It does say a lot though about our current president. Here we have the first black president and America has never been so racially divided in the last 50 years.

Thats a tell right there.

kinda bs that you werent forthcomming in making readers aware that a link you posted is a 105 page PDF

but anyway super glad you did because it gives an insight to what americas police departments and judicial system is all about...directly from the corrupt ass DOJ itself...



Cliffs; its all about generating revenue

This is the MSM lying to you again.

The fact of the matter is there is a certain subset of peeps who are into destroying things, etc, and they'll use any excuse to do so. These are pretty much exactly your words ITT. Recent excuses are (a) sports teams winning, (b) coaches getting fired in pedo scandals, (c) high profile police killings. Not every sports team winning results in violence, but it's inevitable that some will. Same with (b) and (c). There is a certain subset of peeps who are into destroying things, etc, and they'll use any excuse to do so.

The MSM gets it right when there is a riot after a sports team wins. They don't attempt to manufacture a negative stereotype against sports fans, or players, or fans of that team, stadium vendors, or residents of the city, or in the Penn St example, college students, alumni donors, coaches, cheerleaders, or mascots. The MSM reports that the violence is from a certain subset of peeps who are into destroying things, etc, and that subset will use any excuse to do so. They opine that it's that certain subset to blame, and only that certain subset.

But, for whatever reasons, in these cases the MSM lies to you.

Instead of opining that it's on that certain subset, and only on that certain subset... they intentionally go about creating a negative stereotype tarring all black folk, and also tarring their concerns. This lying is beyond "guilt by association"... there's no association between that certain subset and BLM activists, there's no association between that certain subset and the POTUS. This lying is "guilt by lack of association".

Well, no. You have a garbage-in garbage-out premise. And once again, you've already admitted you have zero experience in organizing demos/actions. You are pointedly using the pronoun "you", you are speaking as an outsider. Why do you presume, as an inexperienced outsider, to give tactical advice to IRL activists? Your condensation and paternalism is off the hook.

While you are drowning in your awful American existence it's hard to see things as they are. I would recommend actually listening to "Outsider" opinions to get some perspective on the situation.

Yeah, we should start listening to those quoting Breitbart and making videos helping me figure out whether I'm a basic bitch or not.

I didn't mean outsiders in that sense. My bad.

Remember, we were discussing tactics. I'll use the analogy of a soccer coach. I don't watch, study, or play soccer. It could be said I'm outside of the world of soccer. That's the sense of the word "outsider" I was using.

As an outsider, it would be paternalistic and condescending of me to say "you soccer coaches should do x,y,z". Got it?

You'll need to cite your work.

Given that the police force represents state power, literally the lawful use of power to end someone's life and voting is the method by which political power is meted out those are two very powerful things.

I'll use the analogy of a poker coach. If you'r wondering why you don't have a higher win rate, even though you have been working hard to improve, it's good to hire a poker coach. The coach can see things that you don't. If you're not aware you are making a mistake, you cannot correct it. I see mistakes being made. I here the opinions of white people whom are my friends or work colleagues. I believe that these opinions matter.

I just report what I see and here. I don't claim to be an expert on race relations. I'm eager to learn and willing to help.

I see things getting worse in regards to race relations. I think a different message and different tactics need to be employed.

If I was the one who felt I was being oppressed, I would want to learn as much as possible from both sides of the issue. I sense you are rational person. It's unfortunate that there are others who feel it's more important to be right than happy.

Sure. There's this weird thing where unless someone openly states "this is to oppress black people" then it doesn't count. It has to be open and certified. But race and class are intertwined in America so it's not an either or proposition. It's not like Ferguson was like we can either be racist or we can do this unconstitutional a**hole stuff, it's got to be one or the other. The places that were running the fine making schemes were majority black areas ran by largely white administrators. That isn't the case out in the suburbs. So maybe they weren't explicitly thinking "let's get the n*ggers" but their moral calculus maybe didn't consider these people as equal citizens deserving of constitutional rights and general well being, but they thought of them as a piggy bank. It just so happened that the majority of those affected were black and seems like a good reason to protest.

I mean come on, are you trying to play into the stereotype of the aggrieved white guy who is complaining that some black guy is protesting the effects of 200 years of slavery, 100 years of Jim Crow, 30 years of redlining and slanted government and business policy, but is going to b*tch about affirmative action? Don't be that guy.

