Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
So Democrat elected officials stirring up hatred of law and order, the police, civil stability is OK?
That's a bad one.
You've yet to name the Democrats who have incited the violence.
Of course I have, NYLiar.
No, you haven't.
You have to state the incitement, and then state the violence, and then show a cause and effect relationship, beyond a reasonable doubt,
between the former and the latter.
You have done no such thing. Just because your retarded fans give you cheers does not mean you've proven anything. Making retards happy is admirable,
but it's not what wins a debate.
6. I live in a city that has the finest police force in the nation...perhaps in the world. Safety of our citizens is a direct result of their work. Yet Democrats work to undermine same.
The anti-police message comes from many of Democrat elites.
a. "Clinton says patterns of violence against black men are ‘unmistakable and undeniable’ and calls for police officers across the country to wear body cameras." Hillary Clinton America must confront hard truths about race and justice US news The Guardian
b. Here is the message that Speaker Pelosi delivered, encouraging the sort of activity seen in places like Ferguson and Baltimore.....
Back in 2006:
And at a Berkeley Graduation ceremony:
“You here at Berkeley are already disruptors in many ways,” she said.
“Being called a disruptor, in my view, is a very high compliment.” Nancy Pelosi delivers commencement address to Class of 2014 The Daily Californian
7. Do these Liberals want an end to the riots......or the continuation?
Here.....you be the judge:
"Maryland Governor Says Obama Urged Him to Exercise 'Due Restraint'
Maryland Governor Says Obama Urged Him to Exercise Due Restraint CNS News
You think exercising due restraint is a bad thing?
You would prefer 'undue' action? Do you know the difference between the words 'due' and 'undue'?
4. Did Obama have a hand in fanning the smoldering embers in the case of Ferguson?
You betcha'!
Obama met with protest leaders:
"Some of the national leaders met with President Obama on Nov. 5 for a gathering that included a conversation about Ferguson.
According to the Rev. Al Sharpton, who has appeared frequently in St. Louis with the Brown family and delivered a speech at Mr. Brown’s funeral, Mr. Obama “was concerned about Ferguson staying on course in terms of pursuing what it was that he knew we were advocating. He said he hopes that we’re doing all we can to keep peace.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/u...html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=1
With whom is the President standing shoulder to shoulder?
Sure looks like another "I wasn't there....but the police acted stupidly."
The Food-Stamp President is also the Anti-Police President.
The investigation of Ferguson found a long history of systematic racist abuse of the citizens by the Republican government and by the police force of that municipality.
3. The venues in which we find the violence is wholly owned and operated by Liberals, Progressives, Democrats.
No, Ferguson was run by Republicans, who were shown to be racist, and many of whom quickly resigned as the truth came out.
When it's obvious that there is a lone liberal activist OR The Democrat Party at the root of all the bad shit that's happening it suddenly is politically incorrect to give them the credit they deserve?
Would that not be "unfair"?
You can't name one.
The spark for the riots are the semi-questionable suspect killings. The powder is the years of racism.
You've yet to name the Democrats who have incited the violence.
Of course I have, NYLiar.
No, you haven't.
You have to state the incitement, and then state the violence, and then show a cause and effect relationship, beyond a reasonable doubt,
between the former and the latter.
You have done no such thing. Just because your retarded fans give you cheers does not mean you've proven anything. Making retards happy is admirable,
but it's not what wins a debate.
6. I live in a city that has the finest police force in the nation...perhaps in the world. Safety of our citizens is a direct result of their work. Yet Democrats work to undermine same.
The anti-police message comes from many of Democrat elites.
a. "Clinton says patterns of violence against black men are ‘unmistakable and undeniable’ and calls for police officers across the country to wear body cameras." Hillary Clinton America must confront hard truths about race and justice US news The Guardian
b. Here is the message that Speaker Pelosi delivered, encouraging the sort of activity seen in places like Ferguson and Baltimore.....
Back in 2006:
And at a Berkeley Graduation ceremony:
“You here at Berkeley are already disruptors in many ways,” she said.
“Being called a disruptor, in my view, is a very high compliment.” Nancy Pelosi delivers commencement address to Class of 2014 The Daily Californian
7. Do these Liberals want an end to the riots......or the continuation?
Here.....you be the judge:
"Maryland Governor Says Obama Urged Him to Exercise 'Due Restraint'
Maryland Governor Says Obama Urged Him to Exercise Due Restraint CNS News
You think exercising due restraint is a bad thing?
You would prefer 'undue' action? Do you know the difference between the words 'due' and 'undue'?
