrd saved lives, while Rittenhouse did not, you might be a black supremacist.
We have all seen that over and over again. Why have you never seen it before? Because your disinformation sources doesn't want you to see what actually happened?
My only steady information source is ABC World News Tonight, a very liberal source, comes on after the local news, both during my usual evening meal. My Fox News viewing is sporadic, don't have a certain favorite show. I might have missed it if ABC showed it, but they've shown video of most of the rest of the January 6th riots dozens, if not hundreds of times. One thing is clear, they, and the rest of the media were a lot more proud of of smashing windows and unrest by that crazy, but non-liberal mob, than they were of a calm black policeman quietly, carefully aiming and killing a white woman. I found the vid Percy showed to be pretty shocking, the descriptions I got seemed to imply that Barney Fife got scared and accidentally fired his one bullet into a crowd, the poor dear. It wasn't quite like that.
I mention that because of what Rep. Ted Lieu said. He was part of the team presented the case against Trump in his record-breaking second impeachment.
It was record breaking all right, impeached after it was clear he was leaving office anyway. Today's Democrat stupidity knows no bounds.
The presentation included showing videos from the attack on the Capitol -- I forget whether Babbitt's shooting was shown there.
Well here's an educated guess for you, it probably wasn't. Even at least some liberals just might find Byrd's hiding in the alcove, and his calmness and careful aim to be a little disturbing.
When he wasn't giving the presentation, he waited with the others in the Green Room where they had TVs tuned to all the channels that were covering the impeachment proceedings live. When a video was shown to the Senate, they all showed the video. Except for one station: FOX News. Every time a video was shown as evidence, they either cut to a commercial or to commentators. Obviously, they did not want their audience to see the truth.
And where did you get this information from? Do you have a dozen television sets, or did a liberal commentator tell you that? Did they show the video of one policeman getting hit in the head with a fire extinguisher, wielded by a crazed Trump supporter? They probably didn't, since it was a made up lie. I've watched Fox News enough to know that they showed a lot of footage from that riot. Never saw them show the shooting though. Even Fox News seems to be getting afraid of the black community now.
BTW, the video I linked us to came from an ultra-conservative channel,
CGTN America. Also, many of the comments echoed my earlier amazement at how she could have ever served 14 years in the military (including three deployments to the Middle East) without ever having learned a single thing.
Just because you're amazed at something doesn't mean it's false. She could have learned a lot of things that didn't involve being too brazen during a riot. Maybe she missed a course on what not to do during a riot, maybe that course is given only to black soldiers, since before January 6th white riots were largely unheard of. Or maybe while stationed in the Middle East, she learned how damaging it can be if an election gets stolen - maybe she learned some Middle Eastern characteristics of rigged and stolen elections.
Yesterday Jussie Smollett was found guilty on 5 of 6 counts of completely faking a white supremacist attack on himself. That verdict is trumpeted a LOT less than all his lies that the mainstream media spent weeks lapping up when he was shrieking about this "attack". They say each count carries a maximum of three years in prison. I suspect he'll get a slap on the wrist, probation, a suspended sentence, or something similar. I suspect the judge who passes the sentence will be just as afraid of the black community as those who gave Michael Byrd his free pass to murder.
Now do you feel capable of addressing this message all by yourself, or do you welcome all the attacks and name calling that I'm sure to get from others, who don't have much confidence in your ability to address it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by dwise1, posted 12-07-2021 9:13 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 499 by Percy, posted 12-15-2021 1:29 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1522
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 483 of 773 (889660)
12-10-2021 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 459 by AZPaul3
12-08-2021 12:35 AM


Re: Racism Is Not A One Way Street
We talk about police murdering a man in public and you go off about race. I never even mentioned race in my message. But it sticks in your craw doesn't it?
Jar was the one who mentioned race, it was what inspired me to point out the fact that Byrd is black. You gang members should try harder to keep up with what your helpers are doing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 459 by AZPaul3, posted 12-08-2021 12:35 AM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 485 by AZPaul3, posted 12-10-2021 9:46 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1522
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 484 of 773 (889661)
12-10-2021 9:37 PM
Reply to: Message 460 by PaulK
12-08-2021 1:19 AM


Re: Racism Is Not A One Way Street
marc9000 writes:
It doesn't destroy the truth to point out facts, like Michael Byrd is black, is still alive, not lynched.
