Prosecutors and the defense will be offering closing arguments on Derek Chauvin's role in George Floyd's death. Chauvin was charged with second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter charges, and he denied a quilt.
Both sides will rest their case, and a jury will then be left with the decision of innocents or guilt. This is our system of justice, innocent until found guilty by a jury of peers. Not found guilty due to emotions, but a verdict that is culminated from facts.
Enter Maxine Waters -- Maxine Moore Waters is an American politician serving as the U.S. Representative for California's 43rd congressional district since 1991. Maxine has a long history of inappropriate statements.
Congresswoman Waters appears to see things a bit differently in regard to innocent until found guilty. She simply has stepped up over the weekend in a crowd of protesters and used inflammatory words that COULD be understood as a message to that crowd to get out and fight, get confrontational if the verdict that is unacceptable to them. In my opinion, Due to individual perception, her words could be comprehended differently by a given individual.
The jury has listened to both sides of the case. It is their responsibility ultimately to be responsible and weigh the evidence and hand down a verdict on the police officer that is accused of Killing George Floyd while attempting to arrest him. In my view, in that crowd of protesters Waters handed down her own brand of justice, street justice. Waters type of justice appears to be asking to condemn without a trial, and just "fight", and get confrontational" if you don't get the outcome you desire... confrontational. (adjective tending - to deal with situations in an aggressive way; hostile or argumentative.)
Here is a source to provide her words, from her mouth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn1br0MQFG4
Waters also stated --- MSN reports
'I am not happy that we have talked about police reform for so long,'
'We're looking for a guilty verdict,' she added in regards to the Derek Chauvin trial. 'If we don't, we cannot go away.' 'We gotta stay on the street,' Waters was recorded saying, adding that protesters needed 'to get more confrontational' and they should ignore the curfew in place https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/maxin … r-BB1fLU3B
Should this congresswoman be expelled from her position as some in Washington are now demanding?
Should her words of incitement make her accountable for any riots, looting, or deaths that could occur if Chauvin is found innocent?
Congressmen and women are hired to represent American citizens. Is Waters suitable to represent American citizens?
Could her form of politicking rhetoric be dangerous and stir racial tension?
Let's see... she voted for impeachment, didn't she, for Trump asking people to peacefully talk to their legislators but calling it incitement to riot? And now she is inciting to riot herself. "We've got to stay in the street". "We've got to fight!". We've got to become more confrontational!".
SOP for Democrats, isn't it? "Do as I say, not as I do, for you are not allowed to do or say what I am."
There is always great hypocrisy evident in many on the left. It's never so clear as in this example IMO. We are in for a long violent summer with this kind of rhetoric on display.
Yes, I fully expect the riots to start up again, at least in the predominately liberal cities. Glad I don't live in one.
I agree, living in Michigan a swing state, Detroit would be about the only place that protesters could be a problem. However, Detroit has a wonderful chief of police that pretty much the population of the entire state appreciates his no-nonsense rule by law approach to protest. No politics with Chief Craig, he respects the people that hired him wishes for law and order.
"Yes, I fully expect the riots to start up again, at least in the predominately liberal cities. Glad I don't live in one."
Yes, and most progressive minded cities are glad you don't live there.
For you, Idaho is best.
Damned country bumpkin . . .;-0
If progressive cities had more even tempered citizens, who don't support mob violence and lynch mob justice, it might be a good thing.
But I can see why those who refuse to call out violence, without qualifying it with a
'but I understand the mindset for the violence' would hope those types lived elsewhere.
You say it as if it is an insult.
Many are escaping to places like Idaho, Texas and Florida, they don't want anything to do with the "progressive" agendas sweeping through states like CA, NY, OR, WA.
As for these so called liberal cities, most cities have Democrat mayors, by the way. Most large urban areas lean Democrat, but where are the jobs found and where is the foundation of the American economy, is it Petticoat Junction?
I considered the statement that I responded to an insult, did you note that?
We are working to flip Texas and Florida and in a matter of time we will, Idaho is hopeless.
As I often say to those I speak to, when Florida flips to a truly Blue state, America will have finally become a nation people are fleeing from rather than fleeing to.
The growing disrepair and dysfunctionality of the States on the West Coast is a sign of the disease that will spread across the nation, where the homeless have overrun the streets, where police will no longer respond and personal protection will be left to individuals to fend for themselves, where what we consider common courtesies today are cast aside for abusive behaviors.
Hopefully Red blood fleeing States like NY and CA keep States like FL healthy a while longer, I know that is expecting a lot from people... to have learned their lessons and comprehend why they had to flee from CA & NY in the first place, making sure they don't vote those same mistakes into office all over again.
I wouldn't be so pessimistic about people fleeing the country, Ken.
They said the same thing about Obama after he was elected.
I don't see the West Coast falling apart, California may not be growing as fast because of the cost of living, etc. but California, Oregon and Washington are not going anywhere and we may well add Arizona to the mix.
As for your last paragraph, the newcomers to Texas have enough crazy leftist ideas to unTexas Texas, that will be akin to the "second coming".
Sharlee: I watched your video and it is interesting that the secret service agent used the word "trumped" several times in the same sentence. And it was also interesting that fox news in it's propaganda style, selects a region in L.A. and says that shooting and violence is up 100%. Therefore if there was one shooting on one day and a second one the next day, is it fair to say shooting was up 100%. Fox news listeners do not use critical thinking. They just run with whatever is said. That's what their broadcasts are designed to do.
To answer your questions I'm going to use one answer for all your questions. Should Trump been impeached for inciting the riots at the Capitol and causing the death of several people and the destruction of public property? What goes around comes around.
Critical thinking does not produce the concept that 1 is twice as great as 1.
Hi Mike, The only reason I used the video from Fox was that this morning I could not find another online video where her inflammatory words were used, and not cut away. So, I needed to use Fox news report to present the inflammatory words most news Outlets have seemed (as of this morning) cutaway. I certainly did not want to present this thread without a video or a proper quote. I prefer to present facts whenever possible, In this case, Fox made that possible. MSN also had an article that quoted Waters's statements that I have added to the thread.
Her words show disrespect for our justice system, inferring if Chauvin was not found guilty it would be an unjust verdict. . Yes, to your point as so many have come to feel Trump did on Jan 6th.
I do not support Maxine Waters statements as shown on the news cast. They are provocative and irresponsible from a member of the House of Representatives.
As to whether she should be removed? What came from the statements and controversy from Rep. Greene? The insurrection on last Jan 6th found a Republican Senator or two intimately involved. What about removing them?
I think Green should be right behind Waters when escorted out. her antics are inexcusable IMO. It is up to the DOJ to go after anyone they feel had a part in the attack on the Capitol. Hopefully, we see the new DA do his job.
It is good as long as we all acknowledge that these outrages come from the abrasive ends of both political parties.
Yes it is. But not so good when we demand that one of the opposing party be "ousted" before considering one of our own.
Poor behavior is poor behavior and should not be tolerated whatever the party affiliation.
Shrarlee: If I put myself in the place of these black people who are protesting, I believe this is not just about George Floyd. This has been a long time coming it's about how black people are treated by the police and how they get put on administrative leave and take for ever to bring a verdict, usually of not guilty.
Maxine Waters is wrong for the words she has chosen. However, if I put myself in her place I can understand where she is coming from.
Mothers have to have "the talk" with their sons so that they don't make the cops angry and comply with their every command. Because if they don't, the cops can elevate the use of force until it becomes lethal as it has in so many cases.
I understand they have a dangerous job, but it is just as dangerous when a black person gets stopped for a minor violation and the scenario escalates to violence on the part of the officer.
In my opinion, that's what these protest are about. When white people quote the Black Lives Matter slogan, they say, "All lives matter." That may be true, but really what black people are saying is Black Lives Matter as Much as White Lives Matter. All it takes is a little empathy to put yourself in their place and to understand what they are protesting about.
The question is why it escalates to violence on the part of the cop. I have a really hard time believing that a "suspect" quietly following orders and not arguing or especially fighting back, is simply shot because they are black.
We've seen a string of cop shootings wherein (I think) every single one was escalated by the suspect, not the cop. Why that is ignored every time, just as it was in this case, is beyond me. Except that the BLM wants cops removed from the country...
Wilderness: It is a tense situation for both sides. I don't care how well the cops are trained. If they get in tense situations they become nervous and stressed and are not thinking clearly and that applies to the suspect as well. But the cop is allowed to escalate the use of force based on his perception of the situation, where the suspect is not allowed to do the same.
That's why a police officer can shoot and kill someone when they think they are firing their taser when they have been trained not to do that. That's why a suspect can try to open a glove compartment to get his registration and nervous cop will shoot him because he told him to keep his hands on the steering wheel and he thought he was going for his gun. Once the shot is fired, it can't be called back, but dead men don't talk either.
Read my article. It has many case studies of the situation between officers and suspects.
https://discover.hubpages.com/politics/ … untability
I did read your article. A long list of people shot by cops, but without any background, without the rest of the story. Just someone got shot without any indication of the "why".
And that's a big part of the problem - we continually castigate cops for doing their job (protecting the public and themselves) without ever looking at the rest of the story. Your example of going to the glove box is a good one: the suspect told what to do and instead goes for a gun hidden in the glove box. Whereupon he's shot and we scream at the cop for not allowing him to get that gun and kill the cop.
Follow instructions, don't fight, and you won't be shot. It's really pretty simple.
It is as simple as just do not get physical with a police officer or pull a weapon.
It baffles me how some can find no real concern for the police officer doing his job. A public service that puts itself out there to keep law and order, and keep the general population safe. I find this a truly disturbing problem. When one can show total concern for someone that is becoming violent with a police officer, and little to no concern for the officer safety. IMO this kind of thinking is odd, shows little common sense.
Wilderness and Sharlee: I had an ex-relative that was an LAPD cop. He was one of the most sadistic people I know. I had to leave his house when he started talking about how he and his partner loved to corner black men in an alley and shoot them in the stomach and watch the blood flow out as they put their hands on their stomach to stop the bleeding. He showed us how they use a night stick to stick between women's legs to move them around and control them. He talked about how they would take a drunk person and slam their head through the headliner and break their teeth as they put them into their squad car.
You would think the LAPD would screen for this type of sadistic person, but I think that is what they are looking for. There are good cops and there are bad cops. Just like there are good people and bad people. But I wonder how many of them get real training and screening to act in the best interest of the situation or how many of them are just signed off by someone on the force and not really taking the training. And further, how many of the trainers are even qualified to train.
All policies and procedures are done internally at the municipality level. There are no national standards for uniform police procedures. It's a form of quality control done by peer level people, not disinterested third parties.
In the LA area, they started having high-speed chases. When the officers finally brought the suspect under control, they would pull them out of the car and beat the crap out of them because their adrenalin was so pumped up. They were sent to anger management classes and now that doesn't happen any more. They have learned how to control the anger. Now it is interesting to see how they control the situation and get the proper outcome without endangering others.
There is zero doubt that we have some bad cops out there. None at all.
But the answer is not to get rid of police, and it isn't to hamstring police to the point that we lose even more police to violence from criminals. The anger management training you mention is a viable solution...until it turns into "never hurt a criminal that is intent on hurting you or others". Which is what we see being called for and where we are heading.
It would be unrealistic to even think all police officers are the same. You have pointed out someone that clearly does not belong in police work or any form of work that gives him the authority to hurt another. Sounds like a person with a true psychological problem. However, I would still trust the majority of police officers are good cops.
It would seem an officer that shoots people for fun would not fall through the cracks due to police reports., and showing an absorbent number of deaths or injuries he was involved with.
As I said we need reform, in training and evaluating a person before they are given a job in law enforcement. Anyone that shows the need for anger management should be fired. Just my view.
Mike, I could not put myself in a black person's shoes, just due to not having the same experiences or individual ideologies. I don't feel that Maxine Waters is considering what is the best way to support and help black people. She does not live in the areas that will sustain damage, and perhaps lose their businesses or suffer the astronomic insurance costs to do business in these riot-strewn neighborhoods. Not sure why blacks don't note that these type of representatives only hurt their cause, and actually keep them further marginalized due to these antisocial beliefs.
As I stated it is obvious we need to overhaul police training. This would certainly work to help the situation. However, if someone is arrested chooses to fight with an officer, or is visibly holding a weapon with intent to do harm, I don't want to see police hampered. As I pointed out 45 police were killed by a gunshot last year while doing their job. I don't at all believe it is dangerous for a black person to be stopped for a traffic violation unless they began to physically fight with the officer or pull a weapon. I have proven by last year's stats 45 officers killed, many while stopping a person for a traffic violation. n my view it is illogical to think officers get up in the morning with a desire to kill... Just saying
I would also think most black parents do have that talk with their children, as do white moms and dads. -- respect the police, and cooperate.
It would seem you ask for empathy from the police,
perhaps we need empathy for the majority of our police officers that are now demonized while taking a chance of being killed due to fearing if they use force to arrest a person that fights or shows a weapon, it will be them that will be deemed a criminal.
I have little empathy for lawbreakers that get physical with police, that the majority of the latest cases of those killed by officers had long violent rap sheets. This new ideology is a topsy turvy way of looking at the problem. Just not willing to get on that bandwagon.
To be honest, I have no respect for the BLM organization. If they cared about black people they would be considering the black on black crime, and help get to the root of what causes black on black crime. They support violence any form of crime. They don't need protests they need to look into the problems of the black race... Poor education, poor family structure, and poor understanding of what America has to offer them if they proceed down the right paths.
BLM has done nothing but pit black against white... They have put blacks back 50 years. In my own circle of friends, I see racism popping up its ugly head with newfound opinions that surprise me. We are headed for trouble. And in the end, it is because of people like Waters and her politicking rhetoric. walking over black people to promote herself.
