I'm still waiting to hear about Taylor vs. Ohio, Citizen Aretas. Maybe you should ask him, AMiB.
Also, have you weighed in on Stop and Frisk yet, Citizen R.? I don't recall.
It's the Supreme Court decision that provides the Constitutional basis for Stop and Frisk (TM). See a page or two back.
Something I noticed in Should Gang Bangers Be Treated Like Terrorists was how he would ignore my questions but answer yours when you asked the same thing.
|
Actually HE implied that poor ghetto residents needed legalization to be protected from the police. i equally hate all drug use and find the poor crack smoker equal to the wealthy heroin addict or middle class raver.Legalization breaks the back of gangs, which are a major source of crime and violence in poor neighborhoods.
But this?
Or just maybe your ghettos could NOT bake their brains and follow the law like the rest of us, just sayin......This is racist whistleword bullcrap.
I'm a Greek/American and proud of my peoples accomplishments and history. I get inspiration from my Greek, European and American history so I can strive to do better for myself, my family and community.
Taking pride in that is a great thing. Not to be diminished by race baiters like you who would call me and people like me racist or make me ashamed of my heritage.Nothing inherently wrong with this, but talking about pride in your European heritage while also talking about enforcing draconian legal measures on neighborhoods full of people who don't look like you (in one of the most segregated cities in the US, no less) while also talking about how Arab immigrants want to destroy the US (as you have elsewhere) tends to paint a picture. It isn't a pleasant one.
And your only response to this is how dare I call you a racist, etc. The sane response is "Holy s**#, this is problematic. Am I okay with the motivations of people who are expressing the same goals as me?" It's not about being part of the WPWW 1488 crowd, but rather sharing goals and rhetoric with them. Because right now, your solution for "suffering communities" is to inflict more suffering on them.
Is having voter I.D., secure borders, enforcing immigration laws racist rhetoric to you?Not sure what this has to do with anything, but there's a long history in the US of making...
Racist except i say the same about white trash meth cookers. trash is trash regardless of color.
|
|
I'm still waiting to hear about Taylor vs. Ohio, Citizen Aretas. Maybe you should ask him, AMiB.
Also, have you weighed in on Stop and Frisk yet, Citizen R.? I don't recall.
It is very iffy as to it's enforcement. as a limited project to end one particular problem maybe but as an ongoing policy it seems to problematic.
I'm still waiting to hear about Taylor vs. Ohio, Citizen Aretas. Maybe you should ask him, AMiB.I don't know what that is.
I believe you meant Terry v. Ohio, Comrade.
|
|
Actually HE implied that poor ghetto residents needed legalization to be protected from the police. i equally hate all drug use and find the poor crack smoker equal to the wealthy heroin addict or middle class raver.But the "poor ghetto residents" are not exclusive to illicit drug usage (but I know you're aware of that because your following sentence affirms it).
I would like you to clarify, if you don't mind. You said all drug use. That's a sweeping broad generalization that can encompasses a lot of (un)scheduled classes that shouldn't deserve your ire. I assume you mean a certain class of drugs? I get the illustrative examples from the three social classes you provided, but I just wanted to be clear so I wasn't misconstruing you.
Thanks, Andrew.
Any recreational drug use, of course i oppose excessive drinking too. I have no respect for those that want to wreck their mind and body and all too often wind up a burden or danger to society. A glaucoma patient using marijuana because it is the only effective drug i do not have an issue with but the guy taking prescription narcotics for minor aches just to get the high is on my list.
Any recreational drug use, of course i oppose excessive drinking too. I have no respect for those that want to wreck their mind and body and all too often wind up a burden or danger to society. A glaucoma patient using marijuana because it is the only effective drug i do not have an issue with but the guy taking prescription narcotics for minor aches just to get the high is on my list.
Thanks for clarifying.
What about tobacco?