And nobody got even mildly annoyed at that.
Seven posters did, yourself included. My Message 423 You were so annoyed that you said I "destroyed the truth".
Yawn. And I suppose you expect us to believe that every response was likely that. Cherry-picking only proves your dishonesty.
Any time I refer to one specific thing, I'm "cherry picking"? Strange how gangs work together so well, yet you immediately distance yourself from one of your helpers blunders.
marc9000 writes:
I don't know what was in their minds, but breaking into one building hardly can be twisted into an attempt to "overturn an election".
That was the point of breaking into the building. The building where the legislators were certifying the election results. As even you must know.
I don't know what their point was. Maybe an inability to control themselves over illegal voting, ballot harvesting, hostility towards Republicans at polling places etc. I didn't go, I controlled myself. I'm now slightly enjoying watching Democrats and the mainstream media dance to try to cover for the screwed up Biden presidency.
And from what I remember the police had a lot to do with that. But nice try at creating a false equivalence.
Riot compared to a riot, a "false equivalence"?
So you insist that there were reasonable alternatives but you can’t think of any. It’s not exactly like the George Floyd case where the cop could have stopped kneeling on his neck and used approved restraint techniques instead.
I can think of several. Mainly, rather than hiding and hoping for a chance to kill a honky, the policeman could have gotten out in the open, stood a safe distance away, 20 or 30 feet, then made sure the crowd knew that when they COMPLETELY (not almost completely) crossed that window, they'd get shot. He had at least 8 shots in that gun, and most of the mob probably would have known that.
Or the three officers who were inside the door could have been a little more assertive, rather than wimping out and moving aside. Yes, several.
Here’s the DoJ statement
It explains why there was no trial.
Okay, I'll concede that point. Looked like a pretty quickie investigation though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 460 by PaulK, posted 12-08-2021 1:19 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 492 by PaulK, posted 12-11-2021 1:16 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1522
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 486 of 773 (889663)
12-10-2021 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 462 by Percy
12-08-2021 11:59 AM


Re: Racism Is Not A One Way Street
marc9000 writes:
It doesn't destroy the truth to point out facts, like Michael Byrd is black, is still alive, not lynched.
Yes, Marc, you're right on top of things again, those are the exact points people were disputing.
Yes it was, because those are the exact points that were in my Message 423. There were none of my opinions there. Except maybe for my word "murder", the word that was used many times by the media when referring to the deaths of black crooks at the hands of white policemen.
They must be what people were disputing, else why would you use them as your examples of you telling the truth?
Yes, they must have been, because that was the message that got the angry responses.
You would never cite irrelevant examples, oh no, not you. Quite clearly people must have been disputing that Byrd is black, alive and not lynched. Thank you for pointing that out.
It was relevant, because of jar's implication;
jar writes:
Had Rittenhouse been black it's very unlikely he would have lived through the night and not been executed by the police right then and there.
They weren't disputing it, they just got angry that someone pointed it out, they want that forgotten about, since the goal is to always imply that anytime a black uses a gun, he gets lynched.
Oh, you are too kind, because as we all know the misrepresentation of the events of January 6th was far worse than that. Democrats built it up into some kind of giant insurrection thing when it was merely, as a Republican congressman informed us, like a mere tourist visit.
It was microscopic, compared to the many black riots of the past several years. It was a giant insurrection only because of amazingly sloppy Capitol security.
Percy writes:
one of the many gang members, can't keep track of them all writes:
In how many were the lives of the legislators at risk?
marc9000 writes:
In Seattle, the lives of anyone near that courthouse or police station were at risk.
Just so clever, Marc, answering a question with another question...
The above was a question? Looked like a statement to me.
that makes clear that invading the halls of Congress with the intent of halting the constitutionally mandated certification of the electoral college after a presidential election and where congresspeople hid under chairs is equivalent to the threat to life and limb of a riot in Seattle where no one was killed. Don't forget cars on roads, that puts people at risk, too, and so is also equivalent to the January 6th insurrection. Great point, Marc!
No congresspeople were killed. Must have been really impressive for our allies around the world to see our congresspeople hiding under chairs, rather than depending on some kind of well thought out security to keep them safe.
