I mean I don't expect he reads 2p2, but if we collect them all in one place maybe then we can just print it out and send him a list and maybe he'll keep us safe.

I don't know about keeping us safe, but maybe he'll stop being so divisive and saying imaginary awful things about white people, like when George Zimmerman kept his family and his neighborhood safe by not backing down to Trayvon's Skittles and Obama went on national TV and held a 2 hour press conference to lambast George Zimmerman and by extension, all white people, for protecting themselves. At least that's what I assume happened, because he's such a divisive person.

Not being divisive = keeping us safe. You ever had to live through a race riot bro? If Obama would just calm his people down maybe they'd stop murdering us. No way Trayvon killed Zimmerman without first hearing Obama's impassioned defense of the OJ Simpson verdict.

fyp

He is a poker player, soooo he might read 2p2.

More Obama created divisiveness/race-hustling:



Why did Barack Obama make Drudge only post pictures of the 2 black killers and not the whiter kid? Obama promised Change and Hope, and he's just creating more of the same, which is Chicago style Ayers divisiveness and racial division, making Matt Drudge completely flush the whiter kid down the memory hole and focusing solely on the two black killers. Why did Obama do this? White people did great things in this country and he's always making them feel bad. Was it his anti-colonial upbringing in Kenya, or does he just not like white people?

I don't know, but if this scourge of black people murdering white people for fun continues and white people are forced to retaliate, I blame Barack Obama.

I was in a racial riot once. Pretty sure it was the KKK and Nazi Skinheads gathering on the steps of the Colorado State Capital on MLK day while thousands of people marched past had something do to with it.

This was back before the racists had the tall grass of the internet to hide in.

We already have a racism thread.

How about anytime there is a senseless killing that the political leaders show outrage regardless of who is involved. Is that too hard to ask?

THIS IS UNCHAINED, BRAH

Yes? Lots of people are pathologically violent and senseless killings are like, daily occurrences. Welcome to humanity. I'd rather just assume political leaders disapprove of senseless acts of violence, they can spare me the theatrics of showing outrage to satisfy populist angst, and will focus on creating and executing laws.

In this case of Christopher Lane, the justice system seems to have functioned pretty well, since the murderers were apprehended and sentenced within days, and then not let free. Politicians succeeded here. Nice. No grand conversation necessary.

When politicians maybe fail is when some dude murders an unarmed black kid because of his perception that the black kid was roaming where he shouldn't have been, and then some opaque legal doctrine inhibits justice by making that murder legal. I welcome their thoughts and comments about such events in that case.

Is this thread part of The Agenda or The Narrative?

LOL it's amazing how this dumbass racist accidentally forgot what he was angry about(actual answer: everything!) and suddenly made the fictional outraged version of Obama... the appropriate response. Ed, it's about time someone was brave enough to ask: where was Obama's outrage over Trayvon Martin? He shoulda been furious about that ****.

Hilariously in the Chained thread the racist OP flipped this and in the course of his whining he accidentally was arguing that Obama was CORRECT to not mention the Lane case.

It's almost as if racists are selfaware enough to realize they need to come up with phony "principles" that explain their righteous anger, but racists are also so stupid those principles are transparently flimsy rationalizations.

Yo, racists, get your stupid ass **** on the same page.

The weirdest part about all this **** is like, what are the racists claiming they want? Like let's pretend they are adult grownups with a sincere desire to see Obama address this issue.* So there was a theoretical course of action that would've prevented the Daily Caller from being forced to call for Obama's head.

What policy response is called for the in the wake of isolated acts of sociopathy? I'm pretty sure murder is already against the law.


* LOL

Not every thread needs to be a monolithic thing that goes on. Some are just brief fleeting moments used to make a point.

He's supposed to admonish black leaders for not stopping the black culture of killing people.

He's not supposed to take away guns, try and get people out of poverty, educate people, focus on community outreach or otherwise do any of the things that might make that actually stop happening.

This is giving whiny rightwingers way too much credit. Their concern trolling about "black on black" violence is a complete political kludge, they obviously don't give a ****, I mean come now. The people furiously scouring Patch sites for white victims at the hands of black criminals and then blogging about it hoping Drudge picks it up are the same people who are happy to ghettoize blacks and other kinds of poors and lecherous bum types and have them shoot each other up in blighted urban areas. As long as the thin blue line keeps them in place and out of the suburbs and gated communities (like hero George Zimmerman tried to, despite liberals trying to stop him), they obviously couldn't give a **** what black people do amongst themselves. The call for 'black leaders' to police black culture is their own twisted lizard brain way of endorsing de facto segregation and removing any sense of collective white moral agency for the condition of black people in the US, the end. Why are blacks poor and violent, question begs Tucker Carlson's editorial staff? NO IDEA, GO ASK AL SHARPTON.

