Context for Black Lives Matter

[Moot]

Why would they have supported anyone? It has nothing to do with the NRA??? Just because people in a situation are armed does not mean the NRA has anything to do with it... DUH.

The NRA doesn't seem to have a problem defending the gun rights of the mentally ill, felons or terrorists. So how come they won't defend the gun rights of black's?

So they now have to say something even though no one's rights were violated? Like in Dallas? No protesters who open carried were shot; nor did open carrying protesters shoot anyone. Police are now less likely to harass or arrest peaceful open carriers. As for Castile The man is dead, what do you want the NRA to say Moot? When the police say don't move... don't???

Sorry your argument is as silly as those who were upset.

Putting up a photo of a black guy open carrying as the only suspect was like putting a bounty on his head. The notion that the police are less likely to harass or arrest peaceful open carriers is unfounded and unsupported by the evidence.

Sorry but your argument is even sillier than mine.

 

[bubbabgone]

That's all you took from that? Wow.

I didn't want you to go and repeat something that you now know isn't accurate.
I'm here for ya, BD.

 

[Black Dog]

The NRA doesn't seem to have a problem defending the gun rights of the mentally ill, felons or terrorists. So how come they won't defend the gun rights of black's?

Hmmmm I wonder why LAWS BEING talkend about or passed for GUN CONTROL would interest them? Hmmmm?

Putting up a photo of a black guy open carrying as the only suspect was like putting a bounty on his head. The notion that the police are less likely to harass or arrest peaceful open carriers is unfounded and unsupported by the evidence.

Sorry but your argument is even sillier than mine.

OK it appears the stupidity of your position is just to great to overcome.

 

[Black Dog]

I didn't want you to go and repeat something that you now know isn't accurate.
I'm here for ya, BD.

It was inaccurate but that was not the point. You missed that of course. But no one expects excellence from a turd.

 

[Patrickt]

it sounds like your clearly both extremely bias against Black Lives Matter

I do. I also have a bias against the Mafia, most unions, anarchists, PETA, and the Democrat Party.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Why are you now writing "the US" Gimmesometruth? I really liked it when you wrote, in earlier posts in this thread, "Murica" which I thought gave a much better picture of your mind set.

The topic of the thread in not my us of my mother tongue or the slang within it...or my mindset.

 

[Sweden]

The topic of the thread in not my us of my mother tongue or the slang within it...or my mindset.

That's true. But some insight into your mind-set is useful when trying to understand your posts. 'Murica - sounds pretty negative to me, do you intend it that way?

 

[bubbabgone]

It was inaccurate but that was not the point. You missed that of course. But no one expects excellence from a turd.

You're such a meanie.

 

[bluesmoke]

Under Obama, Blacks Are Worse Off -- Far Worse - Larry Elder

Larry Elder sites some stats...but they are all common..well known realities.

Another fact is that poverty for all races and ethnicities has been rising since Bush2 took office and falling since about 2010 - 2011:

Who is poor? | Institute for Research on Poverty | University of Wisconsin?Madison and Poverty Rate by Race/Ethnicity | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

That tells me over the Obama years poverty is being lowered. If you look, you'll see that black poverty is being lowered also. The problem, INO, is that the economic system is geared toward those with the most. Those with the least suffer the most. As you can see by the stats, white poverty is improving at a greater rate than blacks. That's because blacks had the least to begin with, and regardless of their color, under our present economic system, those with the least gain the least. You didn't dig enough for the right figures to represent the truth of the matter. Only enough to demean others.

 

[Moot]

Hmmmm I wonder why LAWS BEING talkend about or passed for GUN CONTROL would interest them? Hmmmm?



OK it appears the stupidity of your position is just to great to overcome.

Visa versa, darlin.

 

[Black Dog]

Visa versa, darlin.

Not really. You are however free to your opinion no matter how wrong.

 

[VanceMack]

Another fact is that poverty for all races and ethnicities has been rising since Bush2 took office and falling since about 2010 - 2011:

Who is poor? | Institute for Research on Poverty | University of Wisconsin?Madison and Poverty Rate by Race/Ethnicity | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

That tells me over the Obama years poverty is being lowered. If you look, you'll see that black poverty is being lowered also. The problem, INO, is that the economic system is geared toward those with the most. Those with the least suffer the most. As you can see by the stats, white poverty is improving at a greater rate than blacks. That's because blacks had the least to begin with, and regardless of their color, under our present economic system, those with the least gain the least. You didn't dig enough for the right figures to represent the truth of the matter. Only enough to demean others.

The poverty rate for all blacks and Hispanics remained near 30 percent during the 1980s and mid-1990s. Thereafter it began to fall. In 2000, the rate for blacks dropped to 22.1 percent and for Hispanics to 21.2 percent—the lowest rate for both groups since the United States began measuring poverty. By 2010, however, the poverty rate for both groups had risen to around 26 percent.

I'm not demeaning others...I'm presenting truth.

 

[bluesmoke]

The poverty rate for all blacks and Hispanics remained near 30 percent during the 1980s and mid-1990s. Thereafter it began to fall. In 2000, the rate for blacks dropped to 22.1 percent and for Hispanics to 21.2 percent—the lowest rate for both groups since the United States began measuring poverty. By 2010, however, the poverty rate for both groups had risen to around 26 percent.

I'm not demeaning others...I'm presenting truth.

You repeated what I just said, but what you didn't say to begin with. You failed to point out was that the poverty level was it's best after many years until Bush took over. Then it rose and continued to rise during the Bush2 begat recession until it has been falling under Obama since his administration began to turn things around. You made it sound, and you did, like it was just the opposite. You are attempting to use facts to demean others, that's the truth.

 

[VanceMack]

You repeated what I just said, but what you didn't say to begin with. You failed to point out was that the poverty level was it's best after many years until Bush took over. Then it rose and continued to rise during the Bush2 begat recession until it has been falling under Obama since his administration began to turn things around. You made it sound, and you did, like it was just the opposite. You are attempting to use facts to demean others, that's the truth.

Perhaps I didnt mention Bush (or Obama) because I'm not really interested in making this a moronic partisan rant. You arent REALLY foolish enough to think parties are relevant here are you?



Pay particular attention to the speech beginning at 27:00. That was 60 years ago. You arent foolish enough to believe anything has changed, are you?

I'm not a republican. Ideologically I am a Kennedy Democrat. I am by registration a libertarian. Parties dont matter to me.

 

[bluesmoke]

Perhaps I didnt mention Bush (or Obama) because I'm not really interested in making this a moronic partisan rant. You arent REALLY foolish enough to think parties are relevant here are you?



Pay particular attention to the speech beginning at 27:00. That was 60 years ago. You arent foolish enough to believe anything has changed, are you?

I'm not a republican. Ideologically I am a Kennedy Democrat. I am by registration a libertarian. Parties dont matter to me.

Thank you for not decaring your polictical self.

Wow. I really don't know what you're talking about. Can you help me?

 

[Patrickt]

this video was meant for people who aren't familiar with BLM, not for people who know every little detail. She didn't call for anyone to be indicted (or anything else for that matter) she simply stated that there was no indictment.

It is easier to mislead people with shallow propaganda when they no nothing, isn't it. When you say, "There was no indictment" that implies there should have been. That's like saying, "BLM takes no issue with young blacks killed by other young blacks." While that's true it implies they don't care which I doubt is the case.

But, it's true, people who know nothing are a lot easier to fool.