Pure genius, Marc, misrepresenting what I've said. After all, who will remember that my actual position is that almost no police should have guns. What are the odds that I'd think that the most important officials in the land and the most important building in the country should have armed protection?
Did you ever make that position clear? I never saw it, so now I understand. Only the central government headquarters should have guns. I'm sure that's how it is in North Korea.
Well now I just feel bad, but who could ever have imagined that your ability to inform yourself was so weak? We apologize for picking on you for your ignorance about something you insisted on talking about as if you were informed. From Wikipedia:
quote:
Following the routine process for shootings by Capitol Police officers, the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department and the Justice Department investigated Babbitt's death and declined to charge Byrd with shooting her.
I wasn't really referring to a "routine process", I was thinking more like a thorough investigation, similar to several that were done on Trump's personal life, or that of George Floyd.
Looking at the last full year, 2020, there were 2021 police murders and only 7 police officers charged. Also look at the disproportionate numbers for blacks, who are only 13% of the population but 24% of the police murders. How could it be that blacks are murdered at nearly twice their proportion of the population? But I bet good old Marc has a ready answer, maybe that they're criminal anyway and had it coming.
Because blacks commit far more crimes than whites do. Statistics have always shown blacks to have more problems with morality and civilized behavior than do whites. I know I'm a terrible racist for saying that, but facts are facts. Here is a racist statistic for you;
quote:
For all racial and ethnic groups combined, 39.6 percent of births in the United States were out-of-wedlock (incidentally, isn’t that appalling?). And there was as always a tremendous range among groups. For blacks, the number is 69.4 percent; for American Indians/Alaska Natives, 68.2 percent (Native Hawaiians/Other Pacific Islanders were at 50.4 percent); for Hispanics, 51.8 percent; for whites, 28.2 percent; and for Asian Americans, a paltry 11.7 percent.
[bolded mine]
Percentage of Births to Unmarried Women | Center for Equal Opportunity
Here's some more racism for you, in Cincinnati, as I'm sure it is in most medium / large cities in the U.S., food stores in black areas have closely spaced posts at the sidewalk to keep shopping carts from being destroyed / stolen in the parking lots. They don't in white areas. Auto-Zone parts stores in black areas have big concrete pillars at the end of the parking spaces to keep cars from ramming the store fronts. No such pillars at Auto Zone stores in white areas. Interstate overpass walkways have huge fences in black areas, to keep the little urchins from dropping rocks on passing cars below. No such fences in white areas. Food stores and drug stores often close in black areas - can't make a profit with so much grab-and-run / shoplifting going on. When was the last time you saw a white area with buildings boarded up, burglar bars over broken windows, graffiti everywhere? There are countless other examples. How tiny is the liberal bubble? Is it racist to point out facts? What makes it so interesting is the small, but significant percentage of blacks who are very good, productive people. Many thousands of them, they are represented by that list I put up in Message 457 If I had the chance to pick out the President, Vice President, Speaker of the House, and Senate Majority Leader, every one of my picks would come from that list.
Oh, evasion combined with counterattack, just the right tactic.
Almost the same as the common tactic by the gang, answering my post to one of your helpers, because you don't think he'll answer it sufficiently.
Who could ever believe you're racist anyway? No one believes you really mean all the racist things you say.
Depends on the meaning of the term "racist". Democrats seem to have re-defined it to mean anything that counters today's brand new far left Democrat ideology.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 462 by Percy, posted 12-08-2021 11:59 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1522
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 487 of 773 (889664)
12-10-2021 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 485 by AZPaul3
12-10-2021 9:46 PM


Re: Racism Is Not A One Way Street
I comment about the police murdering a man openly in the street in obvious response to your message mentioning Floyd and you tried to deflect by asking if Floyd was killed by black police officers.
Please specify the message number where I asked if Floyd was killed by black police officers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 485 by AZPaul3, posted 12-10-2021 9:46 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 490 by AZPaul3, posted 12-10-2021 11:16 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1522
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 488 of 773 (889665)
12-10-2021 11:03 PM
Reply to: Message 463 by Percy
12-08-2021 12:23 PM


Re: Racism Is Not A One Way Street
Why, thank you for this quote from a white supremacist website. We don't get a lot of that here, so thank you. I'm curious, though. Why did you complain about name calling when called a white supremacist in a prior message but now are quoting from a white supremacist website?