Yep, the extremes of one party don't cancel the extremes of the other. I think Water's statements were wrong, but the Republican "extremes" have been just as wrong in their statements.
The judge in Derek Chauvin's trial says Rep. Maxine Waters' comments may be grounds for an appeal...
"CNN)The judge overseeing former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin's trial in the death of George Floyd said Monday that Rep. Maxine Waters' comments could be grounds for appealing a verdict in the trial.
"I'll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned," Judge Peter Cahill told defense attorney Eric Nelson on Monday." https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/19/politics … index.html
OMG! I guess Maxine should have kept her two cents to herself.
I have ceased to be amazed at the ignorance of the left. She should be removed from office. She has no regard for justice. She's trying to fire up a lynch mob.
I agree, I think her words will fire up not only black citizens but also citizens who respect our laws, and court system. She has a history of making inflammatory statements such as the one she made over the weekend. Perhaps her conduct should be considered disruptive, and she should be requested to step away from her position or be expelled by a two-thirds vote of her peers.
LTL: I watched Maxine Waters put down Jim Jordan while he was questioning Dr. Fauci about when can we go back to having our freedoms restored. He was way over his allotted time and badgering Dr. Fauci. She told him to shut up and that he was over his time. Jim Jordan did shut up. I think she was totally justified in doing so. Jim Jordan is a bully and she defended Dr. Fauci.
At this juncture, no one can accurately predict when the virus will be over and our totally freedoms can be restored. We are at war with the virus and wars don't have schedules as to when they are won.
Come on, You're deflecting --- I have no problem with Waters telling Jorden to shut up, she is outspoken...It is an apparent characteristic she has, which I can take or leave. To each their own.
I do have a problem with Waters stirring up racial hatred, and disrespecting our very justice system due to an "if come". She made it clear if this officer was not found guilty, justice will not have been accomplished. This kind of rhetoric is dangerous to all of us. Our laws protect us with a system that provides all to be innocent until proven guilty. And guilt is ascertained in our courts, not by Maxine Waters.
This kind of thinking is lynch-mob thinking. Plain and simple.
Is this the kind of woman that should be in Congress? Does it say something about where we are headed as a Government?
I was appreciative to hear a comment from the White House ---
"White House press secretary Jen Psaki said President Biden believes "protests must be peaceful" in response to Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., calling for demonstrators to ramp up their actions in the event that Derek Chauvin is acquitted of murder for the death of George Floyd.
In controversial comments over the weekend, Waters said protesters in Minnesota should "stay on the street and get more active, more confrontational." When asked if Biden agrees with this, Psaki did not directly answer, but she made clear that while the president is very much in favor of protesting in general, he opposes violence."
Sharlee: I wrote this article back in June of last year, but it is even more pertinent now. I know we are not supposed to support our own articles in forums, but at the risk of being called out on this, it will save me a lot of time to argue my point. This article tries to look at both sides of racial tension with the police and black people.
https://discover.hubpages.com/politics/ … untability
Mike I will enjoy having a look at your work. I see no reason one should not use an article they wrote if on the subject or related to the subject. I will read the article and respond afterward.
Mike, I read your article, it was well written, and one can see you did a good amount of research to bring your point across the finish line. You laid out compelling proof that America has a need for better training programs for our police officers. Most important changes to dictate what is appropriate when an officer needs to use force to make an arrest. I think the majority of American's would agree we need reform in regard to the types of force protocols an officer can use to subdue someone in the line of duty.
However, have you considered that an officer's job can be dangerous, and without being able to use force can put their lives in danger? In your article, you had a list of black people that were killed by police officers while being detained, and in most cases being arrested. The sad list span incidents from 2012 to 2020.
In 2020 alone we had 45 officers across America lose their life to gunfire while performing their job. One year... Can you imagine if I offered stats that would span 2012 - 2020? So, I just hope I can impress on you that there are two sides to every story. Being a cop is a hard job, and most I venture are good people doing a very hard job. So, when we demand police reform, in my view we need to be careful these men and women have the right to defend themselves. We just have no right to ask them to protect us with a hand-tied behind their back.
https://www.odmp.org/search?cause=Gunfi … ilter=nok9
Not only the right to defend themselves, but the right to do their job. We are progressing towards a situation where if a criminal doesn't lie down and present his arms for arrest he is to be let go; no violence of any kind will be permissible against a criminal. Not a tazer, not a nightclub, not fists or hands as a criminal might be bruised.
The result is easy to see as crime has grown to the point that most offenses are not even investigated, let alone an active search for the criminal.
I was so shocked to find so many police officers died (45 in 2020) by gunshot last year. I never realized just how dangerous a policemen's job was until I researched the death toll from 2020. I would be almost afraid to research any further prior years. I can see why so many are leaving the field of law enforcement.
Nice article, Mike, statistics say that there are disparities in enforcement of the law and the application of justice between Blacks and Whites.
I can't believe that whites in certain situations do not experience police brutality. Are situations involving whites reported in the same way?
No one should want to defund the police, but I believe more care should be given to the kind of men hired. There remains a lot racial bias within American life, do these men bring their biases to the job and how does it affect their performance? All candidates should be subjected to rigid psychological batteries and screens to weed out the "Dirty Harry's", or those with subconscious resentment over anything which will be brought to the forefront in situations of stress. This Chauvin guy is a sadist brute, there can no excuse for him and 3 attending officers just standing by applying force to restrain a man leading to his death.
The problem also appears to be that whites have too much say within departments when the force primarily consists of people of color. Is this a reason why police departments are slow to embrace needed reforms in recruitment and SOP on the beat?
I respect the job and such, but I find very little excuse for use of lethal force when a suspect is unarmed. I expect the adult officer to use better judgement and discernment and not shoot a kid with a toy gun. The need for transparency is needed to foil the idea of a "blue line", everyone is held accountable for their behavior, the citizen and law officer, such being, all officer's are required to wear body cameras to protect the citizen, themselves and the tax payer from expensive law suits. I like approaches that keep everybody honest as we are all on candid camera.
As you say, resisting arrest raises the ante, it is best to cooperate now and have your day in court later.
Whatever the verdict the agitation and the riot are bound to follow. I hope I am wrong but the black invariably does not want to sit and talk but resort to violence because he feels he has been marginalized for 220 years and there is no other way. If Chauvin is acquitted there will be riots and if he is convicted again there will be celebratory riots.
I agree... I do realize many black people feel marginalized, as insignificant. I will never understand why any would want to be noted for violence, stealing, and causing injury. It would seem to be noted for violent protests would defeat the purpose, and they would be noted for all negative, antisocial actions.
Not need to worry about her words anymore. Justice has been done.
Do you really think justice has been done? Do you think only a manslaughter conviction would also have been justice, or is it justice because there was conviction on all charges?
I won't make you guess. I don't think justice was done. I think a manslaughter conviction was justified. Maybe even the 3rd-degree murder charge, but I don't agree with the 2nd degree murder conviction.
I also have a problem with the appearance of three unanimous conviction agreements in 11 hours of deliberation. But, your Justice" was done by the rules, so I can accept the verdict. I also won't argue why you think justice is done. I just disagree.
We have a justice system, it was followed to the letter. The officer was charged on three counts. He had a jury of peers, a defense. In studying the three charges it would appear the charges were justified. The prosecution well proved their case on all three charges. The defense was not the best and lacked the ability to offer doubt to the jury that all three crimes were not justified.
IMO our justice system is one of the best or as good as a justice system can be. It has flaws, but in the long run, it works much of the time. Could we improve on it? Yes, always room for improvement.
We have a man dead who has been labeled a martyr. Now we've offered up the sacrificial lamb.
LTL: Who labeled him a martyr and who sacrificed him?
Pelosi stated he sacrificed his life. That's the definition of martyr. I have no idea what the rest of your question is about. Sounds like you were still referencing Floyd. Chavin was the sacrifice. Guilty, or not, guilty was the only verdict that would spare the area more violence.
Yesterday Nancy Pelosi thanked George Floyd and said these words -- "Thank you George Floyd for giving your life for justice..." In my view, those words sound very much like she labeled him a martyr.
Biden also put out a statement --- You be the judge
"Well, I told her this afternoon, “Daddy did change the world.” Let that be his legacy: a legacy of peace, not violence — of justice. " President Joe Biden
"The guilty verdict does not bring back George. But through the family’s pain, they are finding purpose so George’s — George’s legacy will not be just about his death, but about what we must do in his memory." Joe Biden
"In my conversations with the Floyd family — and I spoke with them again today — I assured them that we’re going to continue to fight for the passage of the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act so we can — I can sign it into law as quickly as possible. " Joe Biden
I would think all of Biden's statements promote a form of Martyrdom. Source --- https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo … rge-floyd/
I could give several more examples from the media, and Washington talking heads.
Does anyone on this thread realize how the law works?
Maxine Water's statement can negate the ruling on appeal. His defense team will have a strong case that the jury was impacted by her statement. If this happens, the verdict could be overturned. Then they would have to have a new trial.
I'm sure his attorney may try to work out a plea deal. It opens the door for him to get out on appeal. It happens.
Will this case get the same verdict in a few years when emotions about it have died down?
What Maxine Waters did was just plain stupid. She's known for her stupidity...but this could result in some serious negative consequences.
Yes, I noted the judge's statement... Unbelievable what Maxcies words now will be part of an appeal. And all for a photo op.
https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/351 … ost4184382
Career politician, who keeps her constituents subsidized, to stay in office.
Maxine Waters doesn't even live in the district she represents. I don't know how she gets away with that one.
Wow! I remember her during the LA riots. She reacts.
Dershowitz: Chauvin Conviction ‘Should Be Reversed On Appeal,’ Maxine Waters Used KKK ‘Playbook’ To Intimidate Jury
“The irony of what Congresswoman Waters did. She borrowed the playbook of the Ku Klux Klan from the 1920s and 1930s. They would stand outside of courtrooms, and they would threaten violence,” Dershowitz told Newsmax. “This violates the separation of powers. It insults the integrity of the independent judiciary, and Congresswoman Waters ought to be ashamed of herself. What she did was disgraceful.”
https://www.dailywire.com/news/dershowi … ngDsWtdp5g
The race-baiting from the left is so out of control. It will lead to a totally split society. I see it in my own circle of friends, I am willing to admit I seeing bitterness, and even hate.
The Democrats are playing a sad destructive game to keep power, and it is at the expense of the black citizens. Their narrative is clear pit one race against the other.
And Waters IMO is an arrogant, ignorant woman that could care less about black people or law enforcement. She has bodyguards and certainly does not live in the areas where the riots take place. She is to put it politely, an unscrupulous opportunist walking over the backs of blacks to obtain political power. Time for her to retire, and take Ol' Joe with her, he race-baits every chance he gets, and his history shows him to be very much racist throughout his 50 years in Washington. I don't appreciate my Country being belittled, torn down by race-baiters that seek power.
Sharlee: Maxine Waters does not represent the entire democratic left. Dershowitz's statement is his opinion. Just because he and Waters made those statements does not mean that the left is race baiting.
The black people and the left deserve justice when cops use lethal force when it is not justified. As far as you saying the left is trying to split the society by pitting one race against the other. I have news for you. Our society has been split for a long time. You can thank Trump and company for the latest split.
I can't believe that Dershowitz would even mention the Klan when they did horrible things to blacks and then he says they were trying to intimidate the juries when people were hung, burnt and beaten to death. They were so proud of themselves, they even had to wear sheets to hide their identities.
Look at the number of white people shot by police. NO riots, protests, and limited mention in the news.
Yes, the left is race baiting. They prey on those who don't know that facts.
Notice how this year 50 unknown white people have been shot by police. There have been 30 black people shot by the police. We know this because our media seems to cover each and every one. There has also been 20 Hispanics shot by police. Where is the news coverage?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585 … e-by-race/
RMN: It looks like all you did was look at the graph, but you didn't read this below the graphs. Read the second paragraph below.
Sadly, the trend of fatal police shootings in the United States seems to only be increasing, with a total 213 civilians having been shot, 30 of whom were Black, in the first three months of 2021. In 2020, there were 1,021 fatal police shootings, and in 2019 there were 999 fatal shootings.
Additionally, the rate of fatal police shootings among Black Americans was much higher than that for any other ethnicity, standing at 35 fatal shootings per million of the population as of March 2021.
Police brutality in the U.S.
In recent years, particularly since the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014, police brutality has become a hot button issue in the United States. The number of homicides committed by police in the United States is often compared to those in countries such as England, where the number is significantly lower.
Black Lives Matter
The Black Lives Matter Movement, formed in 2013, has been a vocal part of the movement against police brutality in the U.S. by organizing “die-ins”, marches, and demonstrations in response to the killings of black men and women by police.
While Black Lives Matter has become a controversial movement within the U.S., it has brought more attention to the number and frequency of police shootings of civilians.
So, are you telling me, the lives of the white and Hispanic people killed by police don't matter?
Again, where is the media coverage of their deaths? Where is the riots for them?
BLM? They ONLY care about black people.
BLM protesters rally for ‘victim,’ leave after learning he was white
The man who was killed is believed to be a white man in his 20s who had stolen a car from a woman at gunpoint — then repeatedly shot at cops as they chased him
https://www.foxnews.com/us/blm-proteste … -was-white
BLM has gotten more attention for being founded by a dedicated Marxist, who used BLM funds to purchase a million dollar residence in a white neighborhood, and their promotion of looting and burning cities more than anything else.
RMN: What I'm telling you is that your statement of more whites than blacks are shot by police is based on the graphs, not the explanations that explained that graphs which I copied and posted.
Why no outrage for the whites and Hispanics who lost their lives by being shot by police?
You've heard of George Floyd. Ever hear of Tony Timpa? Of course not. As a white person his death did not warrant liberal outrage.