Any recreational drug use, of course i oppose excessive drinking too. I have no respect for those that want to wreck their mind and body and all too often wind up a burden or danger to society. A glaucoma patient using marijuana because it is the only effective drug i do not have an issue with but the guy taking prescription narcotics for minor aches just to get the high is on my list.Actually HE implied that poor ghetto residents needed legalization to be protected from the police. i equally hate all drug use and find the poor crack smoker equal to the wealthy heroin addict or middle class raver.But the "poor ghetto residents" are not exclusive to illicit drug usage (but I know you're aware of that because your following sentence affirms it).
I would like you to clarify, if you don't mind. You said all drug use. That's a sweeping broad generalization that can encompasses a lot of (un)scheduled classes that shouldn't deserve your ire. I assume you mean a certain class of drugs? I get the illustrative examples from the three social classes you provided, but I just wanted to be clear so I wasn't misconstruing you.
Thanks, Andrew.
Hnn. Interesting.
|
|
Any recreational drug use, of course i oppose excessive drinking too. I have no respect for those that want to wreck their mind and body and all too often wind up a burden or danger to society. A glaucoma patient using marijuana because it is the only effective drug i do not have an issue with but the guy taking prescription narcotics for minor aches just to get the high is on my list.Thanks for clarifying.
What about tobacco?
Tobacco doesn't warp the mind like booze and drugs but is still a horrible health hazard when over used. I think occasional tobacco and alcohol use can be ok but moderation is the key. Most drugs do not have a "moderation" point at all and any use has instant and foolish consequence.
I think the best NYPD movie would probably be Bad Lieutenant starring Harvey Keitel. Not to say that all cops are bad, (the uniform doesn't make the man) but the higher ups in the NYPD seem to be real Fascists.
I just discovered that the law firm representing the class action suit for NYC's "Stop N' Frisk" abuse is the same firm representing my 2004 RNC arrest at the hands of NYPD.
http://www.blhny.com/newsitem.cfm/ID/22
And my case:
http://www.blhny.com/newsitem.cfm/ID/17
It has been 8 years now...
I believe you meant Terry v. Ohio, Comrade.I'm still waiting to hear about Taylor vs. Ohio, Citizen Aretas. Maybe you should ask him, AMiB.I don't know what that is.
Woops. Well, I have been doing drugs all day...
Or just maybe your ghettos could NOT bake their brains and follow the law like the rest of us, just sayin......
---
Racist except i say the same about white trash meth cookers. trash is trash regardless of color.
Oh, so there are people doing drugs outside of the ghetto!
What about tobacco?Tobacco doesn't warp the mind like booze and drugs but is still a horrible health hazard when over used. I think occasional tobacco and alcohol use can be ok but moderation is the key. Most drugs do not have a "moderation" point at all and any use has instant and foolish consequence.
One could argue that tobacco may have more addictive qualities than alcohol and marijuana and perhaps even be classified as more harmful than the two. At least marijuana has medicinal value and some of its variant raw by-products have commercial usage outside of inhaling / ingesting. I cannot seem to see the same for tobacco, though. If there is a beneficial purpose for tobacco, please let me know.
It is a horrible health hazard, like you implied. I personally do not smoke; I abhor the odor of it on one's breath. [Moreover, I have never experimented with any form of recreational drugs.] I can only imagine what it's doing to the rest of one's body, including the lungs. And it's highly addictive. I know so many people that have so much trouble kicking the habit. But it feels so good to get that nicotine high fix because it's a stress reliever, I'm told. Nicotine does mimic serotonin inside the human body and has a tendency to hijack its production and thus "warp the mind" as the high delivered is not a natural one.
I am aware that the context does depend on one's interpretation of what is "warping the mind", though. I agree that moderation, as well as education, is imperative.
?
I find this very disturbing. Something needs to be done about this salt epidemic before people's sense of reality become more warped with lengthened exposure. Where is the moral outrage?