So statistics are no good if the source has been labeled "white supremacist" by today's new Democrat party? Everything is now white supremacist if it's not in line with today's radical liberalism?
Another brilliant stroke! AZPaul3 had responded to your question about why there are "no memorials to white, dope-head crooks, like there are for George Floyd," and you responded in a way to completely hide that fact. The bust is of George Floyd but as a memorial it's a symbol of the effects of and fight against racism.
It's not a tradition in the U.S. to build monuments to drug addicted, non productive citizens. Do you have any understanding of racial hatred FROM blacks towards whites? If not, you've lived a very sheltered life. If you've ever heard some of MIchelle Obama's comments about whites, you'd know, From her, all the way down to Cincinnati ghettos, that kind of racism is everywhere. But with today's new definitions, it's not possible for a black to be racist, is it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 463 by Percy, posted 12-08-2021 12:23 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 491 by AZPaul3, posted 12-10-2021 11:21 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1522
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 489 of 773 (889666)
12-10-2021 11:15 PM
Reply to: Message 464 by Percy
12-08-2021 3:26 PM


Re: Racism Is Not A One Way Street
What an incredibly astute observer you are! Nothing gets by you! Yes, we liberals (of which I'm not one, but thank you for giving me honorary membership)
Percy's computer has been stolen by one of George Floyd's troubled teenaged sons! GIVE IT BACK, GIVE IT BACK!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 464 by Percy, posted 12-08-2021 3:26 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1522
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 507 of 773 (889971)
12-18-2021 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 466 by Percy
12-09-2021 7:45 AM


Re: Racism Is Not A One Way Street
I'll let everyone decide for themselves whether I'm being fair to Marc. My own feelings are that the lies, the gaslighted racism, the false claims and accusations, the fabrications, the inhumanity, and so on, were not finding effective counters as Marc would just ignore them by disappearing, wait a random amount of time, then return and perform the same act again.
It's probably safe to say that I'm the most hated poster at EvC of all time, far more than Faith or Buzzsaw. You've made comments in the past about Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson, so you sometimes must be slightly curious about what they have to say. But they sometimes have to stop short of saying just what 40 to 45% of Americans think, or their advertisers would leave them in droves, after the furious outrage that would be poured on by the mainstream media and Democrat commentators. Hannity and Carlson are public figures, I'm not. They make a living with their commentary, I don't. I can say things like "black supremacy". Blunt, yes, but it's honest and descriptive. It only gets me insults and called names, but that's all. What I say really IS what a significant percentage of Americans think. You must ever-so-slightly appreciate my presence, or you'd have banned me by now.
Views not arrived at by reason cannot be countered by reason and should not be treated seriously. Mockery, disdain, scorn and ridicule are more appropriate responses to the determinedly irrational.
Did you learn this from collegiate debating guidelines? Or did you and Dr Jones come up with that on your own? Is it good, or bad for political divisiveness in the U.S.? It is true that some conservatives (Rush Limbaugh) do/did that from time to time, but what conservatives do pales in comparison to the name calling here, and the mockery and scorn that routinely go on at places like CNN.
My own personal opinion is that I'm not being unfair to Marc because the lies he's telling are the dangerous and divisive Trumpian ones that have divided the country and turned the Republican party into zombies.
Here's a recent vid from CNN;
Brian Stelter: Fox News is like a toddler exaggerating a bump in the night - CNN Video
At the beginning, they showed a few cherry picks from Fox News, then at the 38 second point, Stelter said this;
quote:
I would be so scared to leave the house if I watched that all day.
The cherry picks were so brief, we don't know what the Fox people were talking about, maybe record inflation, maybe the Afghanistan debacle, any number of things that were/are more disastrous than anything that happened during the Trump administration. Yet he's apparently forgotten about the Trump-Russian-Collusion lies and so many other divisive things CNN harped on during the Trump administration.
I guess it's just politics, but I'm a little surprised that you, and the mainstream media, has the nerve to finger point about "divisiveness".
Ask any Republican whether Biden won the election fairly and the most likely response is bunch of hogwash.
Yes, comparable to 'Trump-Russian-collusion lies, that were all over the mainstream media 4 / 5 years ago. Proven wrong by a 2 year investigation. Too bad all the Covid fear inspiring absentee voting, illegal influx, ballot harvesting won't get anywhere near a 2 year investigation.