"But the body camera footage released this week shows the officers holding Timpa in a prone position, face down in the grass while officers swap out his handcuffs and zip-tie his legs. Timpa can be seen struggling, begging the officers to stop holding him down. He screams, “You’re gonna kill me.” One of the officers repeatedly tells him to relax, saying “You’re going to be all right.”
The footage shows Timpa, his face down in the grass, falling unconscious. The officers can be heard making jokes about Timpa falling asleep and about waking him up for school. One officer appears to mimic a teenager, saying: “I don’t want to go to school! Five more minutes, Mom!”
The footage shows officers and paramedics putting Timpa’s lifeless body onto a gurney, and one of the officers can be heard asking, “He didn’t just die down there, did he?”
https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/02/us/dalla … index.html
Where was the outrage from the liberal left? Where was the outrage from the Democrat controlled media? Police officer killed a man and laughed about it as it was happening. Do you think it was because Tony Timpa had the wrong skin color to warrant acknowledgement of his horrible death at the hands of the police?
This is just one of many. Want to see some stories about black police officers shooting white people? There are many. Again, where is the outrage from the left?
So, do you even know what race baiting is?
RMN: We all know there are good cops and there are bad cops and they come in all colors just like the people they use excessive force on.
Race baiting originally didn't mean what the right means that is today. Here are two articles that tell how it began and how it has been coopted by the right to mean something used as political advantage for the left.
Now the right is accusing the left media that they are not covering cops mistreating white people as much as black people.
https://medium.com/@rosekellywhite/what … cbe8357258
https://splinternews.com/if-youre-confu … 1793848630
PP, the only things your links provided are opinion pieces. That is ALL they are pure and simple.
When one race is favored over another knowing there will be repercussions, that is race baiting. People are dared to be outraged.
So, since the media prefers to cover the deaths of blacks at the hands of police and ignores all the white and Hispanic people who are shot and killed by police, even with there being more whites killed by police than blacks, that is race baiting. The coverage is not balanced and only done for a purpose. Journalism is dead in our country and has been replaced by amateurs whose only goal is to promote the Democrat agenda.
Hey, I may write an opinion piece about it, just like you provided.
How do you know that the BLM leader used BLM funds for her real estate purchases? I heard she has multiple streams of non-BLM income.
I agree with the contradiction of her Marxist claims and her personal financial actions, but I haven't heard any evidence, (yet?), that she funded her contradiction with BLM funds.
How do you know she didn't? Unless they are willing to open up their books, she reveal her finances, nobody will know for certain. So you can either assume she did or assume she didn't. I suppose the choice is up to the individual.
RMN: You can ether assume the sun is coming up tomorrow morning or it isn't. I guess the choice is up to the individual.
Or, without a solid history of facts, you can assume nothing at all and wait until the facts are available.
Our own president uses race-baiting. He does it frequently when he speaks. He is pandering to the black on one hand and pointing them out as unintelligent on the other... That my opinion. I never claimed Maxine represented the entire democratic left. I did say --- "The race-baiting from the left is so out of control". I do include her in with the Dems that race bait.
I have not argued or denied black people justice for any case of police brutality. I consider and look at each case as it is presented. The majority of these police shootings have occurred while a police officer is making an arrest, and the person being arrested fought with the officers. So, each shooting would need to be considered and investigated for police brutality.
I don't agree that our society has been split for a long time. I think over the many years before Obama our society was working to repair a historical split, and making good headway. Obama IMO was responsible for much of today's split. He continually played the I am ashamed of America card, he worked hard to tear America down. That's one reason Trump won, he was pro - American. He put America first and was very patriotic. Citizens were hungry for change after Obama.
At this point, we have a split that deep, and I think unrepairable. Not sure if all that live on the blow-up bandwagon have taken a look around, fewer people really care about fixing a split and are not willing to give even an inch when it comes to left ideologies.
Not sure why you have a problem with Dershowitz's comment about Maxine. It would appear she did use a Klans playbook tactic He simply stated something the KKK would do back in the day, his statement was factual. The KKK would stand outside courtrooms and let those inside know --- you don't give us the verdict we want there will be violence.
Maxine's statement said exactly that. Dershowitz's analogy to the KKK is solid... She borrowed a tactic from the KKK. Have you listened to her complete statement? Using words like stay on the streets, fight, get confrontational, ignore the curfew are all threatening terms.
Sharlee: I'm sorry I have to remind you of Trump's statements to incite insurrection at the Capitol. She is just a congresswoman. He was the President of the United States and a known documented racists for most of his life.
You might find this interesting reading.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/202 … 308414002/
You need not remind me of Trump's statements the day that protesters went into our Capitol. These were the words that stood out to me... Factual quotes that can not be denied in any fashion. His words were1 clearly stated, the context was clear.
"'We are going to the Capitol'
The president used "we" but he didn't join them as his supporters took the short walk from the rally to Congress. In closing his speech he stated.
He said: "We're going to walk down to the Capitol and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them." President Trump Jan 6, 2021, Save American Rally
"'Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard".... President Trump
I felt I have given factual information and good context to substantiate my point, that she was clearly stirring up a crowd to promote violence if they did not get a guilty verdict.
Maxine's states were also clear, the context was clear... Ignore the curfew, fight, get confrontational
I have researched your claim, and not found any statements that would indicate Trump is a racist. Perhaps you could offer a few statements. I do realize his father did appear to segregate his rentals. I don't hold the sins of a father against his children. I also have read and researched the full context of statements that the media deemed racist to be misquoted out of context. You really need to add some substantial proof when you label anyone a racist.
We have a man sitting in the White House that has a very clear history of promoting racist legislation as well as making off-color statements. The facts are available to the public due to the wonderful world of technology. Not sure how Trump entered into this. Maxine Water's statements and history of such statements show her to be a race-baiter IMO.
The Chauvin trial is over, justice was served. I have no idea or do I care about him appealing the case. It is very obvious he would lose on appeal.
Sharlee: I replied to RMN with this and I'm replying to you as well.
https://medium.com/@rosekellywhite/what … cbe8357258
https://splinternews.com/if-youre-confu … 1793848630
I don't think you look hard enough to find about Trump being a racists. There are many articles available about his long history of racisms. This is just one.
https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/ … sm-history
First, I find you have made an attempt to deflect the subject away from Water's and on to Trump. In reality, two wrongs don't make a right. If we are going to deflect, I am very willing to move on to Biden the man sitting in the White House today. I find him an innate racist, it's deeply seeded in his history. His own words, not someone accusing him of doing or saying something second hand --- His own words, from his mouth... So, if we open door number two, I am going to open door number three, and that door has Biden behind it... With his big ol' mask. Let's talk Biden
This is a pattern you use in most conversations. This is concerning, it would appear you may have an obsession with all Trump. Let's get back to Maxine, her words, the problem with her race-baiting. She attempted to derail our justice system. She told a crowd more or less --- if we don't get the verdict we want --- we riot!
I suggest you apply these two articles when considering what you feel Trump has done or said to be racists. You appear to hope I will apply the information to perhaps consider Maxine's statements were not race-baiting. It would appear you may be being hypocritical. The link you supplied with a list of actions you feel shows Trump to be racist, none have him making verbal racists statements. Maxine's words speak for her character. As does Biden's. I could give example after example of Biden's words that clearly show he stereotypes blacks. Odd many are not willing to accept the facts.
I read your link --- not one of these examples if put in true context shows racism. Most accusations are actually hearsay. Someone stepping up with an accusation. I have never heard anything from Trump that I would find racist. And in regards to the VIrus, I call it the China virus. It originated in China, they are responsible for keeping it under wraps until it became an epidemic. I solely blame China's leadership for a very corrupt decision that has produced a virus and hide it as long as they could. I Blame the Chinese Government and not the Chinese people...
Isn't it funny how the left declares the Donald Trump as a racist, but ignore Joe Biden's many racist comments over the years?
"Biden told black radio host Charlamagne tha God, “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”
"Biden told the Asian and Latino Coalition of Des Moines that “poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids.”
"In 2008, Biden referred to then presidential candidate Barack Obama as “the first sort of mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean.”
"Biden praised the notorious segregationist politician George Wallace, boasted about how Wallace once honored him with an award in 1973, and told a Southern audience in 1987 that “we [Delawareans] were on the South’s side in the Civil War."
https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election … -comments/
Where is the outrage and claims of him being a racist? This is the short list.
I suppose the liberal outrage is drowning in a sea of hypocrisy.
It is apparent there are many that dwell on Trump, without any real information of him actually making racist statements. They use media blurbs that were badly twisted out of context.
Biden's statements, as well as actions, show he stereotypes, and IMO is innately racist due to the veracity of some of his blatantly racist statements.
It astounds me how the Democrats voted for a man that is so racist. I mean this was their main screaming point in regards to Trump. Let's face it the Dems use the race card and have for their entire history. It's in their playbook under - How To Keep Black Votes. Paragraph one -- Tell blacks the Republican candidate is a racist. Oh and, we will be helping ya out with lots of stuff.
Sorry for the sarcasm, but this crap is getting more than old. And my placating is running thin. This is our county this bunch is attempting to ruin. Time to take the gloves off.
You still see the world from the perspective of a carnival funhouse mirror, Sharlee, that is most unfortunate.
Are Republican policies consistent with the objectives of many AA as compared to that of the Democrats? Race in that sense does not matter. More Hispanics, Asians and Jews vote overwhelming democrat, is the race baiting diversion applied to them as well? It is far more complicated, these allegations, that Democrats are calling Republicans racists to gather votes.
So, it would appear you don't believe the Dems pull out the race card in each and every Presidential election?
I came by my opinion about Dem politicking due to many years of watching the same coming previews. Almost have come to be able to lip-sink the spiel. --- The Republican candidate is racist, and then there's the bait -- Plus we are going to fix all your problems, and give you whatever you are in need of. How's that been working out? I can't say the Republicans would offer more. But, they don't pander, they don't differentiate between citizens by race when campaigning as a rule.
No, IMO the spiel is not in any respect aimed at Jews, Asians, or Hispanics. That's what makes it all the more noticeable. Something to think about.
It starts with the stimulus payments and the Democrats were following through, while the Republicans resisted to a man/woman. Do you not think that this assistance was of value?
They don't pander, but they don't help either.
Maybe myself and others Black people are attracted to the Democrats for the same reasons other non-black constituencies are?
"It starts with the stimulus payments and the Democrats were following through, while the Republicans resisted to a man/woman. Do you not think that this assistance was of value?"
Are you serious? President Donald Trump wanted $2,000 stimulus payments and was willing to agree to a deal months before the Democrats agreed to it. It was the DEMOCRAT Congress that held those stimulus payments hostage. Geeeze!
What are his plans as Chief Executive and his legislative objectives? Are they more in line with the changes in society sought by many of us? In the final analysis that is where the rubber meets the road......
Great deflection, so, is he a racist or not?
Most white people stereotype blacks in some form or another. We have always had to settle for less than the ideal. But, clearly some people and party platforms are more abrasive than others, if you know what I mean?
Let me correct you, not all Blacks settle for less than ideal. Some would take offense at that statement. I would say they moved on from a mindset that was destructive to them as human beings. I would then realize they may have had many obstacles to overcome. But, they tackled challenges, no matter how hard, they did not settle.
None of that came from embracing American conservatism nor Republicans. Well, you have acknowlege yourself the dearth of black conservatives with the failure of Trump and Republicans to win over Blacks in any of the battleground states last fall.
Are you kidding? President Donald Trump had significant increases in support from the black and Latino vote.
"Despite statements such as Waters’, President Trump has invested heavily in the black and Hispanic communities. Policies like the First Step Act, opportunity zones and funding for historically black colleges and universities have paid off. As of this writing, exit polls conducted by Edison Research show President Trump won at least 18 percent of black men this year, up from 13 percent in 2016, and 8 percent of black women, doubling his percentage from four years ago.
The president also increased his support among Latino Americans. According to Edison Research, he captured 36 percent of Latino men and 32 percent of Latino women. These votes helped Trump secure victories in Texas and Florida.
Trump received historic levels of black support not seen since 1960, and record-breaking Latino support suggests people value policy over rhetoric.
“If your starting point is that not a single Latino should vote for Trump, then, of course, you are going to need a more complex explanation for understanding why Trump would win 25 to 35 percent of the [Latino] vote” nationally, said Bernard Fraga, an associate professor of political science at Emory University."
https://nypost.com/2020/11/07/why-trump … no-voters/
I hear you, Mike, this is true those Blacks may have had love affair with Trump and his image, I don't know if that allegiance transfers to the Republican Party, generally.
Not to deflect....
https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit- … al-results
Will one of you wise conservatives tell me why the only people that seem to support Trump in majorities are Anglo folks, why is that?
It is found true, looking income, age, etc. it is the only constant among so many variables in the exit poll.
This is pretty typical for an election.
"Will one of you wise conservatives tell me why the only people that seem to support Trump in majorities are Anglo folks, why is that?"
Well, let me respond my letting a very conservative Black American state the case. Her name is Candace Owens. She is an EXTREMELY intelligent and articulate black woman. Very impressive to listen to when she gives a speech.
She speaks of the fear tactics used by the Democrat party in the black community. I think she explains it well.
https://www.newportri.com/news/20190922 … ash-blacks
I saw the article, I am not going to give a great deal of credibility to some 31 year old woman that say all blacks are being brainwashed. What are her qualifications relative to those that have been involved in this for considerably longer? She is intelligent and articulate from the standpoint of conservatives only because she parrots the rightwing line, is that not the truth?
I can think for myself and I certainly am not going to doubt my own lying eyes?...
Mike, You still got to tell me why it is only whites that give Trump his majorities? What explanations are there for the Jews, Asians, Hispanic everybody excepting whites for clearly supporting Biden? Are they all being brainwashed as well?
You say that it is "typical", why?
