Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by MastaG8r, Jul 19, 2013.
Making its rounds on facebook:
If they were teens they must be considered children, therefore their culpability has to be diminished.
If Obama singlehandedly saved a bus full of preschoolers from a fire on the roadway it wouldn't matter. This board would still be bashing him and half of his haters would say it was "staged".
Trying to process that Obama isn't the Great Satan for many on here is like a christian trying to process the idea that God doesn't exist. It would so shake the core and fundamental basis of a persons self-identification that it couldn't be done. Its easier to deny and lash out than even consider such a vile thought!
I think everybody on here would be applauding PresBo if he single-handedly saved a burning school bus full of pre-schoolers.
Using your hyperbole example to illustrate a point, however, the more accurate and quite fair question being raised here, seems to be whether he would bother to stop if they weren't African-American pre-schoolers.
The differing, selective aspect of whatever it is he thinks he is doing with respect to racial relations, is what is troubling.
Aaaaahhh, but here is the rub. He was not presented to us as the great satan, but as someone who could heal the Earth. He is neither, just a one term senator that probably should never, ever have been elected president.
His self identification is all well and good. He could have been Trayvon. He still could be trayvon if he wants. All he has to do is find some guy with a gun and try to beat him up. See what happens. Plenty of those characters in DC.
Wow. Great stuff.
Obama would use those dead kids for political reasons to pass some horse chit bill.
That's one view. But I say that if they are teens then there is no way on Earth they can ever be rehabilitated and they should be put to death. Anyone that shoots a defenseless baby should face Capital punishment like they do for killing a cop.
Glad you too recognize his focus, and delivery, is way off.
Wasn't his class load about 1 class a week as an ADJUNCT professor?
So, you know, I have been so busy, but I had to come back and make time for this:
But I did want to just talk a little bit about context and how people have responded to it and how people are feeling. You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago. And when you think about why, in the African- American community at least, there’s a lot of pain around what happened here, I think it’s important to recognize that the African- American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that -- that doesn’t go away.
There are very few African-American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.
And there are very few African-American men who haven’t had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me, at least before I was a senator. There are very few African-Americans who haven’t had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often.
And you know, I don’t want to exaggerate this, but those sets of experiences inform how the African-American community interprets what happened one night in Florida. And it’s inescapable for people to bring those experiences to bear.
The African-American community is also knowledgeable that there is a history of racial disparities in the application of our criminal laws, everything from the death penalty to enforcement of our drug laws. And that ends up having an impact in terms of how people interpret the case.
Now, this isn’t to say that the African-American community is naive about the fact that African-American young men are disproportionately involved in the criminal justice system, that they are disproportionately both victims and perpetrators of violence. It’s not to make excuses for that fact, although black folks do interpret the reasons for that in a historical context.
We understand that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods around the country is born out of a very violent past in this country, and that the poverty and dysfunction that we see in those communities can be traced to a very difficult history." ---Obama
I have to admit, I had such a problem with this I still can't get past it. First, we all know George Zimmerman is a wanna be police officer with an inordinate amount of calls, so this whole it was obviously profiling argument that has been on every talk show is the biggest example of assume, you make an ass out of you and me. Is there any person who really thinks that some kid, white, hispanic or asian who was new to neighborhood wouldn't have gotten the same treatment by Zimmerman? He did not, IMHO, racially profile Trayvon. I don't know why this is treated as a given. Even his defenders try to defend his right to use the probability of a black committing a crime to defend this action. Where is the proof that he followed Trayvon cause he was "black"?
So now to Obama. I know my life's experience's are ancedotal, but you know when I was in college, with a ponytail, baggie pants and a smoke hanging out my mouth, women of all colors, gripped their purses tighter. When this white guy was on Rodeo Drive, some chick irritated me so I told her, to have a nice day b*tch, and people who had pressed the floor on the elevator were getting off at the next stop "cause I was so scary". I have seen my wife lock her car doors for more homeless white guys guys who say they will work for food but never seem to have a job. You don't think that old ladies crossed the street to avoid a bunch of white "greasers" like pony boy back in the day?
What I am so upset about is this, basic assumption that people are reacting to a black person's pigmentation and no one calls them put on this. It is like it is ok to assume that a white person is racist. Their is no option for the person looked sketchy due to their attire, the look on their face or maybe a simple odor in the case of the homeless. Is there racism in America? Of course, but if we are ok with assuming it is there and acting like it is there based on assumptions then we have to wonder how racism is ever going to end.