I feel these ideas should be challenged in the most compelling ways possible.
You said it best in another thread not long ago, Message 61
quote:
But many times an important point is at stake, and at other times the stupid is just too precious to resist, and so we eagerly reply despite knowing it will go nowhere, and we excuse our behavior by telling ourselves it's for the lurkers or for posterity or just for the principle of truth and honesty. So even though the stupid persists unabated, we feel better.
COULD NOT have said it better myself. I've invited a cyber friend or two, and a cousin (all long distance) to read here. Whether they do or not I don't know, I haven't asked them. I guess they don't, these types of message boards don't seem to be near as popular as they were 15 years ago. But I'm sure they get a kick out of it if they do.
I find the mainstream media to be as much milquetoasts as the president, for example, gently chiding the Republican party for its highly effective efforts at voter disenfranchisement.
Considering the recent massive illegal immigration, and Covid fears of voting in person, the word fraud is much more appropriate than "disenfranchisement".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 466 by Percy, posted 12-09-2021 7:45 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 508 by jar, posted 12-18-2021 7:28 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 511 by Percy, posted 12-19-2021 12:53 PM marc9000 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 514 by ringo, posted 12-20-2021 11:08 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1522
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 509 of 773 (889973)
12-18-2021 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 499 by Percy
12-15-2021 1:29 PM


Re: A Prime Example of Racism
Replying to all your messages here.
A lot there, but about 3/4 of it seems to be your accusations of racism, so I think the best way to streamline it all is for me to address the racism part all at once, then move through what little substance there is to the rest of it. I'll start with some quotes from Michelle Obama;
quote:
Michelle Obama has recalled her "exhausting" experience with racism using the example of a simple trip to get ice cream with her daughters during her time in the White House.
https://www.today.com/...eriencing-racism-first-lady-t190319
quote:
We had just finished taking the girls to a soccer game," Obama said. "We were stopping to get ice cream, and I had told the Secret Service to stand back because we were trying to be normal, trying to go in," Obama said.
"There was a line, and once again, when I'm just a Black woman, I notice that white people don't even see me. They're not even looking at me. So I'm standing there with two little Black girls, another Black female adult, they're in soccer uniforms, and a white woman cuts right in front of us to order. Like she didn't even see us."
Obama said the girl at the counter almost took the woman's order before the first lady spoke up. "So I stepped up, and I said, 'Excuse me?' I was like, 'You don't see us four people standing right here, you just jumped in line?'" Obama said. "She didn't apologize, she never looked me in my eye, she didn't know it was me. All she saw was a Black person, or a group of Black people, or maybe she didn't even see that because we were that invisible.
"I can tell you a number of stories like that when I've been completely incognito, during the eight years in the White House, walking the dogs on the canal, people will come up and pet my dogs but will not look me in the eye. They don't know it's me."
Obama emphasized how not even being acknowledged as a human being can be hurtful.
"What white folks don't understand, it's like that is so telling of how white America views people who are not like them," she said. "You know, we don't exist. And when we do exist, we exist as a threat. And that, that's exhausting."
She also shared why having close Black friends has been important to her.
"There's a certain relief that comes when you don't have to walk into your friend group and explain yourself," she said. "My group of female friends aren't calling me to say, 'What can I do?' You guys are calling me to say, 'How you doin' girl?' You know, 'let's talk.'
This is so unbelievable to me - does she not realize that people in line in a public place just might have other things on their minds than bowing down to her, or anyone? Most people would agree that she's an attractive woman, above average. If she could spend a couple of weeks in the shoes of an unattractive white person, she'd quickly find out what it's like to be ignored, to not be taken seriously. Bush 41's wife Barbara probably could have told her some stories of things that happened to her late in her life that would have caused Michelle to turn white. Michelle was the wife of a president, now the wife of an ex-president, she's now set for life, from the tax money of mostly white citizens. Is she satisfied with that? Of course not, no matter what special rights blacks get, they're never satisfied. They hate. They're racists of the worse kind.