Well, I could be very cynical here and blame it on the distortions, lies and bogus claims made by the Democrat party for decades. Generations believing the false narrative of the Democrat party. Candace Owens is intelligent and articulate, period. The Black Conservative Movement (BCM) is growing. At their meetings when someone leaves the Democrat party they stand up and say "I've left the plantation." There is also the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principals (LPCP), which had a record-setting year last year with membership.
It is taking time. Things are changing slowly.
Now, if we could just get Democrats to keep from cheating and promoting fraudulent elections, things would turn around faster.
"Now, if we could just get Democrats to keep from cheating and promoting fraudulent elections, things would turn around faster."
It doesn't matter. You would just deny it. But, the fraud from the last election is not going away. Look at what is happening in Maricopa county in Arizona. Then there's Michigan where a judge declared the election officials broke the constitution. Things that are not in the main stream media are happening. It will be uncovered. It's just a matter of time. Many people realize it.
New Poll Shows Biden Can’t Shake Voters’ Belief That Democrats Cheated In 2020 Election
"A new poll from Rasmussen found that a significant number of voters in both parties believe the Democrats cheated in some way.
By a margin of 51%-44%, voters said it is “likely” that cheating affected the outcome. That included 74% of Republicans and 30% of Democrats.
Some 47% said it is likely Democrats stole or destroyed ballots for former President Donald Trump. That included 75% of Republicans and 30% of Democrats. An even 50% said that it is unlikely ballots were destroyed.
It is the latest survey to show that much of the nation is stuck in neutral when it comes to moving past the 2020 election, especially Republicans.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/0 … -election/
RMN: Polls don't prove anything other than opinions. Nothing you have shown me woud hold up in a court of law.
I never intended to show you anything that would hold up in court. It was shown to make a point that many Americans believe the election of biden was fraudulent.
Let's cut to the chase, I am not convinced of this big realization that Republicans and their ideology will be heartily embraced by everyone in time as you say
The GOP have not won an election by electoral college and popular vote, with the sole exception of GW Bush in 2004, since 1988. The trend is not in your favor.
You could not answer my question, have the Democrats deceived everybody in America with the exception of rightwing oriented whites, am I to believe this?.
Democrats have not fooled conservatives of ALL races. Give it time.
There is no reason why conservatives of all races would not embrace the Republicans in the same way just Anglos do. Why are the Anglo conservatives different? Perhaps they are what is meant as the "true Americans" in Conservative circles?
You can't answer why the GOP and Trump received election majorities only among whites. I don't think that any one of you know, if you do know you won't admit it.
It is such evasiveness and the implications behind the real answers that make me suspicious of the GOP, their candidates and their supporters.
It wasn’t until Harry Truman garnered 77 percent of the black vote in 1948 that a majority of blacks reported that they thought of themselves as Democrats. Earlier that year Truman had issued an order desegregating the armed services and an executive order setting up regulations against racial bias in federal employment. Even after that, Republican nominees continued to get a large slice of the black vote for several elections. Dwight D. Eisenhower got 39 percent in 1956, and Richard Nixon got 32 percent in his narrow loss to John F. Kennedy in 1960.
President Lyndon B. Johnson pushed through the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 (outlawing segregation in public places) and his eventual Republican opponent, Sen. Barry Goldwater, opposed it. Johnson got 94 percent of the black vote that year, still a record for any presidential election. The following year Johnson signed the 1965 Voting Rights Act. No Republican presidential candidate has gotten more than 17 percent of the black vote since. It would appear Johnson helped worked to make a change in regard to systemic racism.
From that time on stats show that the majority of Blacks vote Democratic in the presidential elections.
According to exit polls from the 2020 election, President Donald Trump received 12% of the Black vote. When looking back on data from the Roper Center for Public Opinion and Research, there have been numerous candidates that did better than Trump among Black voters over the last century. Richard Nixon received 15% of the vote in 1968, Gerald Ford got 17% in 1976 and Ronald Reagan won 14% in 1980.
So, your question would be hard to answer, other than considering our history from Johnson on shows Black preferred to vote Democratic. I would think one could only offer an opinion. It would be the same if I asked a black person why do the black majority vote Democrat. Why did Biden draw the majority of the black vote?
https://www.factcheck.org/2008/04/black … tic-party/
Your right on target, kudos for you for the chutzpah to answer the $64,000.00 question. You are a great listener, Sharlee, the mark of a true peacemaker.
FDR began to turn heads with novel programs that would benefit us all in difficult times. That was the beginning of our leaving the Party of Lincoln. But we fell in love with his wife, Eleanor, a true advocate of Civil Rights who often goaded her husband to follow through on civil rights issues regardless of political costs. She walked the talk and will be forever appreciated.
With Harry Truman, we had a friend in the White House. He and his bold civil rights initiatives could not be ignored and we rewarded him at the ballot box. I still remember the précise day he died and where I was when I heard the news. The group "Chicago" did a great memorial ditty soon after on Mr. Truman's behalf.
We were not necessarily turned off to the GOP totally during the fifties. Richard Nixon was pretty mainstream and in 1960, he wasn't anyone we disliked in principle. It was just that Kennedy during the campaign made a couple of Civil Rights gestures on behalf of Martin Luther King, locked up in a southern jail. Jack and his brother Bobby took the bold course and interceded on behalf of Dr. King. Nixon was too cautious during times that demanded action.Our community took note of that and gave Kennedy our votes.
The GOP sunk itself with Barry Goldwater, his ideological stance was the contradiction to the Kennedy/Johnson period of addressing civil rights grievances. Goldwater and his States Rights thing was undermining all that was being done. As far as many of us were concerned that was the equivalent to a stake in the heart from the GOP, from which I don't believe that they have ever really recovered in our eyes.
You have, yourself explained why blacks have voted for Democrats, why do whites so solidly support the Republicans, and why are they the only major demographic to do so?
Also, while you well explain the circumstances with Black folks, what is the explanation for Native Americans, Jews, Asians and Hispanics, why do they all lean heavily toward Biden and the Democrats?
You seem to think that something like 90% of whites are R, but if that were so we wouldn't see 100% of our major cities all going D.
Beyond that, if 90% of whites are R, and the national vote is nearly 50/50, it would mean that 90% of all Native Americans, Jews, Asians and Hispanics are 90% D, something I would disagree with.
You guys left out one important factor and that is the Dixiecrats. Here is how and why they left Johnson's Civil Rights Movement and joined the Southern GOP.
https://www.history.com/news/how-the-pa … atic-south
Sad, isn't it, that Johnson would feel so badly about "delivering the South to Republicans". Even then party power was incredibly powerful in "deciding" what the needs of the people and the nation were.
And that has grown by a hundred fold since then - now it is the only thing that matters.
No, 90 percent of whites are not Republican, but 90 percent of Republicans are white....
Taking in your comment, please view the attached brief article and see if your position still holds...
https://news.gallup.com/poll/160373/dem … white.aspx
According to your link, 90% of Republicans are white, and 60% of Democrats are (although the little qualifier that only "self identifiers" were counted means the numbers could be way off from actual population numbers).
That leaves precious few voters of any other race, considering that whites only make up half the population. Perhaps a quarter of the voters out of half the nation. Why aren't blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Innuits, and any other races not voting? Your people don't care?
You want to argue with the national census figures, Wilderness? That states that non Hispanic whites are 76 percent of the population as of 2019, where are you getting this half stuff from? Where do you get you skewed data and attitude? Obviously, you really did not read the Gallop poll data linked, is that fake news, leftist conspiracy, etc as well?
https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicat … 2asc%22%7D
Whites comprise 60% of the population (a little higher than I thought). Where are you getting your numbers from? It is obviously not a census for there was no census taken in 2019.
Yes, I read it...and thought about it. Did you? Did you figure out that nearly all the voters are white according to your link? That only a very small percentage of blacks vote?
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/ … /PST045219
This is the national census, this is the supreme authority. Can you question that?
If whites are 76 percent of the population, of course, most of the votes are whites, but among the 25 percent remain tHey skew heavily toward Democrats.
Why the disparity between the national census data and this KFF exists, needs to be determined.
I can't follow your line of reasoning, here.
The national census was conducted in 2020. Your figures are from 2019. They are NOT from a census.
The reasoning is fairly simple, at least if you follow the math. Given than approximately half the country is Republican and half Democrat, and given that 90% of Republicans are white with 60% of Democrats being white, it means that approximately 75% of party registrations (and presumably voters) are white. That leaves only 25% of the population to be divided between all other races...races which comprise 40% of the population. Even ignoring that these are all self descriptions, ignoring that all of us are mixed race, that still leaves few blacks as voting. Why are "your" people not willing to participate in the running of our country?
Wilderness, you were saying something about why "my" people were not willing to assist running the country? These stats seem to indicate that we participating at competive levels, to me.
We are only 12 percent of the population, of course we cannot compete with Anglo voting numbers. What's left for non-white voters is 50 percent between the two parties 40 percent of that as Democrats and 10 percent Republican. That is still 25 percent of the total when both party allegiances are combined, which is consistent with a Anglo population of just under 75 percent. So how does that jive with your math?
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 … oters_01a/
I always stop and listen when having a conversation, and step back and look at the view of the other. Especially when the view is steeped in common sense and truth. Over the years I have become "somewhat" of a realist, due to being knocked down plenty by facts.
I found Eleanor Roosevelt to have a huge heart and an abundance of true unabated common sense, and the gusto to get things done. She softened her husband's edges and was not willing to be a woman that settled to be in the background.
I can only offer an opinion on why the majority of Republicans generally stick with the party. I think this propensity is due to a couple of variables.
I feel in some respects it is how one is brought up, parents instill their ideas, values, norms, and morals. These characteristics can be deeply inbred and carried throughout one's life. Conservative values offer good solid ingredients to a nice lifestyle. For instance, conservatives appreciate self Governing, they don't like Federal government overreach. They pride themselves on being in control over their lives. I think conservatives don't like to rock a boat that is steady on the water, no need for change social change if all is calm.
So, to answer your question --- many whites just have not experienced the turmoil that black people have had to live with. Perhaps many whites just do not see why any human being can't get beyond the turmoil using the same tools they use to thrive. Perhaps sometimes common sense does not serve the white race well. I think conservatives may have the ability to see problems and think they can be solved very simply. But don't realize the obstacles are just not easily solved by others with different mindsets and different obstacles we have not had to encounter.
When it comes down to it I think right and left ideologies are developed from the time one is born, life experiences, with parents, peers, teachers all having a hand in shaping one's ideologies, and lead us to political ideology.
Hopefully, you can read this and add some relevant thoughts.
"But don't realize the obstacles are just not easily solved by others with different mindsets and different obstacles we have not had to encounter."
Now you're cooking with gas, it is an acknowledgement that so few among the Right would admit.
I can guess that are adherence to on ideological stance verse another is mostly taught, not found in the DNA.
You always seem keen to find an answer, maybe with a little dialogue we may well find it.
"I feel in some respects it is how one is brought up, parents instill their ideas, values, norms, and morals. These characteristics can be deeply inbred and carried throughout one's life. Conservative values offer good solid ingredients to a nice lifestyle. For instance, conservatives appreciate self Governing, they don't like Federal government overreach. They pride themselves on being in control over their lives. I think conservatives don't like to rock a boat that is steady on the water, no need for change social change if all is calm."
Understood, but why are these values, supposedly represented by the GOP not more widely embraced across almost every other race/ethnicity?
For instance, Jews and Asians have done relatively well by the standards of this society why do they overwhelmingly support Democrats? Nine out of 10 Republicans are White, that is a substantially higher percentage than their numbers in the general population.
(See the gallop link, I shared with Wilderness and the CNN link, I shared with Mike)
"Nine out of 10 Republicans are White, that is a substantially higher percentage than their numbers in the general population."
So is the 6 of 10 that are Democrats. Do you think the other races are all independent, or just not identifying themselves? Or not registering at all?
My husband's grandparents were Jews, we found this out after his grandfather died. His grandparents came over in the late 1800s and made the decision to bring up their American-born children Catholic, and hide the fact they were Jews. His own parents never knew about their parent's secret. And naturally raised their children catholic. They were Dems, as were their children, as was my husband... We could only guess why the grandparents made the decision to never share they were Jewish. My husband's grandparent's also had socialist tendencies. And would drive everyone crazy when they got on a roll.
It is well documented that Eastern European Jewish immigrants had a fear of Christian anti-Semitism, and had a propensity or need to repair all that is wrong with the world. This could be part of why they might be drawn to the Democratic party. One might also consider Jewish look at education a being very important, and attempt to send their children to the best colleges. Many of the best colleges have liberal professors, and. the ideologies run deep in these institutions.
When it comes to Asians, I am stumped on why they lean left.
I got my first job as a teen working for a Denver Stapleton Airport concession owned by Jewish brothers. What a gas.... Jews have been helpful during our civil rights struggles.
I spoke to a Jewish acquaintance years ago asking the question of why they supported Democrats, I was told that they understood what it meant to be ostracized in society and the appearance of the Republicans as being less tolerant and inclusive than the Democrats was more important to them than what they felt about Israel, itself.
The ideas of inclusion and tolerance may be behind the Asians preferences for Democrats as well.
I hope you know there is more to European-American than "Anglos."
The Anglos and the Saxons were from the UK area. They do represent the Scandinavian countries or any of the Eastern European Countries. There is more to white people than just Anglos or Saxons.
So, why are the others so different?
And the rightwing oriented blacks, the rightwing oriented Hispanics, the rightwing oriented Asians and anyone else not pretty far left.
Pretending that these people do not exist does not make it so.
Only white people's adherence to the Right reaches the point whereTrump and the Republicans win among them. How come the right wing oriented people of other groups have not selected a conservative choice among their group to the same extent? We know that THEY may exist, but to a obviously far lesser degree.
Why is that, Mr. conservative?
So, don't equivocate, the information was provided to Mike in a survey. The question I posed to Mike still remains unanswered.