I mean isn't it racially profiling to assume, I the white guy is racist cause I crossed the street when really I am just a jay walker trying to get to the store across the street? Or the black homeless guy that thinks my wife is racist for locking her car door when really she is just heartless and hates homeless people.
So, I mean how can you defend a president who just basically confirmed that it is ok for black people to interpret actions as racism rather than demand we treat every person as an individual and assume the best in people rather than the worst. This is the part that gets me.
Then he goes on to say, that although blacks know they have more crime in their neighborhoods, they look at it in a historical context and that too, means it is the fault of white America for keeping the black man down. At least that is how I interpreted his statement.
There was no call to America to assume the best in each other, to say that each one of us earthlings, need to accept responsibility for our own actions and trying to blame history and circumstances for our problems, but rather face our problems and concentrate on the best ways to overcome them. But, know that would be presidential.
And, our misinformed president of course brings up SYG when it in no way shape or form played a role in this case. This was an old fashioned case of self defense. Again creating division and getting his facts wrong.
But, hey, sure he made a good point, a lot of African Americans think most white people are racist. Makes you wonder who the racist is? We are individuals. He shouldn't make a statement for black America. Nor should I be able to make an all encompassing statement for white America. Stereotyping is wrong, no matter who does it.
You know I told the story a long time ago on here, when i first went to visit my house during construction, the neighbor came out and asked me what the hell I was doing there. Pretty belligerently too. I stuck my hand out, said just looking over my purchase. Red faced he sad sorry, he just told the builder he would keep an eye out since at the time construction thefts were on the rise. I told him I appreciated it. Kind of neighbor I wanted.
In Texas, drunk driver almost ran into me with both my nieces in the car. I chased his *ss for 30+ minutes on country roads until they got him pulled over. Guess what? The 911 operator told me not to follow too. I said they want me to stop following pull him over. You don't almost hit my nieces and get away. I had to call back to 911 like 3 times and crossed over counties. When I pulled over and flashed my lights a 100 yards back not to spook the cop, he said the guy fell down getting out of his car. But the people who think Zimmerman was wrong, would probably blame me if while I was following that guy he got in a wreck and killed someone. They would blame me for following him and scaring him, rather than blaming the drunk guy for being behind the wheel.
All I hear is innocent Trayvon, innocent Trayvon. Innocent Trayvon?? Who the hell hit Zimmerman if it wasn't Trayvon?
Look there is a chance that Zimmerman accosted Trayvon and Trayvon was only defending himself, but there is no evidence to that fact, so how you can say"Inncoent Trayvon" without any chance that he is just a punk who brought his fists to a gun fight is beyond me.
In Gibbs vs. State, found at 789 So.2d 443 (2001), the initial aggressor was defined as the person who “uses force or threatens to use force.” In that ruling, the court made clear, the aggressor is not someone who merely follows someone and/or someone who confronts someone and even hurls racial epithets at them. One’s actions have to be physical in nature to legally be deemed the aggressor. In the Zimmerman case, there was not sufficient credible evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman confronted Trayvon, as defined under the law. Again, he may have had his gun out when he initially confronted Trayvon and/or even initially used violence, however, that wasn’t proven.
This following, being a creepy cracker, none of it would have justified Trayvon to hit Zimmerman.
We have the right to come up to someone, a fellow earthling and say WTF you doing? That does not give one a right to hit a person.
Well, it had been a while just thought I would let everyone know I think our President set back race relations rather than helped them. You can't assume racism in an action, you have to assume the best or we are going to never be whole as a nation.
most of the problems that exist in the black community is their own fault- the breakdown of the family unit-over 70% of all births in the black community are by unwed Mothers- the love of the gangsta rap movement- the drop out rate the abortion rate the unemployment rate, the black on black crime rate all are related to the total breakdown of the family unit in the black community
if prezBO had the guts and were a true leader he would demand they get their chit together and quit playing the victim mantra- get an education , accept responsibility and make something of their lives- but in stead he just pushed the it is someone elses fault for their failures
Anyone else agree that GZ's profiling hierarchy had gender and clothing style prior to race?
If TM was a female or dressed in an Oxford shirt, khakis, and tasseled loafers GZ wouldn't have made the police call.
I think he would have called on a female or a person in an Oxford. The guy had made 40 911 calls if memory serves? I think he would have called on anyone he didn't recognize which would include the kid who moved in 2 weeks prior.