Now let's look at what another black person had to say, from a much earlier time, 1950, before there was Black History Month, before Martin Luther King Day, before Black Entertainment Television, before racial quotas, before minority contracts in construction, before other recent black supremacy;
Thomas Sowell, one of the people I listed in Message 457 Born in 1930, adopted as an infant, grew up in Harlem, left his family and went to D.C. in 1950. I have several of his books on my shelf. In one of the introductions, he gives a brief outline of what his life was like growing up.
quote:
I had dropped out of high school at age 16, left home at 17 to go live on my own, usually in a rented room. I discovered the hard way that there was no great demand for a high-school drop out with no skills or experience. I had no clear indication of where I was heading, if anywhere beyond the string of low-level, poorly paying jobs I held. After nearly 3 tough years on my own, if was a major advance when I received an offer of a job as an entry level clerk with the government in Washington in September 1950.
He doesn't say, but my guess is that that government job offer in 1950 came from a white person. A white person who noticed that he was a good worker, and had a brain. But in referring to this part of his life, he doesn't mention race. Now to continue;
quote:
Washington was a new experience, going beyond a change of jobs and cities. In Washington lived [sisters and brothers] - I never knew any of them existed while I was growing up. I had been adopted in infancy and was not told I was adopted until I was nearly grown. Having left the family in which I had grown up when I was 17, I now had a new family and that was a good feeling. Washington itself was not a good experience , however, when I arrived there in 1950. Racial barriers made downtown restaurants and most movie houses off-limits. The schools were racially segregated. Washington was a typical southern town in every way except that blacks did not have to ride in the back of buses and trolleys.
He then goes on about being drafted into the Korean War, spending over a page in the introduction of this book about that, leading to his graduation in 1958 from Harvard with a degree in economics. Never mentioning race , never referring to the racial barriers he briefly referred to above. So what did he do about those racial barriers? He shrugged them off, he accepted reality as it is, and did the best he could with what he had.
The conditions you're describing are a result of poverty, lack of opportunity, poor education, etc. Whites and blacks fall into poverty for many of the same reasons, the main difference being that blacks have the additional disadvantage of being the objects of racist discrimination by people like you. Your hate deprives minorities of opportunity which in turn forces them into lifestyles you find distasteful, and then you hate them for living in ways that your hate drove them into. Nice work!
I wonder if there will ever come a time when the majority of blacks ever start looking at themselves for their problems instead of blaming whites from generations ago. It's true that 1950 was long after the civil war, and the racial barriers Sowell very briefly referred to were a problem, but steady progress has been made, so many 70 year old racial barriers are now long gone.
Logical indications are that it's not so much about race, it's more about using race as an advantage to give the Democrat party more and more power, by painting all references by conservatives to liberty and limited government with the very broad racism brush. A Lyndon B. Johnson quote comes to mind;
quote:
I'll have those n**gers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.
TOP 25 QUOTES BY LYNDON B. JOHNSON (of 400) | A-Z Quotes
I can only assume from your avatar that you're white. The problem that you have is that you probably believe that blacks adore you and support you because you're on their "side". Their actions and attitudes show me that they don't - you're just a useful tool to them, and until they don't need you anymore, or until you finally wake up and realize that black supremacy is what they seek, and it doesn't include you or anything to do with you. My references above to Michelle Obama make it perfectly clear - they're NEVER satisfied with the gains they get, never.
Making exceptions to your "if they're black they lack" rule doesn't mean you're not a racist.
Why did you put "if they're black they lack" in quotations as if I said it, which I didn't? The exceptions (my Sowell reference) show that I go by the content of their character, not necessarily the color of their skin. Roughly 90% of them vote for the same party that enslaved them 160 years ago. The party of Lyndon Johnson. A significant percentage of them don't pay much attention to the content of character, they only see the color of skin. Like Michelle Obama, and I'm sure, her husband. Their hatred of whites was probably a large part of their courtship, and subsequent marriage.
It isn't the statistics from American Renaissance I distrust but any reasoning attached to them.
Any reasoning? The 69% out-of-wedlock percentage versus 28% can't possibly be considered as one of many reasons for societal deterioration? That's only one example, there are countless others, black supremacy doesn't allow a lot of relevant things to be discussed. It was the same with my pointing out that Capitol policeman Byrd is black, black supremacy / political correctness / Democrat talking points want a lot of things forgotten about - covered up. It's the reason there was so much anger here when I pointed it out.
A few more loose ends in your long maze;
marc9000 writes:
..the descriptions I got seemed to imply that Barney Fife got scared and accidentally fired his one bullet into a crowd, the poor dear.