I have a better question. Why can't the left and the Democrats appeal to European-Americans? What do the Democrats lack so much of that most European-Americans are turned off by them? We know the European-Americans do follow the Democrats, but these are not the best among us.
So, why is this?
According to polls, Sixty percent of professed Democrats are white, with 76 percent of the population identified as white, that does not sound much like a dearth to me.
The other 40 percent of professed Democrats are non white. Comparably, 10 percent of those who profess being Republican is nonwhite.
You asked a good question as to demographic make up of the different political parties. I asked some of my friends their take on it and the responses were interesting.
I don't think it has anything to do with race.
Deomcrats/Liberals are people who believe the government is the solution to everything. They believe the government should be responsible for people and making things fair. They want the government to control their life.
Republicans/Conservatives are people who want as little government influence in their life as possible. Government control is the problem. These are people who don't need the government to make things happen for them, if the government leaves them alone, they can make things happen for themselves.
Democrat/liberals want dependence on the government and are okay with government control. (Similar to socialist/communist governments).
Republican/Conservatives want independence from the government. They hate government control and fight against it.
Of course there has to be balance.
So, why do you think some minorities find big government control over their lives so acceptable?
RMN: "Of course there has to be balance.
So, why do you think some minorities find big government control over their lives so acceptable?"
What is your definition of big government control?
Well, Mike, the Democrats have a 60/40 ( white-minority) split which could be roughly seen as evenly split, I can't say that for a 90/10 split in the same way, that has to be obvious.
Race has to be a factor, every poll and narrative comes to that conclusion, the party is not attracting minorities (none of them) in sufficient numbers. So, they decide to suppress their votes instead.
Why do we support big government? If it wasn't for government intervention, the abuses brought upon our folks may well never have stopped. I don't believed the Republicans and their talk about patience and good people and such, endlessly waiting for gradual progress. No, Change had to forced at the point of the bayonet. The courts were the point of that spear. We cling to government as allies and not adversaries and that make us very different in our outlook from you folks.
The problem with your "balance" is that my "balance will be somewhat different.
No one in a modern 21st century environment with over 350 million people is going to say that we don't need a government. Human nature requires that we have a government. Conservatives don't like regulation, well I don't consider regulation as government control, you are not free to pollute my supply of drinking water with impunity just because I don't have the money to challenge you. Conservatism is elitist implying that some people are more equal than others and it is a loathsome ideology in my opinion.
It was kind of hard to make things happen for yourself while the equivalent of a boot is upon your neck, like that of the late George Floyd. "Your" people deliberately put us all at a distinct disadvantage over decades and centuries, as to why you did this or felt it necessary, I may never know. But you should not have done it.
Here is a nice quote to take "to the bank"
Black voters, Black people in general, don’t all think the same. There is no monolithic Black constituency; instead, there are vast distinctions in thought sometimes related to geography, culture, religion, age, gender and upbringing. But certain broad issues — racial injustice, economic inequality, voter suppression, law enforcement bias, educational access, health care — resonate with Black Americans.
"racial injustice, economic inequality, voter suppression, law enforcement bias, educational access, health care — resonate with Black Americans." Yes, but ONLY when it involves Black Americans. The media doesn't promote stories that don't fit your narrative.
Is the racist treatment experienced by white people because of the color of their skin an outrage to Black Americans? It is well hidden by the media. Here is a small sample. I could provide many more stories.
Washington Vaccine Provider Says White People Not Eligible, Asked to Join Standby List
ACOVID-19 vaccine provider in Washington state—the African American Reach and Teach Health Ministry (AARTH)—is prioritizing "Black, Indigenous & People of Color" for bookings at four vaccination sites across Seattle and Kent in King County.
White people are currently not eligible to book a vaccination appointment at the AARTH website. They are instead directed to join a waiting list and advised they will be notified when there is a "vaccine surplus available" at a clinic.
https://www.newsweek.com/washington-vac … st-1585644
Sign at George Floyd Square gives list of special orders for white visitors
But most of the instructions are listed under five orders “for white people in particular.”
“Decenter yourself and come to listen, learn, mourn, and witness,” the first bullet points reads, adding, “Remember you are here to support, not to be supported.”
https://nypost.com/2021/04/22/sign-at-g … -visitors/
BLACK COP SHOOTS UNARMED WHITE MAN IN CHICAGO
According to AP, the video was recorded in a train station in downtown Chicago this past Friday afternoon. Two Black officers, one male and one female, attempted to detain the man, who was being cited for walking in between train cars. When he couldn’t be subdued with pepper spray, then lethal force was used, shooting the suspect twice. See the video below.
https://thesource.com/2020/03/02/watch- … n-chicago/
University hosts no-whites-allowed faculty and staff listening sessions — to promote inclusivity
“Dear faculty and staff colleagues, this is a reminder about our upcoming listening sessions on inclusion that I am holding for faculty and staff of color over the next several weeks,” stated an April 18 email from Michele Gillespie, dean of the college, to campus employees.
–For faculty/staff who identify as faculty/staff of color: Monday, April 22 at 4:00 pm in ZSR Room 476 (we will be joined by Associate Dean Erica Still)
–For faculty/staff who identify as faculty/staff of color: Thursday, May 2 at 11:00 am in ZSR 476 (we will be joined by Associate Dean Erica Still)
–For staff who identify as staff of color ONLY: Monday, May 6 at 4:00 pm in ZSR Room 477
Please know that I have requested that all department chairs provide staff release time to be able to attend a listening session.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/universit … clusivity/
Dallas police body cam footage shows officers mocking a man who later died
The body camera footage tells the story: Tony Timpa was struggling, begging Dallas police officers who were holding him in a controversial position to let him go.
Within minutes he had stopped breathing, while officers joked that he had fallen asleep, according to the footage first obtained from the police department by The Dallas Morning News after a nearly three-year battle for its release – part of the newspaper’s investigation into the August 2016 death of the 32-year-old man.
The City of Dallas and its police department fought the release of the footage, first citing an ongoing investigation that saw three officers indicted, then the case’s dismissal.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/02/us/dalla … index.html
Perhaps white people need to look into moving to Poland, Slovenia, or somewhere a little less hostile to whites, because if you think these types of examples aren't going to become common place throughout most of the country you are totally missing the reality spreading throughout our universities, media and government programs.
So, you are saying we can expect the oppressed to become the oppressors?
Just answering Mike's question regarding why some minorities (blacks) find big government (control) more appealing....
Credence2, I am now opening a CAN OF WORMS. You are QUITE AWARE of the reputation of the truthful ferocity of Black women. Well I am THAT BLACK WOMAN. Let's get deep here- the reason why some Blacks(including many of my extended maternal family) feel comfortable with big government is big government is a psychic extension of their parents. They feel that the government will protect them. They feel that the government will rescue them, absolving them of the responsibility to be fully responsible for themselves.
Credence2, many Black parents raise their children in a slave mentality. They raise their children to conform to the system. They raise their children to have jobs & survive, not to use their human potential & thrive. Many Black parents raise their children in the safety/security paradigm. They are raise to be obedient & not to take risks. They aren't raise to be their own personas. I AM SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER HERE, Credence. SIT BACK & LISTEN, I am a fellow Black so I know from where I am speaking.
Most Black parents raise their children to be unquestionably obedient. You & I have seen this. I was called hard-headed by some of my maternal aunts because I had my own mind. Raising children to be unquestionably obedient doesn't foster INDEPENDENT thinking. Many Blacks have that unconscious post-traumatic slavery syndrome psychology. They believe that they are powerless to take responsibility for their lives & that SOMEONE ELSE will do it for them. That explains why big government appeals to many Blacks. They believe that the government will solve whatever problem will arise whether it is healthcare, jobs, etc. Many Blacks view the government as their parents, pure & simple. Credence2, Blacks have to realize that the government is only smothering us. It is time to get off that government plantation. Although I am Black, I WANT VERY LIMITED government.
Black parents must raise their children to power, not be dependent upon the government to supply their needs. Blacks have to be fully functioning. Blacks must learn to fully create- businesses, hospitals, & other viable connects in order to thrive in America. Blacks have to stop having an updated version of the plantatiion mentality- this from an AWARE BLACK woman.
Yes, I know of the ferocity of the Black women as the Democratic Party most staunch allies, I know about that. These are the Black women I know.
I was answering a question put to me, the history of the why blacks are generally supportive of government has a great do to with the present.
The history provides as of much of an explanation as the conservative rant about disfunction families and slave mentalities, so on and so forth.
I don't agree about the smothering, I like Biden and his ideas that the economy will be built from the bottom and middle up instead of the "tinkle down" stuff from the Right.
I have always said that there is always room for improvement within our communities TODAY. I was just saying how we got here and the disadvantages that had to be overcome to even hope to get to a competitive place.
Biden sold you on everything you wanted to hear. That's what politicians, like Biden who has been at it for over 40 years, do.
America has become a nation of news consumers both overfed and malnourished. Americans gorge themselves daily on empty informational calories, indulging their sugar fixes of self-affirming half-truths and even outright lies.
Biden created more jobs than any President in the first 100 days?
https://www.statesman.com/story/news/po … 300304001/
https://nypost.com/2021/01/27/joe-biden … mate-plan/
The above links just to give a different perspective.
An economy's strength, its ability to grow, historically is based on its ability to create cheap energy.
Even America's last economic "surge" in economic growth largely came from being able to create its own energy at affordable prices, it did this with its new means of capturing natural gas and getting oil out of the ground (through fracking).
Whether you think those things were good or bad, the reason for the last few years of having gas $2.00 or less a gallon at the gas pump had to do with America's energy independence from foreign oil, gas, and coal.
Things, as we shall see, are going to take a drastic turn in the coming years.
As near as I could tell, Bidens entire "jobs plan" is for government to hire masses of people, at inflated wages that we will then pay for, for a tiny portion of the spending of his "infrastructure" plans.
And when the 3 bridges, 1 dam, 4 bus lines and 10 miles of road are built those workers will be laid off again, leaving us right back where we started...except for the tens of thousands laid off as the energy sector dies off and regulation again shuts down businesses.
Ken; Trump told his supporters everything they wanted to hear. He played to people's fantasies. Everything was hyperbole with him, the greatest; the best in the world. Here are 56 hyperbolic statements Trump made while being interviewed by the Wall Street Journal.
President Donald Trump sat for an interview with the Wall Street Journal on Thursday. While the interview was quickly eclipsed by Trump’s comment that immigrants were coming from “shithole countries,” it is still a very interesting read.
I went through the transcript – helpfully released by the Journal (kudos!) – and picked out the 56 most noteworthy lines. They’re below.
1. “We were going down, we were going down a long way.”
This is Trump’s description of the end of the Obama presidency. And off we go!
2. “The cutting of regulation and all of the many things that we’ve done, including being a cheerleader for the country – and perhaps that’s part of the reason I’m going to Davos also – but being a cheerleader for the country.”
An interesting comment by Trump – and telling. He quite clearly puts considerable stock in the idea that the president must be a cheerleader. It reminds me of a story from The New York Times that suggested Donald Trump Jr. approached Ohio Gov. John Kasich with an offer to be vice president – and a wide-ranging portfolio of responsibilities. What would the elder Trump be in charge of, Kasich asked? “Making America Great Again” was Don Jr.’s response.
3. “You people actually wrote one of the best stories that I’ve ever seen on regulation; you said more than any president in history. That was the full pager, that wasn’t…”
Your regular reminder that Trump is a VERY active consumer of the very same mainstream media he decries. Also, this is the “full pager” (I think) that Trump refers to.
4. “I mean I actually read it because I’ve never seen a full page—it’s actually a full page article.”
So, he read it because it was a full-page article?
5. “One of the promises that you know is being very seriously negotiated right now is the wall and the wall will happen.”
Well, if you say so….
6. “If we don’t make a fair deal for this country, a Trump deal, then we’re not going to have—then we’re going to have a—I will terminate.”
A “Trump deal”! Epic!
7. “They’ve done more for me than they ever have for any American president.”
This is Trump on China and Trump on massive hyperbole. Everything must be historic or record-setting or the best or the first.
8. “He’s — China has done far more for us than they ever have for any American president.”
This is not a duplicate. He just said virtually the same thing again a sentence or two later.
9. “This should not have been a problem left on my desk, but it is, and I get things solved. And one way or the other, that problem is going to be solved.”
This Trump assertion on North Korea is, um, muscular? “That problem is going to be solved” is pretty definitive.
10. “But the difference is I’m president; other people aren’t.”
Fact Check: True!
11. “And I know more about wedges than any human being that’s ever lived, but I’ll let you know.”
OK, so the context here is that the Journal reporters are asking whether North Korea is trying to drive a wedge between South Korea and the United States. is Trump talking about that kind of wedge or a pitching wedge in golf? I genuinely have no idea, but I can tell you that either way he knows more about it than “any human being that’s ever lived.”
12. “I have a great relationship with him, as you know I have a great relationship with Prime Minister Abe of Japan and I probably have a very good relationship with Kim Jong Un of North Korea.”
One of these things is not like the other…
13. “I don’t want to comment on it—I don’t want to comment, I’m not saying I have or I haven’t.”
Trump on whether he has spoken to Kim Jong Un. (HINT: He hasn’t.)
14. “Sure, you see that a lot with me and then all of a sudden somebody’s my best friend. I could give you 20 examples. You give me 30. I’m a very flexible person.”
He’s right about this. Ted Cruz. Rand Paul. Bob Corker. Lindsey Graham. Trump has SAVAGED all of these people and yet has somehow managed to build relationships with them after the clash.
15. “Unless it’s somebody that didn’t love our country, and the Democrats love our country. We have different views but the Democrats love our country.”
Trump is talking specifically about the visa lottery system and chain migration here. And it speaks volumes that he says that if you don’t agree with his view on these two topics, you must not love America.