I think the best NYPD movie would probably be Bad Lieutenant starring Harvey Keitel. Not to say that all cops are bad, (the uniform doesn't make the man) but the higher ups in the NYPD seem to be real Fascists.
I just discovered that the law firm representing the class action suit for NYC's "Stop N' Frisk" abuse is the same firm representing my 2004 RNC arrest at the hands of NYPD.
LinkAnd my case:
Link
It has been 8 years now...
Oh, and just for shiznit and giggles: Link
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Woops. Well, I have been doing drugs all day...I believe you meant Terry v. Ohio, Comrade.I'm still waiting to hear about Taylor vs. Ohio, Citizen Aretas. Maybe you should ask him, AMiB.I don't know what that is.
OUTRAGEOUS!
To the gallows with you!
Vive le Galt!
Down with Salt!
Yes, Vive le Galt!
One new convert to the Glorious People's Revolution!
Most drugs do not have a "moderation" point at all and any use has instant and foolish consequence.
Bullshiznit. You can't speak from any point of authority or experience about my drugs of (incredibly infrequent) choice and their effects in moderation.
Also, clearly you're on one powerful drug: haterade.
The Stormfront related essays you linked to were "interesting", to say the least. What they failed in their conclusion was to overlook European Colonialism that created the conundrum that resulted in the environment we have fostered today. It was only last quarter SocSci Cultural Diversity that I was made aware of Wallerstein's World-Systems Theory.
When I say that there's little to no difference between right-wing discourse and straight up White Power racism, I'm talking about stuff like this.
On the other hand, children of Mexican immigrants have generally been unsuccessful. Disconnected from their native lands, immersed in a degenerate gangster culture prevalent in ghettos and barrios, with a sense of entitlement derived from being born in the United States, young Hispanics are massively dropping out of high school. Lack of ambition, work ethic and education prevents them from economically advancing in this complex society. They often have difficulty achieving the same level of success as their illiterate parents, and in many cases become career criminals.This is from an essay posted on Stormfront. In fact, Aretas doesn't even have a problem with it:
By the way, the stormfront paragraph you posted does not say one thing that is racist. I found it informative not offensive.Straight up lying about the causes of and solutions to inequity in the US are so pervasive that it has become all but invisible. There isn't any difference between Aretas's argument to ditch the fourth amendment for poor minorities in Chicago because they live in crime-ridden neighborhoods - an argument you'll find all over right-leaning sites, to his limited credit - and the same argument made in straight WP sites except for intent. Both of them ignore the real causes of crime, both of them s+%% on people in bad situations because they "deserve" it for being a bad situation.
Ask yourself where you got the idea that crime reduction is something imposed from the outside.
I never said people in bad situations "deserve" to be Sh*t on. You are making things up again and claim that I'm lying! I thought you were a smooth operator until recently, shame on you.
IMPORTANT:
You forgot to include this paragraph in the quote you posted right before "On the other hand."
"Economic consequences of mass immigration of whites and non-whites are completely different. White immigrants arriving on American shores in waves over the last 400 years have brought with them the work ethic and ingenuity that allowed them to assimilate and prosper. The descendents of indentured white servants are as successful today as the descendents of their former masters."
Interesting paragraph in my opinion.
I'm reading this off a stormfront page for the first time thanks to A man in black. I'll finish reading this and get back to you.
To respond briefly I'll take the first quote of what you are using as an anvil to hammer me with.
"On the other hand, children of Mexican immigrants have generally been unsuccessful"
So you believe this statement to be false? I see articles in many publications illustrating highschool drop out rates, college graduates and employement based on race. Hispanics rank low compared to whites and asians. Maybe on par with blacks. What is the racist show stopper?
What you quoted from Stormfront:
"Disconnected from their native lands, immersed in a degenerate gangster culture prevalent in ghettos and barrios"
So you don't believe that Latino culture in America has been usurped by gangster culture? If you really believe that I'm really suprised you are missed it.