You're making things up again.
They were MY VIEWS, they were the descriptions I got. The accusation "made up" doesn't apply.
You often step so far outside reality that I'm beginning to wonder, perhaps what you think is outrage is just people rolling their eyes.
That's what I love about this place, I could say the earth is round and the grass is green and school buses are yellow, and I'd get called a racist for it. Goes along with my most hated status here.
marc9000 writes:
dwise1 writes:
I mention that because of what Rep. Ted Lieu said. He was part of the team presented the case against Trump in his record-breaking second impeachment. When he wasn't giving the presentation, he waited with the others in the Green Room where they had TVs tuned to all the channels that were covering the impeachment proceedings live. When a video was shown to the Senate, they all showed the video. Except for one station: FOX News. Every time a video was shown as evidence, they either cut to a commercial or to commentators. Obviously, they did not want their audience to see the truth.
And where did you get this information from?
As dwise1 clearly said, it was part of the presentation by Rep. Ted Lieu made to the House impeachment committee.
And I clearly wasn't asking about the presentation, or if Ted Lieu was a personal friend of dwise1 and told him about the horrid things Fox News did. I wanted to find out where he got the information about what the networks did with it. I suspect it could have been CNN, they often don't want their audience to see the truth.
Once again you accuse the mainstream media of being deceived by and promoting lies, but it turns out the one lying is you. Smollett reported his faked attack on January 29, 2019, it was all over the media, and from then on the media reported what the police told them, which was that over the next month Smollett's phone records led them to two Nigerians who said Smollett had paid them to stage the attack. By February 20, 2019, Smollett had already been named as a suspect by the police. All this was reported in the media.
When Smollett reported his faked attack, it was sensationalized. Commentators like Robin Roberts interviewed him, and broadcasted his lies for a full 16 minutes. Here's what Biden tweeted;
quote:
"What happened today to @JussieSmollett must never be tolerated in this country," President Biden, tweeted in January 2019 when he was mulling a presidential run, "We must stand up and demand that we no longer give this hate safe harbor; that homophobia and racism have no place on our streets or in our hearts. We are with you, Jussie."
quote:
Multiple politicians called the attack an attempted 'modern day lynching'
Biden, Harris led frenzy to amplify Jussie Smollett's false hate crime claims | Fox News
Would have been nice if Roberts would have sat down for 16 minutes after the guilty verdict, with someone from American Renaissance and they could have discussed how we can no longer give safe harbor to Smollett's style of hate. His attempt to paint all Trump supporters as a lynch mob. What do you think the ratio of initial reports and commentary were between the initial reports of the attack, versus the corrections? 20 to 1? 40 to 1? How many blacks around the country got the message?
Yeah, well, sorry about any attacks and name calling, but doesn't that happen a lot to liars and racists?
Not to black ones.
marc9000 writes:
No congresspeople were killed. Must have been really impressive for our allies around the world to see our congresspeople hiding under chairs, rather than depending on some kind of well thought out security to keep them safe.
It was your people the congresspeople were hiding from.
They were not my people, any more than Jussie Smollett is your person.
You seem remarkably tone deaf to the significance of the events of that day.
Yes, there were a lot of events.
jar writes:
Wasn't the Capitol Building closed to the general public that day?
Weren't there barricades and police that had to be overwhelmed before any of the insurrectionists could enter the Capitol?
Weren't the doors and windows at the Capitol closed and locked to keep the insurrectionists out that day?
Wasn't the door at the scene of the shooting closed and barricaded to keep the insurrectionists out that day?
Wasn't the window in that door smashed by the insurrectionists that day?
Wasn't Babbit shot as she tried to climb through that broken window?
The answer to each of those questions is yes, and our allies around the world were probably wondering why not one of those things were properly ENFORCED. Leading to the last one, an unarmed person being shot.
Of course it's possible for blacks to be racist, but there's no more justification for it than for white racism, though you might recall that I earlier noted that black anxiety and fear of whites is understandable.
And with the non-reporting of black racism, and other black supremacy, white anxiety and fear of blacks is also understandable.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 499 by Percy, posted 12-15-2021 1:29 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 510 by DrJones*, posted 12-19-2021 11:59 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 513 by Percy, posted 12-19-2021 3:00 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1522
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 515 of 773 (889999)
12-20-2021 9:12 PM
Reply to: Message 513 by Percy
12-19-2021 3:00 PM


Re: A Prime Example of Racism
I think I know how Michele Obama feels in that ice cream story. As a male in a grocery store I sometimes feel invisible to some females, like I don't exist.