The same code words for what former NYC Mayor Dinkins said during the Crown Heights riots...."let them vent."
Democrats have no consideration for honest, hard working citizens......it's riots, taxes, vituperation, and 'you didn't build that.'
Anyone just see this mayors press conference?
she's up acting all indignant and pissed over Assumptions being made about HER
While she stands in front of a sign that says: NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE
Anyone just see this mayors press conference?
she's up acting all indignant and pissed over Assumptions being made about HER
While she stands in front of a sign that says: NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE
Why should there be peace in the face of gross injustices being committed every day by the people sworn to protect us?
The spark for the riots are the semi-questionable suspect killings. The powder is the years of racism.
9. There is a solution, and it comes from Chloe Valdary, a student at the University of New Orleans,...
" Many people believed that the election of a black President would advance America to a new era of racial harmony.
That belief proved to be mistaken.
.... many people feel that they have to treat blacks with kid gloves. They think this is noble... enlightened... progressive. It's not. It's demeaning and condescending. In fact, it's racist.
Rioting and looting are acceptable forms of behavior? Why? Because the rioters and looters have no other options? Really? In free, democratic America, you have no other options? Does this apply to all ethnic groups? Hispanics? Southeast Asians? Pacific Islanders? Of course not.
.... the enlightened ones -- are ready with a pre-packaged list of excuses when blacks riot and loot. Worse, when it comes to judging black behavior, even facts don't matter. All that matters is the skin color of the teenager and the skin color of the cop.
Anyone, whether white or any other color, who excuses blacks for bad behavior just because they are black obviously doesn't consider blacks their equal. Rather, they view blacks, in effect, as children who are unable to adhere to the standards to which every other group is held. Think carefully about that. The only difference between this view and that of white supremacists is that white supremacists are honest and open: in their view blacks are inferior to whites. Period.
But those who condescend to blacks cloak themselves in self-righteousness. So, somehow that makes it okay. The bad behavior happens -- a riot in Ferguson -- and they nod knowingly: "They couldn't take it anymore. Who can blame them?" I'll take the white supremacist any day.
.... as a black human being, I want to be -- I must be --judged by the same standards as everybody else...
Treat blacks equally. Always. In every way. Not differently. Not better. Not worse. Not like we're demons. Not like we're angels."
9. There is a solution, and it comes from Chloe Valdary, a student at the University of New Orleans,...
" Many people believed that the election of a black President would advance America to a new era of racial harmony.
That belief proved to be mistaken.
.... many people feel that they have to treat blacks with kid gloves. They think this is noble... enlightened... progressive. It's not. It's demeaning and condescending. In fact, it's racist.
Rioting and looting are acceptable forms of behavior? Why? Because the rioters and looters have no other options? Really? In free, democratic America, you have no other options? Does this apply to all ethnic groups? Hispanics? Southeast Asians? Pacific Islanders? Of course not.
.... the enlightened ones -- are ready with a pre-packaged list of excuses when blacks riot and loot. Worse, when it comes to judging black behavior, even facts don't matter. All that matters is the skin color of the teenager and the skin color of the cop.
Anyone, whether white or any other color, who excuses blacks for bad behavior just because they are black obviously doesn't consider blacks their equal. Rather, they view blacks, in effect, as children who are unable to adhere to the standards to which every other group is held. Think carefully about that. The only difference between this view and that of white supremacists is that white supremacists are honest and open: in their view blacks are inferior to whites. Period.
But those who condescend to blacks cloak themselves in self-righteousness. So, somehow that makes it okay. The bad behavior happens -- a riot in Ferguson -- and they nod knowingly: "They couldn't take it anymore. Who can blame them?" I'll take the white supremacist any day.
.... as a black human being, I want to be -- I must be --judged by the same standards as everybody else...
Treat blacks equally. Always. In every way. Not differently. Not better. Not worse. Not like we're demons. Not like we're angels."
I dunno PC. In any singular instance I do like to judge people on their actions. I also believe in prosecuting the rock throwers, looters and vandals that we can catch. Just like any rock throwers at Kent State deserved punished.
I disagree with your assessment of the effects of welfare.....it is an economic theory / percentage difference of opinion. Our system (thankfully) uses funds from the whole society to pay the National Guard to protect my assests from the looters. You, me, we probably have more to protect than the average looter but it protects them also.
Welfare(& unemployment et ) gives my white neighbor a softer landing when his overextended self looses his job. Saved him from defaulting on his 200k loan lol!