What you quoted:
"Poverty creates the environment where gangs can form at all. If someone has (or thinks) that their legal opportunities are slim, then illegal opportunities become more attractive. This isn't just a matter of needing food and shelter; people have an innate desire to feel needed and useful. Gangs offer this affirmation and what appears to be a lucrative opportunity"
What Stormfront article says:
"They often have difficulty achieving the same level of success as their illiterate parents, and in many cases become career criminals.
It appears that the article you posted gives reasons to the stormfront article on why they don't reach their potential in society.
The white elephant in the room yields the floor to Citizen Aretas:
A simple YES or NO answer will suffice.
You are more than welcome to expand upon that one word answer to clarify it in case we are being obtuse.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You mention publications that you believe are indistinguishable from white power sites. What do they have in common? Is having voter I.D., secure borders, enforcing immigration laws racist rhetoric to you?
I'm going to say yes on the voter ID laws.
Voter ID laws are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Period.
Voter impersonation is so close to zero, that it doesn't matter. Some studies show that it is as rare as 10 cases, in the entire country, since 2000. If those happened in only presidential elections, that's 10 cases of voter impersonation out of 350 million votes cast in the past 3 elections combined. Out of every 35 million voters, one is impersonating someone.
Also, most cases of voter impersonation have involved family members.
So, since protecting elections cannot possibly be the motivation for voter ID laws, we have to look at other potential motivations. Estimates are that as many as 20% of people who are young, poor and a minority don't have photo ID. So, why exactly do you think that we should put roadblocks between them and a ballot? Since, as I've already shown, preventing voter fraud cannot possibly be the reason.
Also, estimates show that absentee voting is shown to have a higher rate of fraud. But it also tends to swing more conservative (the military tends to vote more republican, and are one of the biggest groups of absentee voters). But republicans haven't made any laws targeting that.
So again, their intention isn't to actually target voter fraud.
A huge number of people siding WITH criminals AGAINST legal authority and you see that as nothing but the police being in the wrong?Calling the police "a gang" does not help. I can't take you seriously.
To the last sentence you wrote, incase you missed it I started this thread because I care about my community.
It doesn't matter what you take seriously, or what mental gymnastics you go through to preserve your ideological narrative. The fact remains that people do not like the police and have a culture of such, especially in minority communities. Not only that, but this opinion is completely justified.
This is reality and we have to deal with what is actually the case, as determined through observing (what a novel concept). The police are going to have to shape up, and aggressively combat both their negative image, and their actual misbehavior.
It also does not matter whether stop and frisk reduces crime or not (I don't think that it does, statistics only show that arrests for things like possession of really small amounts of pot are up). It is pretty blatantly an excuse for the police to racially profile (which is illegal) and stop people with no legitimate probable cause (which is unconstitutional).
Basically, yes. But you have taken my argument and couched it in ridiculous, reductive and completely disingenuous terms.
Let me explain again, without your presupposition that everyone in poor, inner-city communities is a criminal. There is a trend that has been going for the last decades which involves the militarization of the police, disconnecting from communities as others have explained before in this thread, and other, more minor symptoms. The fact remains that no matter how you twist what I say, there are large segments of the population who do not like or trust the police. Now you can just sit back in your ivory tower and condemn those people for whatever reason you make up, or you can look to reality and find the causes and solutions.
The root of your problem is that you have conflated Lawful and Good. As soon as I find the article about that particular fallacy again, I will like to it.
You mention publications that you believe are indistinguishable from white power sites. What do they have in common? Is having voter I.D., secure borders, enforcing immigration laws racist rhetoric to you?I'm going to say yes on the voter ID laws.
Voter ID laws are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Period.
Voter impersonation is so close to zero, that it doesn't matter. Some studies show that it is as rare as 10 cases, in the entire country, since 2000. If those happened in only presidential elections, that's 10 cases of voter impersonation out of 350 million votes cast in the past 3 elections combined. Out of every 35 million voters, one is impersonating someone.