16. “I’ve also said Mexico’s got to pay for it—sometimes you know on occasion, I’d add who’s going to pay for it? Mexico. Well they will pay for it, OK?”
17. “You know, we make a good deal on NAFTA, say I’m going to take a small percentage of that money and it’s going to go toward the wall. Guess what? Mexico’s paying.”
OK, so to follow Trump’s logic: The US re-negotiates NAFTA. In that renegotiation, the US saves money in the deal. That money, which comes from Mexico(?), pays for the wall?
18. “There is no deal that I can make on NAFTA that’s as good as if I terminate NAFTA and make a new deal.”
And yet, Trump repeatedly says in this interview he is open to re-negotiating NAFTA.
19. “We have mountains that are far better than a wall, we have violent rivers that nobody goes near.”
The most violent rivers, believe me.
20. “I saw on television, Donald Trump is going to make the wall smaller; no, the wall’s identical.”
“Believe it or not, even when I’m in Washington or New York, I do not watch much television/ People that don’t know me, they like to say I watch television – people with fake sources. You know, fake reporters, fake sources.” – Donald Trump, November 11, 2017
21. “You go 32 feet up and you don’t know who’s over here. You’re here, you’ve got the wall and there’s some other people here.”
22. “If I’m standing here, I want to be able to see 200 yards out. I want to be able to see, I don’t want to have a piece of concrete that I can’t see.”
23. “We have to have vision through the wall.”
Wall vision is key.
24. “I’d like to be able to see three or four hundred yards instead of we’re at a wall we have no idea who’s on the other side. Does this make sense or am I just wasting my time?”
25. “I have Foxconn coming to Wisconsin; that’s my deal. You know the head of Foxconn, you know he’s a friend of mine. He’s still only moving there because of me.”
Paging Scott Walker. Governor Walker, please pick up the nearest white phone.
26. “The wall is the wall and it’s the same wall that we’re always talking about.”
Look. All in all, we’re just another brick in the wall.
27. “We don’t need it where you have mountains; you don’t need it where you have rivers and – you know, vicious rivers.”
Wait, wait. I thought the rivers were “violent?”
28. “Yeah, be really clear, I’d like to – because I love the ‘Wall Street Journal’. I hope that you guys are clear. OK.”
29. “The man with the three hour interview, he spent three hours – the man who said he spent three hours in the Oval Office who I never met once in the White House.”
“The man with the three hour interview” is kind of a catchy nickname for Michael Wolff.
30. “I think that when somebody makes false statements and libelous statements, whether it’s in a book or a newspaper or anything else. When they have phony sources, when the sources don’t exist, yeah I think they should have a liability.”
Cough. Throat clear. Cough. Ahem.
31. “I was always the best at what I did, I was the – I was, you know, I went to the – I went to the Wharton School of Finance, did well.”
This is, by the way, Trump’s explanation for why the media doesn’t like him. Also, he went to Wharton. That’s at the University of Pennsylvania. Ivy League and whatnot.
32. “I created maybe the greatest brand.”
“Maybe” the greatest brand??? Sad!
33. “Just – and so – so I was successful, successful, successful.”
That’s three “successfuls,” which, by anyone’s reckoning, is a lot of success.
34. “I was always the best athlete, people don’t know that.”
35. “And then people say oh, is he a smart person? I’m smarter than all of them put together, but they can’t admit it.”
Best brand? CHECK
Best brain? CHECK
Best athlete? ALSO CHECK
36. “I have many people that work for me who were far more important than Steve, right there.”
This is a very debatable claim. Bannon was the chief architect of Trump’s policy vision and, by all accounts, the one voice urging him to stay in the race after the “Access Hollywood” tape.
37. “And Steve, in the end I fired Steve.”
38. “I don’t know what the word permanent means, OK?”
He does! What Trump means here is that he never severs any relationship permanently. People can always come back into the Trump fold – and often do.
39. “We’ll see what happens, but Steve had nothing to do with my win. Well, certainly very little.”
40. “Steve’s greatest asset is he was able to convince a corrupt media that he was responsible for my win.”
Oh so that was Bannon’s greatest gift.
41. “I talked to Steve very little; I didn’t know Steve well, believe it or not.”
I don’t believe it because it’s not true. Bannon and Trump had known one another since 2011.
42. “My son had a brief meeting based on the fact that he thought whatever he thought.”
We know that Don Jr. met with Russians at Trump Tower because he had been promised dirt on Hillary Clinton.
43. “It’s probably illegal, what he’s doing.”
Trump accuses California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of breaking the law for leaking (I think?).
44. “Because they realize there’s no collusion whatsoever. There’s no collusion.”
46. “I won an election that should never be won, because the Electoral College is far harder to win than the popular vote. The popular vote, for me, would have been much easier.”
The 2016 election ended 429 days ago.
47. “This is the FBI we’re talking about. I think that is – that is treason. See, that’s treason right there.”
Trump’s argument – in case you are missing it – is that the FBI officials texting negative things about him during the 2016 campaign was treason.
48. “By the way, that’s a treasonous act. What he tweeted to his lover is a treasonous act.”
Yes, you just said that.
49. “There has never been, in the history – in the history of an administration anybody that was more open than we were.”
50. “Everybody hated Comey.”
I smell a sitcom….
51. “I’ve been, you know, pretty successful in the courts over the years, I’ve been a very successful person, you can check – USA Today said, ‘he does great in the courts’ OK?”
Best brand? CHECK
Best brain? CHECK
Best athlete? ALSO CHECK
Best in court? WHAT DO YOU THINK? CHECK.
52. “When he announced the Hillary Clinton fiasco where she was guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty and then where they did the interview with no tape recorder, with no swearing in, with no this, with no that – you know the story.”
Four “guiltys”! That’s bigger than three “successfuls.” Trust me. I know math.
53. “I do enjoy this, actually.”
Trump is talking about being interviewed. And of course he enjoys it. He loves the media no natter what he says publicly.
54. “I’ve knocked out ISIS and Syria and Iraq and all but – and we’re doing well in Afghanistan for the first time ever.”
“I’ve knocked out.”
55. “Our air-traffic control is from a different planet.”
Tell me more….
56. “You know what? I like him. I like him. I like them all.”
I like him too. I like them all – whoever them all is.
40 people were killed in a stampede in Israel.
Kentucky Derby overshadowed by calls for Sheikh Mohammed's horse to be banned
First-ever US release of genetically modified mosquitoes begins in Florida
Jimmy Kimmel's interview with the MyPillow CEO got pretty weird
World's largest plane makes second test flight
Ice age-era bones found in Las Vegas backyard
Ohio high school elects lesbian couple as prom king and queen
All with as much to do with the topic of Biden's speech as your litany of your opinions on Trump's failures and infinitely more interesting. Trump is gone; move on and heal.
Perhaps, but were his actions to the benefit of the American people, the workers of America, or against them?
I would argue, the decision to target the oil and gas industry will harm us, the cost will be in hundreds of thousands of jobs throughout those industries and more indirectly in causing higher energy costs (gas, oil, electric production which uses gas and coal).
Self inflicted wounds that will cause costs to rise... costs for food, transportation, etc. etc. ... costs that were sure to go up anyways due to the continuous creation of new dollars. This will only compound the problem and ensure there is no real economic recovery.
I am sure the MSM will tout his achievements and say he saved the Republic... all the while the number of homeless and unemployed will climb steadily.
Ken: We have to move on from fossil fuel. Oil is a finite commodity. There is only so much fracking that can be done.
Technology is going to be our new energy source and it will create many new jobs that will take the place of people working in coal mines and oil fields. I believe it to be the natural order of things and that's what Biden is planning to do. Electric cars are definitely coming on line and there will be more in the future.
While I would agree with that thought, I can separate the sentiment of wanting cleaner energy and better technology from the political BS.
What Biden's actions have done is raise energy costs across the board and cost hundreds of thousands of jobs.
What Biden hasn't done is create the new infrastructure for EVs or Solar Panels.
Good leadership, wise leadership, develops the industry and the infrastructure to support such change, using the cheap energy the country has now, to make it easier to build the renewable energy we need.
Bad leadership, politically driven harmful leadership that hurts the economy, is what we are seeing in action.
China has poured hundreds of billions into building its EV infrastructure, its EV research, its Solar Panel industry, its wind turbines, etc. Through government incentives it enticed its people to buy EV, while making it progressively harder to buy ICE vehicles.
All the while China still uses coal, oil, gas as needed. China btw uses far more oil and coal than America and will continue to do so.
As a person that owns two EVs, I can tell you with certainty, we do not have the infrastructure in this country to support even 10% of America to be using EVs... quite simply, if you don't own a Tesla, long distance EV travel is next to impossible.
Recharge stations in various cities often don't work, or are only accessible to hotel guests, the few public recharge stations that can be accessed would quickly be swamped by users if EVs were more than a novelty... Tesla does have its own infrastructure, twice that of all the other recharge stations in the world combined, but that is separate and cannot be used by non-Tesla EVs.
Ken: I have a hybrid Prius V and I can drive over 400 miles on a 10 gallon tank of gas. It is not a pure EV, but it provides a way to transition into an EV and use less gas. Biden has the problem that all presidents have and that is obstruction and a perversion to cooperation with the other side.
Until we can all act as one nation, not much is going to get done with coming off the dependence on oil and improvement of infrastructure. At least Biden is trying, Trump was and still is a huge supporter of large oil corporations because they have big money lobbyists.
Let’s hear it for Trump and fossil fuels!
My husband was just telling me about a news story he read. I will see if I can find it to share. Basically, it is about how Cali. electric car owners are switching back to gas.
A Mustang Mach-E gets 3 miles TOTAL with a one hour charge (3 miles to the hour...to the charge...proper lingo?) So with a day or an overnight charge this mustang will get you 36 miles down the road! Of course voltage is key, but most Californians do not have access to 480 volts as required for a full charge in about an hour’s time (standard home 120 Volts) But even with a super charger, a Chevy Volt requires 6 hours charging to get 300 miles down the road.
So, many are choosing to go back to gas.
Electric tried, failed, back to what works!
Do you recall when the liberals all wanted compact small cars? It did not take them long to return to the 4X4's, vans, and huge trucks... the Auto companies could not, and still can't at this point keep up with the demand.
Sharlee: Are you saying that liberals want 4 x 4's and huge trucks while conservatives only want small gas savers? Obviously that is only your opinion.
I made no mention of Conservatives, just reminiscing on when liberals were all for small compact cars, and many quickly deserted the cause for Vans. trucks and SUV's. And simply asking AB if she recalled the time liberals were buying compact small cars. I can't speak for other conservatives, but I never liked or purchased a compact car. And yes, when I post a comment one can assume it is my opinion. In my opinion, liberals are quick to jump into a groupthink mindset. Meaning they adopt an ideology quickly, then desert that ideology just as quickly if they need to, or the groupthink dictates them to do so.
The stats support that Americans as a whole opt for SUVs, 4x4, van, or trucks. The compact car certainly is still being sold, but the numbers just don't come close to sales of larger vehicles.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/21/busi … llers.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/08/pickup- … -2020.html
https://www.forbes.com/wheels/news/best … kups-2020/
I read that as liberals touted the tiny cars, but soon left them behind. Nothing at all as to what conservatives did.
I think the large majority of compacts and sub compacts are in metropolitan areas where liberals live. That's where they shine; as a second or third car dedicated to the commute.
But one has only to look at the best selling cars in the country (Is #1 still the F150 as it was for years?) to see that the tiny cars are a distinct minority. As Sharlee says, we want the pickups, SUV's and vans, not the high mileage commuter cars and that goes for both ideologies. Liberals may pay lip service to emissions and getting rid of oil, but their actions don't back it up.
Huh? What a stretch!
Yes I do Sharlee, but they didn't stop there, they demanded, as per their nature, that everyone drive around in Barbie's car
Sharlee and AB: Unless you establish a time frame when liberals were driving compact vehicles, then all you are doing is having fun liberal bashing.
There was a gas rationing in the 70's and it was for everybody, including liberals and conservatives. Everybody today, including liberals and conservatives may drive bigger vehicles, or not. Apparently you don't realize you are singling out liberals for fun and games...sick!
Oh good grief!
I reread my posts and I see nothing that I would walk back. Not sure what you took offense to. I was making a point that as I see it, I feel liberals jump feet first to join in fads or politically correct attitudes, but if the fad or politically correct attitude just becomes burdensome they bail. And my point they bailed on smaller cars when they decided large cars suited them. Just my view. You may not like what I think, or my opinion, but I have a right to offer it. As you did with your reply.
Yes they did and the more they did, the bigger my vehicle got.
AB and Sharlee: I bet your vehicles got so big, they looked like the Oscar Meyer Winner Mobile...Oh! just my opinion, that I have a right to as do both of you.
I love this, and I like seeing the Wiener car. This is wonderful got ya. However, I hope we can still have hotdogs with the new Green deal and all --- may have to go underground with our sausage machines. For a while anyway, until the liberals miss the hotdog, and can justify its place in America. (now please take this as a funny).All in keeping with the subject.
Sharlee and AB: I'm glad you ladies find the humor in this. Most conservative ladies tend to be uptight Goody Two Shoes. I wasn't born yesterday and I know what you were really saying about getting bigger vehicles and drive it for a very short while.
Well, the Wiener Mobile also comes with the Oscar Meyer Wiener Whistle. As Lauren Bacall, said to Humphrey Bogart, "You know how to whistle don't you? You just put yours lips together and blow."
I quit, I know I'm way off topic, but couldn't ignore the opportunity.
As I noted in an earlier post, I have 2 EVs.
One is the Volt, which switches over to a gas engine after using its 30 miles of battery range.
Last year I used 35 gallons of gas total, for over 9,000 miles driven.
We also have a battery only EV, which allows about a 250 mile trip.
