Do you even read these threads? duffee, jibs, and many others have repeatedly gone way out of their way to argue a literal dictionary definition as a defense.

Fwiw, I thought that zikzak's post was sorta racist-y, but I probably would consider it more racist if I thought he was a conservative.

That's not how cheezelawl operates

Well, yeah, I guess that would be racist. Anyone who does that should rightly be considered racist. Can you not think of why anyone else might think the witnesses were biased against the cops? I'll let you think about this because I'm working and I've already explained it so many times and I can't believe you can't get it. Hint: try not to think about race for just a bit.

FoldN, have you... Have you actually read what the Ferguson witness said in her police statement? Or are you just logikally trying to deduce its contents?

Funny how Bruce didn't need any justification other than race to conclude that bias is inevitable. And we have already explained to you that if the cops are truly oppressive, then there is no need for the black people to lie. Furthermore, if the cops are truly oppressive, then there is certainly no reason to trust the cops instead of the black people, which Bruce did.

They are defending why it is taken the way that it is.

The fact the standard dictionary definition matches how so many people understood it is meant is not an argument that they are wrong. It is a good argument that those who are using the word in an unusual way should make the effort to be bit more clear - unless the intention is to be misunderstood that is.

That's just something you make up.

lucky his not an SMPer It would be full flytime.

You are still welcome to quote a post and prove me to be a lying jerk.

The Dems can’t win a national election without the AA turnout, so they need to keep the issue polarized. Everybody knows that. And since they position themselves as pro-black, anyone opposed is portrayed as anti-black or racist. Again, we all get that; it’s just politics. But there’s the other issue of calling people racists for holding political views or supporting policies that aren’t inherently racist at all (outside of leftist cult-think). When what we’re talking about is more near racially disparate outcomes of policies and where real racism isn’t a driving factor of those policies, it’s best to just call it what it is instead of calling what the proponents/opponents of policies what they aren’t, i.e. racists. Best in the sense of getting a consensus of people who hold opposing political ideologies on the same page opposing/promoting said policies. Finding that common ground is just common sense, and I think most reasonable people get that.

You made something up about Bruce, it's purely your biased interpretation and no more.

I don't think you're a lying jerk. Nothing will prove your interpretation is wrong, it's just not as obviously correct as you portray. I even allow that the pap psychology wasn't you being a lying jerk.

Chez continues to never, ever, ever answer a direct question or provide a quote to support any of his viewpoints. He's just here to whine, as usual-usual as it ever was.

Remember when you bitched about how your viewpoints were portrayed, like, all of four days ago and then finished up by concluding that racism in police departments like Oakland and Ferguson was currently inevitable because of the criminal young black male negro?

When they constantly create/support/propose policies that disproportionately hurt minorities, it's just a coincidence.

When they always come down on the side of cops murdering minorities, it's just a coincidence.

When they accidentally use dog-whistles when referring to minorities, it's just a coincidence.

When they fear monger about good white folk losing their jobs to dirty brown immigrants, it's just a coincidence.

Do you think we're that stupid?

The GOP will never win elections without appealing to the racial animus of white people, so they need to keep it as an issue.

Have you ever made a post that didn’t contain a strawman or non sequitur?

Well, we are going down the same path here of why you don't like when your viewpoints called racist, figured we could just hurry up and skip to the conclusion.

On the nose. This is what some of us were trying to get too earlier in the thread. Slavery is always stigmatized as "racist" because of the disparate racial outcomes, when if fact it was just a response to economic pressure. Same deal with voter ID laws - nobody has a problem with black voters. Just their opinions.

fwiw, I think the extreme right is just as cultish as the extreme left, but the right appeals more to the Law & Order mindset than racists, i.e., the constituency that has zero tolerance for criminal conduct however mundane and trivial.

Hahahaha

http://www.usnews.com/news/us/articl...ouncil-members
Ferguson Election Triples Number of Blacks on City Council
First Ferguson local election since Brown shooting changes the makeup of city council.
FERGUSON, Mo. (AP) — Two black candidates were among three people elected to the Ferguson City Council Tuesday, tripling African-American representation in the St. Louis suburb where poor race relations have been a focal point since the August shooting death of an 18-year-old black by a white police officer. The election means that half of the six-member city council in Ferguson, a town where two-thirds of the 21,000 residents are black, will now be African-American....

That's a good thing.

Yes, I remember when those extreme right/law and order folks called for a hard crackdown on Clive Bundy and his band of armed insurgents.

I mean obviously that wasn't as extreme an offense as jaywalking or walking in the road with saggy pants, but it definitely cleared that mundane and trivial hurdle and had the extreme right looking hard for a crackdown right?

Considering the stratospheric black-on-black violent crime rate, I’d think a real racist would just prefer blacks go on killing one another.

Well yeah, stupid is fairly easy to figure out. Which is why explaining how you all act really stupid is fairly effortless to people who know better.