Also, most cases of voter impersonation have involved family members.
So, since protecting elections cannot possibly be the motivation for voter ID laws, we have to look at other potential motivations. Estimates are that as many as 20% of people who are young, poor and a minority don't have photo ID. So, why exactly do you think that we should put roadblocks between them and a ballot? Since, as I've already shown, preventing voter fraud cannot possibly be the reason.
Also, estimates show that absentee voting is shown to have a higher rate of fraud. But it also tends to swing more conservative (the military tends to vote more republican, and are one of the biggest groups of absentee voters). But republicans haven't made any laws targeting that.
So again, their intention isn't to actually target voter fraud.
I disagree with you totally. To make my point I'm going to ask this gentleman to say it for me. Mithral Truth
|
|
A huge number of people siding WITH criminals AGAINST legal authority and you see that as nothing but the police being in the wrong?Calling the police "a gang" does not help. I can't take you seriously.
To the last sentence you wrote, incase you missed it I started this thread because I care about my community.
It doesn't matter what you take seriously, or what mental gymnastics you go through to preserve your ideological narrative. The fact remains that people do not like the police and have a culture of such, especially in minority communities. Not only that, but this opinion is completely justified.
This is reality and we have to deal with what is actually the case, as determined through observing (what a novel concept). The police are going to have to shape up, and aggressively combat both their negative image, and their actual misbehavior.
It also does not matter whether stop and frisk reduces crime or not (I don't think that it does, statistics only show that arrests for things like possession of really small amounts of pot are up). It is pretty blatantly an excuse for the police to racially profile (which is illegal) and stop people with no legitimate probable cause (which is unconstitutional).
Basically, yes. But you have taken my argument and couched it in ridiculous, reductive and completely disingenuous terms.
Let me explain again, without your presupposition that everyone in poor, inner-city communities is a criminal. There is a trend that has been going for the last decades which involves the militarization of the police, disconnecting from communities as others have explained before in this thread, and other, more minor symptoms. The fact remains that no matter how you twist what I say, there are large segments of the population who do not like or trust the police. Now you can just sit back in your ivory tower and condemn those people for whatever reason you make up, or you can look to...
oh i have said for a long time that liberal vs conservative is very much the chaotic vs lawful fight in the real world and both want to believe themselves good and the other evil. Both are a mix of both. I am OK as LN but some would prefer to sacrifice the good/evil aspect to get the L/C part they really want
|
|
Most drugs do not have a "moderation" point at all and any use has instant and foolish consequence.Bullshiznit. You can't speak from any point of authority or experience about my drugs of (incredibly infrequent) choice and their effects in moderation.
Also, clearly you're on one powerful drug: haterade.
So you can be a little high on ecstasy? Get just a tiny buzz off heroine, smoke it for the taste and not get blasted? Get just a taste of acid without the trip? Or do you do enough to feel it and feel every bit of it?
|
|
One could argue that tobacco may have more addictive qualities than alcohol and marijuana and perhaps even be classified as more harmful than the two. At least marijuana has medicinal value and some of its variant raw by-products have commercial usage outside of inhaling / ingesting. I cannot seem to see the same for tobacco, though. If there is a beneficial purpose for tobacco, please let me know.
It can inhibit hunger and that seems to be why it is so popular with barely surviving tribal groups.I have also heard it is good to help clean wounds. Also i do not think raw tobacco is nearly as addictive as the chemical cluster of modern cigarettes.....
oh i have said for a long time that liberal vs conservative is very much the chaotic vs lawful fight in the real world and both want to believe themselves good and the other evil. Both are a mix of both. I am OK as LN but some would prefer to sacrifice the good/evil aspect to get the L/C part they really want
Fair enough. I am obviously on the other side of that Lawful v. Chaotic spectrum from you.