Sure, it's not uncommon, happens a lot to a lot of people. It was quite a stretch for her to make it about race. Almost like she's a racist.
marc9000 writes:
So what did he [Thomas Sowell] do about those racial barriers? He shrugged them off, he accepted reality as it is, and did the best he could with what he had.
I can see you yearn for the good old days when blacks knew their place.
What I was pointing out was that, most blacks, (and so many white race-hustlers who try to exploit them) constantly lament about how tough they had it when they were growing up, and use that as an excuse for their rioting and dependence on handouts. Very few blacks can claim they had a tougher time growing up than Sowell did. He made it work without rioting and handouts in the 1950's. They should all be able to make it work today, without all the accusations about how unfairly they've been treated historically.
Yes, a lot of racists like you are saying, "Enough with the racial progress already."
Exactly right. With all their current special rights that I pointed out earlier, it's clear they achieved 100% equality decades ago. But their demands for more and more special rights never stop.
It's figures you'd find a made-up quote. See FACT CHECK: Did LBJ Say 'I'll Have Those N*****s Voting Democratic for 200 Years'?.
From your link;
quote:
There’s no question that Lyndon Johnson, despite championing the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 and signing it into law, was also a sometime racist and notorious vulgarian who rarely shied away from using the N-word in private. For example, he reportedly referred to the Civil Rights Act of 1957 as the “nigger bill” in more than one private phone conversation with Senate colleagues. And he reportedly said upon appointing African-American judge Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court, “Son, when I appoint a nigger to the court, I want everyone to know he’s a nigger.”
So do you automatically hand wave away the fact that he "was also a sometime racist and notorious vulgarian who rarely shied away from using the N-word in private."? So because Snopes couldn't find any clear evidence for it, it couldn't have happened once in a private conversation? Considering Johnson's nature, it's easier to believe it did happen than it didn't.
Johnson made Trump look like a choir boy.
The phrase had to be set off somehow, which is often done with quotes - would you have preferred italics?
Neither, it was a straw man phrase.
There's a black supremacist movement?
Yes, it's called Black Lives Matter. (BLM) A phoney name in many ways, more accurately it should be called Black Supremacy Matters. (BSM)
You're lying again. No one called you racist for innocuous statements. If you'd confined your statements to the color of grass and school buses no one would have any idea you're racist, but you didn't. Instead you've gone on a lengthy campaign to justify your racism. To you your racism is okay because blacks commit too much crime and have too many out-of-wedlock births and live in too much squalor. To you this excuses your attitudes and behavior that keep blacks locked in as second class citizens.
And too many special rights that I've already pointed out, the minority contracts, the racial quotas, special holidays, special television stations, the list goes on and on. The problem that you have is that you confuse the terms "racism" with what I and millions of others often have, resentment. If so many blacks weren't so arrogant and 'in-your-face' with their demands, what you term "racism" would be far less pronounced in the U.S. So what you perceive as racism is actually brought about by those who promote monuments to the likes of George Floyd, the demands and riots of organizations like BLM, etc.
About dwise1's description of Ted Lieu's account, I can't see why you think some of the information you quoted came from Ted Lieu and some came from dwise1.
Because some of dwise1's "information" was about how the networks covered it, about how Fox News cut to commercials to hide something. Those claims were not part of Ted Lieu's account.
Of course they're your people. You all believe most of the same things, and they especially share your racism.
The beliefs I share with them had / have nothing to do with race. Biden is white - the election dispute wasn't about race. They're not my people because I didn't ACT OUT the way they did. They didn't represent me in their actions. If that doesn't clear it up for you, then Smollett is your person. He hates Trump / Republicans - you hate Trump / Republicans. You didn't stage a fake attack like he did, but apparently that's irrelevant to you.
We're all aware of the ease with which you concoct excuses for your racism.
Merry Christman to you and everyone at EvC, including Dr. Jones, God love him. I'm done here for awhile.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 513 by Percy, posted 12-19-2021 3:00 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 519 by Percy, posted 12-21-2021 11:31 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024