What they want, what they sincerely want, is for black people and their liberal allies to stop whining about racism and bothering them. Some just because they're social Darwinists and not say formal white supremacists, and some because they want to actively discriminate if not subjugate black people, and don't want people pointing it out and making them feel bad or guilty about it.

That's it, full-stop. That's their whole problem with Trayvon Martin. A n***** went walking where he wasn't supposed to and sometimes blacks should know they get shot when that happens, and blacks and their race-pimping egghead liberal allies should just STFU about it, it's the natural way of things, deal with it. Race-baiter In Chief Barry O'Bama and his merry band of race-pimping allies like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are all hypocrites, see, because they don't care about crime, see, check out all these Reverse Trayvon cases where they SAY NOTHING, what they really care about is lecturing white people and making them feel bad, oh the shamelessness of those uppity race agitators just knows no bounds.

Go check out the confusion of DebtVulture in that other thread - it took like 50 posts but you got to the heart of the matter pretty quickly: he wasn't mad Obama didn't say anything about Christopher Lane, he's just still super pissed Obama whined about Trayvon Martin, and this is the right-wing lizard brain way of externalizing their rustled jimmies black people have the temerity to keep whining about things. Like govman said, they're absolutely torn up inside that progressive social conventions have made their overt complaints about race-pimping blacks inappropriate for polite conversation, so you get this incoherent arrgle barrgle about how Obama is a bad man for talking about pending trials and not talking about Christopher Lane, I mean who the **** knows, it's all nonsense, they're just super rustled Obama said nice things about Trayvon Martin which they interpreted as a racially divisive attack on white people somehow.

And when say they're just super rustled Obama said nice things about Trayvon Martin which they interpreted as a racially divisive attack on white people somehow, that's of course sarcasm, it's pretty ****ing obvious *why* in all these stories about how Obama treated the Trayvon Martin case, there's this bizarre and superficially inexplicable strain of white victimhood ("Barack Obama is racially divisive and dividing us!"), and it's because they tacitly endorse what George Zimmerman did. An attack on Zimmerman is an attack on white gated communities and keeping black people out of them, by force if necessary. An attack on Zimmerman is an attack on the real fear that sets in when white people see a black kid with a hooded sweatshirt walking around on a rainy night near their house.

That's why it's also so important for the equally bizarre defenses of Zimmerman's personal character and conduct to be articulated by America's race warriors. Zimmerman is the de facto Colonel Jessup in the race wars going on in the right-wing lizard brain. You can imagine the little Sorkin written dialog playing out in their mind, the A Few Good Men: RACE REALISM EDITION. You weep for Trayvon Martin, and you curse George Zimmerman. Uppity egghead liberal race pimps have that luxury. They have the luxury of not knowing what they know, which is you let blacks roam a little bit and then who knows what happens next to your property or your white wives or daughters. We don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want George Zimmerman on that wall, you need him on that wall, blah blah meow chow.

I think it's funny that racist always essentially ask the same question which boils down to what is the maximum amount of racist I can be and yet not be called a racist. The idea of trying not to be racist at all is just not in the mix. Like I want to be as racist as I can get away with obviously so will this get me called racist? Will that?

Liking "race realism" and Col. Nathan Jessup reference. Should become a thing.

Epic Chris Hayes rant regarding Fox.

http://samuel-warde.com/2013/08/chri...-racism-video/

In response to Alan West's comment, "I wonder who Obama will identify with?" Watch Steve Ducy say, "Excellent point. When will celebrities put on 'I an Chris Lane' T-shirts."

And of course, most of us aren't Australian and good at baseball. AND DON'T HAVE TO BE AFRAID OF GETTING SHOT BY SCARED WHITE PEOPLE.

The lack of intelligence, understanding and empathy demonstrated in misunderstanding the relevance of Martin/Zimmerman is amazing. These ****s still can't understand that even if you ignore every specific of that case, there's still plenty of white people scared of black people, and that that fear is how innocent people get hurt. That that's a think a black person has to consider that a white person simply doesn't. That's the ****ing point of "I am Trayvon Martin". Not that one specific kid is dead. (basically a group of people who love to generalize are failing to correctly generalize here).

I know I'm mostly ranting to the choir and keep jumping in and out of character here, but sheesh. govman's post in the politics thread is so on point- just stop dancing around and admit it you silly racists.

Dvault killing it ITT.

I think those who fear black people are the type of racists that can be saved; as for the most part they aren't being malicious, their environment and the media have made them scared; the same can't be said for those who just flat out hate those who are not the same race; as for the most part they are a lost cause. Ironically, as Dids pointed out the non-malicious racism can be the most dangerous type.

Classic breakdown in logic. You apparently choose to perceive the world in black and white, and your interpretations will forever be skewed until you see beyond color.

Thing is many of the 'malicious' racists these days basically live in poverty.