Even super lawful people have to realize that what is legal and what is right are often not the same thing and that that the legal authorities need to be watched carefully by the rest of society to have a healthy civilization.
So you can be a little high on ecstasy? Get just a tiny buzz off heroine, smoke it for the taste and not get blasted? Get just a taste of acid without the trip? Or do you do enough to feel it and feel every bit of it?
Drug use in moderation does not mean getting a little bit high. It means only getting high occasionally and at times and in settings where it is not irresponsible to. Yes, it is possible to use drugs responsibly, with possible exceptions for some things like crack or crystal meth which have such extreme societal costs. You really need to stop making ridiculous strawman conflations of people's arguments.
So you can be a little high on ecstasy? Get just a tiny buzz off heroine, smoke it for the taste and not get blasted? Get just a taste of acid without the trip?
Actually, in most cases, yes.
Gentlemen:
You can't reason with the unreasonable. I understand the temptation to try -- I often succumb to it myself -- but there is simply no level of eloquence that will not be in vain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... how on earth does "you need to follow the law" apply to a ridiculous injunction against a recreational drug that is less dangerous than salt but not against flagrant violations of the very constitution that all other laws are built on?
Its not even a ridiculous standard. (confusing law with good) Its a blatant double standard. You need to follow the laws (that i agree with) is no different than you need to do what I say.
I would just take a moment to point out that things like, "gangster culture", drug use, lawlessness, and many other things that are viewed as societal ills are abso-funkin-lutely rampant among the mostly wealthy levels of society.
You know who's rocking out to Big L, snorting coke off a prostitute while they rob you blind? Stockbrokers! Bankers! Politicians! The only difference is when they get caught, they take some "family time" in the Bahamas, not a stint in the County lock-up.
Take Jon Corzine , the triple-threat of privilege and power. Last time I checked he had made off with Billions, and well, boys will be boys...
From those Lefties at Forbes
"...that chaos and porous risk controls at the firm, rather than fraud, allowed the money to disappear."
So you can be a little high on ecstasy? Get just a tiny buzz off heroine, smoke it for the taste and not get blasted? Get just a taste of acid without the trip? Or do you do enough to feel it and feel every bit of it?Heroin is an opiate, just like codeine and morphine, and they can legitimately be used as painkillers. (I was just taking codeine to help with the cough and pain from bronchitis, and I'm pretty sure I wasn't getting high on it.) LSD and MDMA were originally developed for psychiatry.
I never said people in bad situations "deserve" to be Sh*t on. You are making things up again and claim that I'm lying! I thought you were a smooth operator until recently, shame on you.I don't think it's an unfair characterization of statements like this.
Scenario: Police see 3 dudes in a car at 2:30 AM cruising around side streets in a HIGH crime neighborhood with dozens of shootings in recent weeks. Common sense man. Not the best scenario but it will do.If I lived in the epicenter of a neighborhood literally at war YEAH I would have no problem allowing the police to do their job.You've maintained that people who live in high-crime neighborhoods—which are minority neighborhoods in Chicago—should be happy to have the police stopping them without cause, questioning them, and searching them. You say you want it for the best reasons, and, hell, I guess I even believe you. The problem is that stop-and-frisk is just as intrusive and unconstitutional and counterproductive and unfair if you do it with the best intentions or if you do it for racist reasons, and there's no shortage of people arguing for it for straight out racist reasons.
Wow. Yikes. I didn't include that paragraph (or any of the rest of the essay) because it's hugely racist and I didn't think it was fair to associate you...IMPORTANT:
You forgot to include this paragraph in the quote you posted right before "On the other hand."
You are totally out of line. The publications I have read come from the Dept of Education! Like this one for example. Are they a racist publication now!
DROP OUT RATES BASED ON RACEHow come recent immigrants from other parts of the world flourish in the US and others have trouble assimilating and succeeding?
I'm going to end this conversation because you always find racism and racists when you need to. People in your community want the killings to stop. Black people are getting killed. Let them kill each other would be a racist attitude, mine is to do whatever is possible to stop the killings. That includes Stop & Frisk.
