This must be one of the examples from earlier where a guy was trying to claim people have racial bias even when they think they dont

While these words in this order don't actually form an actual thought or question- it's not hard to look at the demographics of the last presidential election and see that Republican policies that actively work against women, LBGTA folk and people of color had a negative impact for the Republicans.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. It's not that there is an explicitly and overtly bigoted wing of the Republican party burning crosses on the weekend that the Republican party is vying for.

No, this is one of those examples where the group you've identified is so small numbers wise that they cannot have an impact on an election.

Black conservatism is a pretty large group though. The problem for Republicans is that black conservativism isn't the same as Republican Conservativism. Black conservatives speak about the same thing as Republican conservatives, self reliance, community, responsibility, etc. but they do so knowing that they are advocating those things in spite of the economic and social discrimination that's occurring, think Booker T Washington. Black Republicans, on the other hand, rarely mention it because they have to play to Republican Conservativism, to the idea that such discrimination doesn't exist. It's also why black Republican politicians win in areas with largely white constituencies.

I mixed up who I was talking to.

I'm done for the day, too tired to continue right now.

I bet more people who live on social programs vote Republican than Democratic.

You also "bet" the Republican Senate gains were a result of gerrymandering the United States Senate.

The fact that you make your arguments like this is part of the problem not the solution. Not that I expect someone of your mental capacity to see that.

Your BFF Bill Clinton is one of the worst offenders with regards to championing imprisoning people of color for minor drug offenses, but none of us who have read this forum for a decade expect you to be intellectually capable of seeing that and/or intellectually honest enough to admit it.

Policies from both sides of the aisle have combined to create structural issues for people of color. But keep on masquerading your views as a crusade against racism rather than an argument for a political agenda. We all buy it.

people out there gettin' rich off these t-shirts

Lol, you can't even slam my tiredness caused misspeak without ****ing it up.

Looting will hereby be known as "undocumented shopping"

BTW, a 30 point infraction for saying (in all seriousness) that cops might be better off dead is asinine, Wookie. Especially with the crap-posting, racism, and other garbage the mods here continually let slide. Would love an explanation for that, since you didn't bother to reply to my PM about it.

How do you know it's all being let slide? Can you see everyone's infractions?

Either way, that's still a pretty dumb thing to say.

Should have been at least a 50-pointer and a temp-ban. Mods confirmed weaksauce.

Because garbage like this in other threads is fine:

I say something about resisting police violence with violence and everyone loses their proverbial ****.

lol that's not what you did gtfooh

Depends on what you count as "social programs." Medicaid? Probably not. Social Security? Definitely. The difference is, old folks don't see themselves as living on public largesse, whereas everyone knows the poors are just lazy.

This is the only social program I want:

numbers 33:54 And ye shall divide the land by lot for an inheritance among your families: and to the more ye shall give the more inheritance, and to the fewer ye shall give the less inheritance: every man's inheritance shall be in the place where his lot falleth; according to the tribes of your fathers ye shall inherit.

Oh please give me a job sir...no thanks, I'll take an estate

How do you explain the bigoted white dems?

Are White Republicans More Racist Than White Democrats?

There are racist white Democrats.

Oakland PD has undercover officers marching with protestors

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/mic...akland-n266176

some of the less-reputable sites out there are claiming this cop was trying to get the protestors to get violent and they figured out who he was and he whipped out the gun. I am guessing there may be some additional details.

I would be shocked if this wasn't going on in every major protest around the country these days.

If you mean undercover cops. Sure, of course. It's not illegal in the US to have undercover cops organizing or participating in large protests. In fact, it's SOP.

Most departments will "refuse to admit or deny" if asked. However some, like the LAPD are very up front about it... even bragging about how thoroughly they've "infiltrated" in the past.

Of course, when organizing large protests, it's SOP to assume that some of the other organizers are cops. And it's not really "infiltrating" because such organizing happens in open meetings, and now-a-days are li.ve stre.amed y/o posted online anyways.

As for cops being Agent Provocateurs, say last 15 years... well we know that sometimes they are, as they've been caught red-handed, and even admitted such a few times. I know for a fact I've heard undercover cops call for using violence. On the other hand, I can also tell you as a fact that it isn't always the cops who try to start things.

It's just a matter of time before someone gets a cop on video acting as a provocateur. The question is A) will the MSM run with the story (note the NBC story didn't even hint at the possibility) and B) will the populace care?