The problem is not recharging the vehicles at home, it only takes a few hours to fully recharge them on a 240. Less if there is miles/charge remaining. On a 120 it does take a long time to recharge, but if you are investing in a EV you should have at least a 240 outlet.
The problem with EVs is there is no infrastructure, if I drive 200 miles away there is no place to recharge. If there were recharge stations everywhere like there are gas stations, it would be much more feasible to own an EV.
I'll never go back to purely ICE vehicles, they cost thousands of dollars to maintain, so many parts of the engine that break down, require replacement, need to be changed, and then there is the cost for fuel itself.
We've had an average raise in electricity costs of just under $10 a month, that is what it costs us to "fuel" up our EVs each month. We easily spent over $500 a month on gas before that, for two vehicles.
When we bought our Volt several years ago I switched over to a "time of day" electric fee shedule. The cost goes up in the daytime, down at night, with different time schedules for summer and winter. The Volt allowed me to input that schedule so it wouldn't charge at "on peak" times.
After a year our electric bill hand't changed, while I typically got 3,000 miles on an 8 gallon fill up. Might check into that, if it's available in your area.
Lack of charging stations isn't the only problem; the long recharge times are as well. When it takes hours to get a full charge as opposed to 5 minutes to get a full tank that's a problem.
The number one problem is lack of infrastructure.
If every parking lot (Wallmart, Target, CVS) and every hotel and every major highway had at least a few recharging stations there would be some feasibility to an EV.
To own a non-Tesla EV today is to be seriously restricted in one's ability to travel.
And of course I am sure the oil companies put all sorts of pressure in DC to keep from passing laws to build up our infrastructure.
Its a shame that a small start-up corporation like Tesla was able to create an entire network of recharge stations allowing you to drive all over the country, but the government cannot.
With the Trillions our government p!sses away on the most idiotic things, one small portion of that could have created the infrastructure along our highways to greatly move the EV conversion forward.
Ultimately EVs are a more economical solution for most people, as few people in their daily travels need 250 miles of range. Its just a shame people are filled with deceptions and falsehoods about how bad EVs are.
I'd add that if you live west of the Mississippi and east of the Pacific coast states long distance travel in an EV is often, simply put, impossible. Charging stations are a long ways apart...if you can find one at all.
I won't own an EV; rather I bought a PHEV, and a charging station for my home, that I can also use on long trips.
Perhaps, I just came across this:
Yes, if we had not brought the issue up and brought it front and center, then we could have expected a continuation of business as usual?
The primary issue here is police brutality in these cases regardless of race or ethnicity involved.
I can neither explain and if it is as you say, not support what has happened. I am on record as not supporting reverse racism.
Racism combined with political and economic power is the real culprit, who do you think has that?
Well, those issues that you say are important only because they resonate with Black Americans are the reason we bring it up, they are identified as problems to a far greater degree
Why do you keep,saying the media is the enemy, WE don't own it?
"The primary issue here is police brutality in these cases regardless of race or ethnicity involved."
Odd - I have yet to see or hear of a report of police brutality against a white man (except for those above). If we never hear of it, it is not an issue.
Whites are considered racist if they don't join the bandwagon of BLM; are blacks racist if they don't riot over white deaths from police?
It s odd, because all such incidents need to be reported regardless.
How many incidents like the Dallas one has occurred, what about the cell phon cameras? Why are there not more such instanc s made available to see that is completely outside of the so called media bias and such?
"Why are there not more such instanc s made available to see that is completely outside of the so called media bias and such?"
Where you suggest a cell phone owner make their videos available? On Tik Tok? I don't have an account. On Twitter? No account. On Facebook? The huge percentage of what I see comes from my own friends (and ads), not some yahoo across the country.
Without MSM, they never see the light of day. Reported or not, they are never seen, and MSM is not interested in reporting the death of a mere white man to the nation. No ratings in it.
"Racism combined with political and economic power is the real culprit, who do you think has that?"
I couldn't disagree more. I believe in individual responsibility. If you are truly not racist, no political power or economic power can make you that way. What you stated is just a way to get out of individual responsibility and blame "politicians and rich people." I don't buy it. Being racist comes down to individual choices. If you exclude white people because they are white, you are racist. If you ignore it when police kill an unarmed man because the man was white, that is racist.
"Why do you keep,saying the media is the enemy, WE don't own it?"
What "WE" are you referring to? They have to generate revenue and they do this by getting people to watch it. The media no longer provides objective reports but biased reporting to meet the needs of a political party. They manipulate and spew forth propaganda of one political party. The viewers or readers are the ones who should own it, but that is no longer the case. Journalism in the United States is dead.
Individual responsibility is fine as long as long as I am not being tied to post while others are free to run. There seem to be an awful lot of racism in America that was considered debilatating if you were on the wrong end until relatively recently.
As I said, this issue of police brutality go beyond race in my opinion.
Do you include Fox as part of journalism propaganda? The Right and its media is rife with lies, is that to be ignored?
Do you not blame politicians as socialist in direct opposition to your right winged utopia, Mike?
"I am not being tied to post while others are free to run" What does that mean? You should have success without struggle? If someone has it easy getting rich, so should you? Guess what? Life isn't fair. My friend is a black man who grew up in a single parent home with six other siblings in the projects in Philadelphia. Guess what? He is now very wealthy. He had a lot to overcome but he succeeded. The first self-made female millionaire in the United States was a woman named C.J. Walker. She earned her money during the late 1800s and early 1900s. Did she have it as fair as others? NO! Did she have to struggle? YES Was she more successful than most people who grew up with all the privileges of wealth? YES. She didn't worry about some government program to make things equal for her? NO She did it all on her own. Why? According to an interview with her she "refused to give herself any excuses to fail." That is true no matter what a person's skin color.
Fox gets lots of things wrong since Rupert Murdoch let his kids start to run day-to-day operations. Fox and CNN are cable news networks. The mainstream is absolutely crooked.
This is from the Museum of African American History And Culture in Washington DC. This is a taxpayer funded organization. Should this be considered racist? If something similar appeared in a museum concerning "Blackness" would you be offended?
Of course, no one get there without struggle and all the things associated with successful people.
How much further would CJ have gone forward without the impediment of Jim Crow? That is an externally imposed competitive disadvantage, that has nothing to do with her ability and determination succeed. We were required to be able to cross Mt. Everest while those without such impediments only needed to step over an ant hill or two. It is a gross exaggeration that I use to try to make a point.
I don't like the poster as it makes stereotypical presumptions that cannot be used to define all white people. I don't like labels and I am sure that you don't either. Yeah, it would say the the poster had the aura of racism all over it. Being the ideal ever-present prudent good guy is the definition of whiteness? Hardly....
Credence2: It seems, in these forums, when the topic is about racism, people are either defending that they are not racists or those of color need to pull up their bootstraps because they have the same opportunities as everybody else.
They are really not able to put themselves in the shoes of those whose ancestors came here not by choice, but to be exploited by the white man. Here is an article about Anti-racism that I think everybody should read.
https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is … ist-2020-6
I read the article, PeoplePower, thanks
It won't be met with rave reviews but the rightwing crowd that really believe that it is all Horatio Alger.
While in Montana, I was told by a member of the Crow Tribe there that while current whites and others are not to blame for the Indian Wars and such, they still benefit by holding on to stolen property. If you were really sincere about making amends, return it.....
A superfluous example of a basic principle that just because a practice has stopped does not mean that the effects of it in the aftermath are to just disappear.
Credenced2: When we were in Deadwood South Dakota, we went to a Lokata museum. They told us that the U.S. government had a treaty whereby the tribes were allowed to live in the Black Hills.
All was well until gold was discovered in the Black Hills and then the white man took over the gold and put the Indians in reservations. The tribe was called Lakota, but the white man gave them the name of Sioux which was very derogatory to them and still is till this day.
Should THIS be considered racist?
"MSNBC Hails Biden's Judicial Nominees: 'Not One of Them is a White Man"
https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/alex-c … e-manMSNBC Hails Biden's Judicial Nominees: 'Not One of Them is a White Man'
Yes, and women. Biden's history is that of a panderer.
A classic panderer. He says or does whatever he thinks will gain his favor. In this case, the figures kill two birds with one stone. Still can't figure how this guy ended up in the White House. He is so very transparent, and predictable.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/ … urt-judges
"Most white people stereotype blacks in some form or another."
Please don't tell me most blacks don't stereotype white people. It will make me laugh. Trust me, I've heard it before.
'Most white people'.
Pretty much says it all as to stereotyping. A closed mind is pretty unfortunate.
To all in this forum. Trump was a racists and is still a racists and he will never change. Biden may have been a racists, but in my opinion, I think he has changed since being president. You may say the evidence of Trump being a racists is not valid, but history and the facts speak for themselves.
Please give me one example of Biden being a racists as president. Even if he was a racists, it wasn't to the magnitude of Trump. Trump has embolden the white supremacists and neo NAZI's who hate Jews, blacks, and Asians, and anybody who doesn't support them.
There has always been systemic racism in this country and it was somewhat under ground, but since Trump, it has raised its ugly head with the police departments across the nation and those who are still lamenting about the Civil War and emblazon the Confederate flag and the Klu Klux Klan. Just look at Charlottesville and the storming of the Capitol.
You may call this deflection, but it is not. It's just another piece of the ugly puzzle of different values and belief systems that don't bring us together but keep us apart socially, culturally, and politically. This includes Maxine Waters and the term used by the right called Race Baiting that is used as propaganda whenever the left talks about the mistreatment of blacks.
"Trump was a racists and is still a racists and he will never change. Biden may have been a racists, but in my opinion, I think he has changed since being president. '
You think --- How did you come to have the opinion Biden has changed his spots?
At this point, he is on a chain, told what to say and what not to say. At this point he race-baits. He has from day one. He stirs the pot to keep a base and black votes. he is one discussing human beings. He is a puppet at this point, with many strategizing on what he projects with his words. He has pitted white against blacks at this point. And he is doing a superb job at it.
And you are very correct there has always been systemic racism in America. And it is once again reaching a peak due to Democrat's race-baiting. Thank God Conservatives have the ability to keep calm and see through a Dem scam. I will admit it's been one of their most
It is also clear there is a wide split in American values. But Republicans/conservatives as a rule hold their values very dear and don't bend to crazy ideologies. We live around them until the next silly batch of ideologies come along.
I realize why you deflect --- When the facts are presented they are hard to dispute. You revert to Trump bad man and list all the expected unproven allegations against the man ...
As you felt comfortable throughout the thread to offer a very descript view of Trump, I feel I can do the same in regards to my feelings about Biden.
We have a bad guy in the White House at present, his name is Joe. And the allegations presented here against Biden are facts. No second-hand info, right from his mouth, his deeds while in the Senate. I note you just skipped over what I presented in regards to Joe's history while in the Senate. Yet dwell on allegations made against Trump. Most unproven, and second hand... It would seem hard to have a conversation with someone that does not acknowledge facts when offered. But, just dismiss them, and more or less just say --- Biden has changed.
I wish I could say different --- However IMO Biden is dangerous to America in my opinion. He is in many ways despicable. He is using race-baiting to divide the country, using the black race in a despicable manner.
You are still not getting it, most of us always vote Democratic, so if Biden is using us so did the Clintons, Bill and Hillary, Obama and even, Jimmy Carter.
Why do you think people are so naive, it is just another one of those "stereotypes", I spoke of. I and others like me have found the Democratic Party preferable in national politics for almost 90 years. There is nothing to be found, when looking at Trump, any of the Democratic contenders in 2020 would have been preferred, that is how it is. Do all you folks really think that you are that much smarter to tell us what our issues and concerns should be?
You disregard that there are many reasons people vote democratic, Black or otherwise, besides your belief that Black people are merely being led along. Rest assured, I always know what I am doing and why. Come on, now.
Peoplepower, as white, understands that the issues of race baiting and such between the two political parties, as neither side is pristine, comes down to a matter of degree.
What about the Systemic racism that you acknowledge exists? You can bet that Democrats/liberals hold their values just as dearly. But, the fact is that you lost with your opponent's set of opinions being the more desirable for more voters, that is the reality. They can't all be dumb, huh? You will have your chance again in 2024.
I can respect all you have stated as your opinion, and I consider you a very intelligent man.
I noted you shied away from the pure subject People power and I were having in regard to Biden's racist tendencies.
I certainly can see where you hope not to discuss the subject, However, you state over and over that Trump is a racist. Got it... But what about the facts I presented on Joe's clear racist tendencies as a Senator, and actually right up to his campaign he was still making off-color statements.
I clearly understand from our previous conversations you are very satisfied with Biden, and the Dem party in regards to their agenda. It is also clear more voted for Biden and he won the presidency. So, yes it stands out that many agree with your view.
I can't agree with that Republican party race-biats. The party has faults but I don't consider one of them race-baiting. Hey, just my perspective.
Your comments are in quotes. My replies follow your comments.
"Trump was a racists and is still a racists and he will never change. Biden may have been a racists, but in my opinion, I think he has changed since being president.
“You think --- How did you come to have the opinion Biden has changed his spots?”
Give me one example of Biden being racists as president.
“At this point, he is on a chain, told what to say and what not to say.”
Who has him on a chain and tells him what to say and what not to say?
“At this point he race-baits.”
I don’t buy that term. The right uses that as propaganda against the left. Here is some context:
https://splinternews.com/if-youre-confu … 1793848630
“He has from day one. He stirs the pot to keep a base and black votes. he is one discussing human beings. He is a puppet at this point, with many strategizing on what he projects with his words. He has pitted white against blacks at this point. And he is doing a superb job at it.”
Tell me again what puppeteer is pulling his strings?
“And you are very correct there has always been systemic racism in America. And it is once again reaching a peak due to Democrat's race-baiting. Thank God Conservatives have the ability to keep calm and see through a Dem scam. I will admit it's been one of their most
Again, I don’t buy that term. How do you determine how calm are conservatives? That is a gross generalization on your part.