In any case, wealth disparities and employment discrimination go hand in hand. Well black wealth disparity is the legacy of the what's already been mentioned, slavery, Jim Crow, red lining, theft, murder, etc. Ok so why haven't the black community worked it's way out yet? Well it is but very slowly, it's going to take about 200 years to catch up because of all the previous attempts at gaining wealth were destroyed or robbed.

But when African American do work, employers discriminate based on characteristics they assume African Americans have. For instance, black sounding names get less call backs and less interview requests than whites even when researchers sent out the same resume. While there are laws against racial discrimination in order to be prosecuted they have to be very explicit, but these just as impactful cases of less call backs etc can't be prosecuted.

The data adjusts for the local crime rate, population differences, etc. Blacks are still pulled over and arrested at higher rates.

Yea remember how you were talking about how voter IDs might affect the poor more? Yea see the people instituting the voter ID laws took the demographic data and looked at the people who would be most affected by the law. It's the poor and minorities who vote Democrat. But they know they know they can't just come out and say, "we don't want n*ggers and the lazy not voting" so they make up a concern about voter fraud and the solution will just so happen to be tailored to affect those people more than demographics than vote Republican. So now they have plausible deniability but anyone who's smart enough can see the game plan. That they want to take away the right to vote or rather make it more difficult for those people who don't vote for them.

I'm thinking more concrete than that. I'm thinking in legislative terms gerrymandering can happen in two ways to limit minority voices. They can stuff all the minorities into one district and therefore ensure they don't have enough votes to change anything legislatively, or they can spread out the minority voters among the various districts to ensure that a minority can't win a seat.

All that is to say that things have gotten better but there is still plenty of valid things to protest about.

It's because they don't like black people, especiaaalllly black presidents.

So was slavery.

VG. Poker is a better analogy. If I didn't even know how to play poker, it would be condescending and patronizing of me to say: "you poker players should do x,y,z". Got it?

The reason poker is a better analogy, and the first thing to learn, is it's not a team game. There isn't a "both" sides. It's not white folk -vs- black folk. Instead, it's a whole buncha peeps and groups, pulling up a seat, and playing the cards they've been dealt as best they can.

The MSM, of course, insist on reporting it like a soccer match. Hence guilt by lack of association, etc. etc, etc.

As for mistakes, remember poker and the US civil rights struggle both flow from the US south post civil war. There's a long arc of tactical history behind both going back to those days.

Beyond this however, I think if you give it a look, you'll find that a lot of what you might propose simply aren't practical or even possible.

LOL, this dude thinks I tricked him somehow. Bro do you need some kind of trigger warning? When you saw how long it was, did you have an asthma attack or something?

They're just so darn uppity. Only sensible thing to do is to not have black presidents any more.

It would be fair to discuss how this president and past presidents have affected race relations. For example, Johnson played a huge roll in advancing civil rights. The country and culture made progress towards improving integration.

Under Obama, it's not clear he has had much impact positively or negatively. He hasn't done anything that stands out.

I was Born & raised in Australia and only been to the U.S a few times over the years to visit family. So your comment, much like the rest of the junk you post here can go straight into the trash.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I cannot wait to see the Republican debates in 2012 when you think about who is going to be on that panel. Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Haley Barbour, John Bolton, Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney.

How are they going to out-fire breath each other? I mean where this rhetoric has gone to at this point? It’s only 2010. And we’re having Newt Gingrich, as we were talking about before, calling him an anti-colonial Luo tribesman. Luo tribesman.

That’s the new Kenyan, Larry. And Kenyan, of course, was code for n----r. But that’s where they are. They can’t say it out loud. But that’s where this whole campaign is going to be.

You asked about racism. It’s all about racism. They cannot fathom this idea that there is a black president. And that’s what they are going to fight about.

Finally, here in Week#5, some organized reaction from the Flag Wavers...

this is just an example of one bad law leading to another bad law. the first one was not fair, nor is the second to the opposite end. so i am that guy

exactly. it is happening albeit slowly, it will take time to overcome the actual oppression of the past. but it is happening because of our free society. while racism still exists in a few small pockets here and there as it always will, it does not interfere with black americans as a whole living a life with just as much free choice as white americans.

this could be true and your right cases like this would be hard to prove/prosecute. im definitely going to look into these studies and the frequencies, areas, sectors, this happens in.



when i was younger and before i had ever voted, i remember being extremely shocked at the voter id law argument. i had just assumed that with something like voting it was a given to have to present a photo id. you need IDs for way less important things in america. according to polls the vast majority(70-80%) of americans are in favor of photo id laws.


btw thanks for your responses!