It also keeps crack pipe Annie from starving to death. Or Meth head Mike from needing to kidnap kids for ransome to scrape by.
Now I wish welfare was handed out in more of a "work for it" manner. CCC like and all and perhaps we can find a middle ground with that.
9. There is a solution, and it comes from Chloe Valdary, a student at the University of New Orleans,...
" Many people believed that the election of a black President would advance America to a new era of racial harmony.
That belief proved to be mistaken.
.... many people feel that they have to treat blacks with kid gloves. They think this is noble... enlightened... progressive. It's not. It's demeaning and condescending. In fact, it's racist.
Rioting and looting are acceptable forms of behavior? Why? Because the rioters and looters have no other options? Really? In free, democratic America, you have no other options? Does this apply to all ethnic groups? Hispanics? Southeast Asians? Pacific Islanders? Of course not.
.... the enlightened ones -- are ready with a pre-packaged list of excuses when blacks riot and loot. Worse, when it comes to judging black behavior, even facts don't matter. All that matters is the skin color of the teenager and the skin color of the cop.
Anyone, whether white or any other color, who excuses blacks for bad behavior just because they are black obviously doesn't consider blacks their equal. Rather, they view blacks, in effect, as children who are unable to adhere to the standards to which every other group is held. Think carefully about that. The only difference between this view and that of white supremacists is that white supremacists are honest and open: in their view blacks are inferior to whites. Period.
But those who condescend to blacks cloak themselves in self-righteousness. So, somehow that makes it okay. The bad behavior happens -- a riot in Ferguson -- and they nod knowingly: "They couldn't take it anymore. Who can blame them?" I'll take the white supremacist any day.
.... as a black human being, I want to be -- I must be --judged by the same standards as everybody else...
Treat blacks equally. Always. In every way. Not differently. Not better. Not worse. Not like we're demons. Not like we're angels."
I dunno PC. In any singular instance I do like to judge people on their actions. I also believe in prosecuting the rock throwers, looters and vandals that we can catch. Just like any rock throwers at Kent State deserved punished.
I disagree with your assessment of the effects of welfare.....it is an economic theory / percentage difference of opinion. Our system (thankfully) uses funds from the whole society to pay the National Guard to protect my assests from the looters. You, me, we probably have more to protect than the average looter but it protects them also.
Welfare(& unemployment et ) gives my white neighbor a softer landing when his overextended self looses his job. Saved him from defaulting on his 200k loan lol!
It also keeps crack pipe Annie from starving to death. Or Meth head Mike from needing to kidnap kids for ransome to scrape by.
Now I wish welfare was handed out in more of a "work for it" manner. CCC like and all and perhaps we can find a middle ground with that.
1. "I disagree with your assessment of the effects of welfare..."
Simple to explain....you're an example of the 'low information voter' that keeps Democrats in power.
My post is based on fact.
. Proof? Sure. The government conducted a study, 1971-1978 known as the Seattle-Denver Income Maintenance Experiment, or SIME-DIME, in which low income families were give a guaranteed income, a welfare package with everything liberal policy makers could hope for. Result: for every dollar of extra welfare given, low income recipients reduced their labor by 80 cents. http://www.policyarchive.org/handle/10207/bitstreams/12794.pdf
a. Further results: dissolution of families:
“This conclusion was unambiguously unfavorable to advocates of a negative income tax that would cover married couples, for two important reasons. First, increased marital breakups among the poor would increase the numbers on welfare and the amount of transfer payments, principally because the separated wife and children would receive higher transfer payments.
Second, marital dissolutions and the usual accompanying absence of
fathers from households with children are generally considered unfavorable outcomes regardless of whether or not the welfare rolls increase.” http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/conf/conf30/conf30c.pdf
b. “When families received guaranteed income at 90% of the poverty level, there was a 43% increase in black family dissolution and a 63% increase in white family dissolution. At 125% of the poverty levels, dissolutions were 75% and 40%.” Robert B. Carleson, “Government Is The Problem,” p. 57.
2. Here's the result of your senseless policies:
"This week, the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]
Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal.
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America
You, and every other simpleton who supports Liberals/Democrats are responsible for the outcomes you decry.
There was race protests and riots before welfare..Nice try though.........The spark for the riots are the semi-questionable suspect killings. The powder is the years of racism.
Let's outline the real provenance so no one will imagine that a fool like you actually understands what has happened.
Liberal welfare policies have led to this moment, these sorts of events.
- ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.
- Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence.
"America's Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb," by Peter Ferrara, chapter five