It can inhibit hunger and that seems to be why it is so popular with barely surviving tribal groups.I have also heard it is good to help clean wounds. Also i do not think raw tobacco is nearly as addictive as the chemical cluster of modern cigarettes.....
One could argue that tobacco may have more addictive qualities than alcohol and marijuana and perhaps even be classified as more harmful than the two. At least marijuana has medicinal value and some of its variant raw by-products have commercial usage outside of inhaling / ingesting. I cannot seem to see the same for tobacco, though. If there is a beneficial purpose for tobacco, please let me know.
Correct on the inhibition of hunger. I know people that use it as a form of dieting and are wary to kick the habit because of the likelihood that a weight gain will occur as a result. In order to appear healthy on the outside, they continue to create further harm on the inside.
I will posit that raw tobacco is not nearly as addictive as cigarettes in their popular form of commercial distribution.
Perchance, do you smoke?
|
You do realize the publication you just linked to is showing a 20 point drop in the drop out rate amongst Hispanics over the 1990-2010 time window reviewed ... and at a higher percentage improvement in the status than seen with white students (a reduction of 53.4% compared to a reduction of 43.3%).
While it does show that there is still more work to be done to improve this particular issue, it does not support the claim of "children of Mexican immigrants have generally been unsuccessful". "Generally" would indicate a majority (it being the rule and not the exception ... and while the 32.4% rate in 1990 is really a poor showing, it is still a minority of the whole). If drop out rates are the measure then this is certainly not the case.
Citizen Aretas,
Did you happen to notice that the drop out rate has been decreasing based on the chart you referenced? Even the Hispanics drop-out rate has decreased by half. One could argue via anecdote that those are among the second or third generation of the original immigrants that have gotten the opportunity to assimilate to U.S. culture in order to increase their chances to prosper.
[EDIT: Ninja'ed by AMiB]
What is very interesting is the American Indian/Alaska Native class who appears to remain stagnant within four percentage points over the past two decades. European colonialism gave them a raw deal.
But I notice that you conveniently (?) dodged the white elephant about your opinion concerning the Stormfront article.
You may choose to exit the thread you originated, but how long will it be before you initiate a new one that encroaches similar grounds? I have bookies in Vegas to inquire about the vig.
Resist the temptation, Citizen!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Q: If a tree had five apples and one was plucked off the tree, how many apples would there be left?
A: It doesn't matter! Trees can't count! #badtreantjokes
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree with you totally. To make my point I'm going to ask this gentleman to say it for me. Mithral TruthYou mention publications that you believe are indistinguishable from white power sites. What do they have in common? Is having voter I.D., secure borders, enforcing immigration laws racist rhetoric to you?I'm going to say yes on the voter ID laws.
Voter ID laws are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Period.
Voter impersonation is so close to zero, that it doesn't matter. Some studies show that it is as rare as 10 cases, in the entire country, since 2000. If those happened in only presidential elections, that's 10 cases of voter impersonation out of 350 million votes cast in the past 3 elections combined. Out of every 35 million voters, one is impersonating someone.
Also, most cases of voter impersonation have involved family members.
So, since protecting elections cannot possibly be the motivation for voter ID laws, we have to look at other potential motivations. Estimates are that as many as 20% of people who are young, poor and a minority don't have photo ID. So, why exactly do you think that we should put roadblocks between them and a ballot? Since, as I've already shown, preventing voter fraud cannot possibly be the reason.
Also, estimates show that absentee voting is shown to have a higher rate of fraud. But it also tends to swing more conservative (the military tends to vote more republican, and are one of the biggest groups of absentee voters). But republicans haven't made any laws targeting that.
So again, their intention isn't to actually target voter fraud.
Your clip didn't actually refute anything I said. It was an emotional appeal to "common sense", except there isn't actually any statistical information to back it up.