“It is also clear there is a wide split in American values. But Republicans/conservatives as a rule hold their values very dear and don't bend to crazy ideologies. We live around them until the next silly batch of ideologies come along.”
Again a gross generalization on your part.
“I realize why you deflect --- When the facts are presented they are hard to dispute. You revert to Trump bad man and list all the expected unproven allegations against the man ...”
They are not unproven allegations. They are documented facts. You just don’t accept them because you are trying to defend Trump.
“As you felt comfortable throughout the thread to offer a very descript view of Trump, I feel I can do the same in regards to my feelings about Biden.”
I think you already have.
“We have a bad guy in the White House at present, his name is Joe. And the allegations presented here against Biden are facts. No second-hand info, right from his mouth, his deeds while in the Senate. I note you just skipped over what I presented in regards to Joe's history while in the Senate. Yet dwell on allegations made against Trump. Most unproven, and second hand... It would seem hard to have a conversation with someone that does not acknowledge facts when offered. But, just dismiss them, and more or less just say --- Biden has changed.”
Again give me one example as how he is a racists since being president. What I have presented about Trump is verifiable fact.
“I wish I could say different --- However IMO Biden is dangerous to America in my opinion. He is in many ways despicable. He is using race-baiting to divide the country, using the black race in a despicable manner.”
That’s exactly how I feel about Trump. Race baiting is not a valid term in the sense you are using it in.
Here is more historical support for Trump being a racists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_vi … nald_Trump
I have long moved on from all Trump. I intend on concentrating on Biden at this point. Perhaps there are others here that will continue to discuss the past and ignore the here and now.
"Again a gross generalization on your part." You should realize I offered opinions, personal perceptions. As you have done. I would think it hypocritical of you to feel your opinion is more worthy than mine... I find this odd.
"You should realize I offered opinions, personal perceptions. As you have done. I would think it hypocritical of you to feel your opinion is more worthy than mine... I find this odd."
That dog doesn't hunt. If you read the Wikipedia link, you would realize that those statements are not my opinion, but historical, detailed facts that can be verified.
When I asked you to give me one example of Biden being a racists as president, you didn't answer. I don't care you don't have to answer, because I think you would be hard pressed to find anything at this point.
Let's face it. You are as prejudice of Biden as I am of Trump. I'm not going to forget about Trump because he is lurking in the background and is planning to run for president again. I'm not going to forget all the stupid and wrong things he did.
He has a tremendous influence on the right extremists in congress, including Mitch McConnel. In my view he is still a very dangerous person for this country. He even has a tremendous influence on right wing governors. But you don't care about his character or what he did to screw up this country for the long term. You overlook all of that as many of his supporters do because you think he did wonderful things for this country.
To me, he is nothing more than a despicable used car salesman that knows how to play to people's fantasies and will lie and cheat to get what he wants to satisfy his narcissitic ego...
Have a great day, Mike
I have come to the conclusion that Trump is a race baiter if not a racist. Trump is an amoral man and will use whatever tools are in tool box to gain advantages for himself, solely. Racebaiting is a form of red meat for conservatives and stirs them up. I don't think Trump really believes in anything in earnest or principle outside of taking care of himself.
We all stereotype to a certain degree, just look at the attitudes ascribed to blacks here. Take off those red blinders and look for yourself,
" a known documented racists for most of his life."
I think you might have trouble supporting that as anything more than an opinion. Yet you state it as a fact.
GA: This is just one of many.
https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/ … sm-history
I will deflect as you have seen fit to do --- You have brought up your belief that Trump is a racist. I think it is suitable to point out Biden's job history in regard to race. It's clear he has made many racist comments over the last two years. It may be time to look at his past actions, his job history in the Senate as it relates to race, and systemic rare problems. Did he support black citizen's needs or did he work hard to discriminate against them? I mean, after all, Trump is gone, we now have Biden in the White House. Should we all be as concerned about his attitude in regard to race? Or does he just get a magical pass go card? Trump certainly did not get that card. Is it hypocritical to support such a man?
During the last election, the Democrat Party is spent millions of dollars in campaign ads targeting minority communities falsely painting President Trump as a racist. The fact is Joe Biden has supported more policies that adversely impacted African Americans and facts confirm President Trump has implemented and supported policies that have resulted in real growth inside minority communities.
I think it fair to look back on Biden's history in the Senate - What he was up to at his job. Did he really support the needs of black citizens? Let's have a look...
In 1977 U.S. Senator Joe Biden was adamantly and vociferous against desegregating public schools. Busing was being considered as a program that would provide transportation for minority children into better school systems at the time occupied by mostly white children. It was felt and was presented as an idea that would have allowed children of different races to interact with each other, develop respect for one another, and help create a more diverse and accepting society, while also providing black children a better education.
Biden's own words made that very clear. Biden’s biggest fear was obvious that his own children might have to grow up alongside African American children and expressed those fears on the floor of the United States Senate when he stated "Unless we do something about this, my children are going to grow up in a jungle, the jungle being a racial jungle with tensions having built so high that it is going to explode at some point. We have got to make some move on this.”.
Let's consider Biden respected and worked side by side with Ku Klux Klan Senator Robert Byrd. Biden partnered with a former member Senator Robert Byrd (D-W.Va) who held the Senate floor for more than 14 hours in a filibuster against the 1964 civil rights bill. These two partnered up and wanted to prohibit the use of federal funds to transport students beyond the school closest to their homes ensuring that black kids stayed in black schools.
However, Joe Biden was not done by as of yet. He realized the best way to keep black children out of white neighborhoods was to eliminate any potential funding streams. So in 1977, Biden co-sponsored a measure that further restricted the federal government from desegregating city and suburban schools with redistricting measures like school clustering and pairing.
By 1977 Biden had truly emerged as the Democratic party’s leader in racist policies and even joined up with segregationists Jesse Helms from North Carolina. The two worked together to strip the federal government’s power to withhold funding from school districts that did not comply with measures under the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Joe Biden did not want the Federal Government to be able to enforce the Civil Rights Act on School Districts that did not want black children in white schools.
In the middle of all this, the racist Helms welcomed Biden "To the ranks of the enlightened”.
Has time changes Joe Biden's mind in regards to providing better education for the underprivileged? Trump started a new movement to help African American children obtain better educational opportunities through school vouchers. A program supported by a majority of African Americans especially African American women. Joe Biden has claimed he is against school od choice and school vouchers.
Should we have a look at Biden's criminal justice reform? The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, now known as the 1994 crime law, was the result of years of work by Biden, who oversaw the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time, and other Democrats.
The 1994 crime law passed by Congress. The bill which was meant to reverse decades of rising crime was one of the key contributors to mass incarceration. The bill leads to more prison sentences, more prison cells, and more aggressive policing — especially hurting Black and brown Americans, who are disproportionately likely to be incarcerated.
It well appears Biden had racists tendencies and has throughout his life. His racist words are telling. But his deeds speak so much more loudly, do they not?
The thread was about Maxine Waters, it may have been wise to discuss the subject, not bring Trump in as a comparison. It leaves a door open for the ugly fact we have a racist sitting in the White House presently.
Sharlee: Obviously, you didn't take all that off the top of your head. I posted the link for my reply. What is your source for all that information about Biden. I would like to read it for myself.
The reason I brought Trump into the picture is because he is a racists and he incited violent protests, just like many people in this forum have claimed Maxine waters statements would do, but so far that is not the case. I think it is wishful think on the part of people who don't like her. They would love to see her go down in flames.
No, I certainly did not come about that information without lots of research. I did the research during the last election on the Dem candidate. I do this each presidential election. I have many articles that I saved due to gathering info on an HP I did on Biden while he was running for office. The reason I wrote such a lengthy comment was to provide information that I felt was important. I wanted to touch home, some don't 'take the time to visit links. I wanted to back up my opinion with facts. I will add the link to a couple of places that cover what I posted. One such link is Biden's own page that each Senator has that shows each and every bill or bill they supported from the bill being presented and the final fruition of the bill. I think this the best link to get to know what Biden did in his 50 years in the Senate.
https://www.congress.gov/member/joseph- … e=expanded
New York Times "lock Up The SOB" https://outline.com/5fsBvA
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/25/us/j … -laws.html
I hope the others of your "many" are more conclusive. This one repeatedly used words indicating opinion or interpretation. The article even answered that same question:
"For one, the argument is tremendously semantic. It’s essentially probing the question: Is Trump racist or is he bigoted? But who cares? Neither is a trait that anyone should want in a president — and either label essentially communicates the same criticism."
GA: This is for your dining and dancing pleasure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_vi … nald_Trump
If BLM really cared about their people, they'd educate them and help them gain power through knowledge, not protesting, and disregarding the laws.
This is a telling reminder that everything is not hunky-dory in USA and the Black Lives Matter movement should not be taken too seriously.
Amen and hear, hear Ken!
I would like to add that blaming the media is like flogging a dead horse. The media functions under a set of rules which they have formulated and they have to generate a profit they are not there at the beck and call of the common man. As far as racism is concerned we must recognize the fact that it is something that is inbuilt in the human mind. The concept of color has been there for the last 4000 years and even among the Negroes the lighter-skinned are preferred and I can say that with authority having spent time in Africa. The color bar is not going to go away and never will that is the reason all the Scriptures whether they are Hindu or Christian refer to the white color as something good and pure and to be desired. Why even in the Koran the houries are described as having flawless white skin. Certain facts have to be excepted and it is up to the individual to formulate his mind. I will give a small example I had a friend in America who was all the time talking in favor of the black man and that he was oppressed but when his daughter wanted to marry a black man he lost his shirt and threatened to shoot him dead till his daughter broke with him.
"I would like to add that blaming the media is like flogging a dead horse. The media functions under a set of rules which they have formulated and they have to generate a profit they are not there at the beck and call of the common man."
I agree. In the United States, we at one time, had something called Journalistic integrity. I had to take a course in college on journalism ethics. There was a time when the goal was to report the facts and let the reader/viewer make a decision about a story. That is no longer the case. The reporting in the written and broadcast media is absolutely hideous. There is no longer story balance, facts are not verified, and many in the mainstream American media simply report lies and half truths to support a single political party. They play on a person's emotion rather than their mind. This is done to increase readers/viewers. It's a shame. We now have nothing but propaganda like Russia's Pravda news agency.
I have a black friend who is very wealthy and he married a white woman. It really was a huge scandal in their family. Eventually they got to know her and realized she was great lady, but it took time.
Definition of Propaganda:
Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.
Information, ideas, opinions, or images, often only giving one part of an argument, that are broadcast, published, or in some other way spread with the intention of influencing people's opinions.
Definition of Independent Journalism:
Any form of press, that is free of inspiration by government/political or corporate interests.
Please provide the sources of information in "American news", especially that found on tv, that you feel meets the definition of Independent Journalism.
"The fight is already over, what is to come will come."
The article states pretty much what I just said in my previous reply.
A 240 is nothing more than a dryer outlet. If you do not have one of those available to you, for whatever reason, then an EV is not for you.
Ken, I did not read your previous replies, I was responding to PP's criticism of Trump (in this case) Trump's push for energy independence. I happened to come across it about the time my husband was telling me about an article he had just read, about the lack of enthusiasm for electric cars in Cali. (article shared)
While a dryer outlet will work (if it is within reach and if you aren't using the dryer) it isn't optimal. A class II charger will provide all the current your Volt will accept off of a 30 amp breaker, but many cars (especially the all electric ones) can handle over 6KW, and that requires a larger circuit.
I operate with a 240 just fine, never have any issues with charging. I can achieve a full 250 miles of range from almost 0 with one night of charging.
The Volt uses a standard 120, the all electric Bolt the 240.
I do not have to share the 240 with a dryer as it is gas operated, so this is not a problem.
As most of the charging is done in the evening hours, the impact to our electric bill has been minimal. There was no need for costly electrical upgrades, though at some time in the future I want to install solar panels and a power wall with enough storage capacity to cover a 24 hour period.
At which point upgrades to the electrical system will be required.
"We have to move on from fossil fuel. Oil is a finite commodity. There is only so much fracking that can be done. "
That is simply not true. Here is a story from Yahoo News. One of the most liberal rags on the planet discussing how we won't run out of fossil fuels.
"We Will Not Run Out of Fossil Fuels"
"Even if no more fossil fuels were to be discovered or deemed extractable, our nations already possess far more reserves and recoverable resources worldwide than we can burn without destroying the climate. Humanity has burned just a small portion of our fossil fuels to date."
https://news.yahoo.com/not-run-fossil-f … 43174.html
You do have a sense of humor after all PP I love it! That would be fun to cruise around in for a while....a very short while!
Wanna a little fun, guys?
Check out the History Channel's documentary on "The Food that Built America".
by Mike Russo 5 months ago
Finally Justice is being servedRhodes and the other defendants were charged with disrupting the peaceful transfer of power by conspiring to oppose by force the certification of President Joe Biden's electoral college victory on Jan. 6, 2021, among multiple other...
by TruthDebater 12 years ago
How does a government and society expect people to value all life including themselves and each other, while at the same time, the government can influence and enforce the death penalty and abortion? If people see abortion and "DP" as justified when someone is inconvenienced or found...
by Jack Lee 5 years ago
Was justice served in this case?
by Renee S 11 years ago
Maxine Water (D) Congresswoman out of California. She's definately opinionated. I guess her mamma loved her. What do you have to say about her?
by chipsball 9 years ago
Having survived the "Rites of Passage of an African-American Teenager in America" myself as a teenager and having raised four African-Americans teenagers in America I feel so blessed today that none of them ever encountered George Zimmerman. Nor having them ever being judged by the jurors...
by PR Morgan 11 years ago
What is the bigger injustice, that a guilty man goes free or an innocent man be jailed?
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2023 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|