Show me an election where the wrong person got elected due to voter impersonation.
Voter ID laws are the equivalent of Comet Insurance. By the way, I have some Comet Insurance you can buy, a mere $15 a month and I'll cover any damage from comet's to your home. It's so cheap, how can you NOT afford it?
Gentlemen:
You can't reason with the unreasonable. I understand the temptation to try -- I often succumb to it myself -- but there is simply no level of eloquence that will not be in vain.
It serves a purpose. Once you've said that those fellows at Stormfront have a point, nobody will take your "I'm not a racist, but..." routine seriously any more.
How come recent immigrants from other parts of the world flourish in the US and others have trouble assimilating and succeeding?
I'm going to end this conversation
Then why ask a question? The answer is racism. "Model minorities" assimilate faster because they don't have obstacles like, say, a whole political party saying that they are worthless parasites.
(And your BoEd stats show Hispanic dropout rates falling dramatically over the measured period. I imagine it had a lot to do with more adsimilated descendants outweighing the immigrants. I didn't know you read years old BoEd stats for fun!)
Your narrative of "a whole political party saying that they are worthless parasites" is groundless, baseless and vile. Nothing can be further from the truth.
Regarding the stormfront article. The article pretty much apes the other article you posted which I cited in another post. Yeah the article has a point, I'm sure if La Raza came out and said the same thing it would be fine. But that does not fit into your designs.
Urizen. I believe I already told you the article was interesting. I don't agree with some of it but its an interesting read.
The best a.m.i.b. can say to why other ethnic groups flourish and others linger in poverty is that:
" because they don't have obstacles like, say, a whole political party saying that they are worthless parasites."
What are the reasons? Is it disintegrating values, gangster culture, no fathers? Children born out of wedlock?
Is this on stormfront? Nope, just a role model for the community keeping it real.
Is this on stormfront? Nope, just your a friendly afro-centrist from the university.
...So you can be a little high on ecstasy? Get just a tiny buzz off heroine, smoke it for the taste and not get blasted? Get just a taste of acid without the trip? Or do you do enough to feel it and feel every bit of it?Heroin is an opiate, just like codeine and morphine, and they can legitimately be used as painkillers. (I was just taking codeine to help with the cough and pain from bronchitis, and I'm pretty sure I wasn't getting high on it.) LSD and MDMA were originally developed for psychiatry.
I never said people in bad situations "deserve" to be Sh*t on. You are making things up again and claim that I'm lying! I thought you were a smooth operator until recently, shame on you.I don't think it's an unfair characterization of statements like this.
Scenario: Police see 3 dudes in a car at 2:30 AM cruising around side streets in a HIGH crime neighborhood with dozens of shootings in recent weeks. Common sense man. Not the best scenario but it will do.If I lived in the epicenter of a neighborhood literally at war YEAH I would have no problem allowing the police to do their job.You've maintained that people who live in high-crime neighborhoods—which are minority neighborhoods in Chicago—should be happy to have the police stopping them without cause, questioning them, and searching them. You say you want it for the best reasons, and, hell, I guess I even believe you. The problem is that stop-and-frisk is just as intrusive and unconstitutional and counterproductive and unfair if you do it with the best intentions or if you do it for racist reasons, and there's no shortage of people arguing for it for straight out racist reasons.
Wow. Yikes. I didn't include that paragraph (or any of the rest of the essay) because it's hugely racist and I didn't think it wasIMPORTANT:
You forgot to include this paragraph in the quote you posted right before "On the other hand."
Aretas, I would argue that it's not as black and white
Note Aretas, that while I rarely agree with you, I don't think you're racist per se. I do think that you may have issues around race that are based more on a "just trying to help" position that could certainly be taken the wrong way. I would suggest you listen to opposing positions more than just shutting people down entirely because they don't agree- it makes you sound far, far worse than you probably actually are.
Hey guys, what's up?
