New Rioting in MN

[yiddle on da fiddle]

t'aint happnin...I know.....

[easyrider16]

Because those lives aren't good for their political direction. But don't kid yourself thinking republicans would not do the same exact thing if they were in that position.

So you can't protest one wrong without protesting all wrongs?

Here's a good Op Ed that addresses this issue much better than I can:

OK, fine. Let’s talk about “black on black” crime.

That, after all, is where the conversation seems to inevitably turn whenever one seeks to engage a conservative on the American habit of shooting unarmed African-American boys and men. So it was exasperating, but nowhere near surprising, to see former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani go there last week on Meet The Press.

Asked by host Chuck Todd, during a discussion of the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Mo., about the fact that African-American communities like that one are often served by snow white police departments, he offered some perfunctory words about the effort to produce more representative cop shops. But then Giuliani took a sharp turn off topic and into the brambles. “I find it very disappointing,” he told Todd, “that you’re not discussing the fact that 93 percent of blacks in America are killed by other blacks....I would like to see the attention paid to that that you are paying to this.”

There followed a sharp exchange with another panelist, author and professor Michael Eric Dyson, which produced this parting shot from the mayor: “The white police officers wouldn’t be there if you weren’t killing each other.”

Somehow, he managed not to call Dyson “you people.” In nearly every other respect, Giuliani’s words reeked of a paternalistic white supremacy unworthy of a former mayor of America’s largest city — or even a sewer worker in its remotest Podunk. But again, this has become the go-to “reasoning” for those on the right — Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs, Rush Limbaugh — when asked to give a damn about the killings of unarmed black boys and men.

That formulation is false for multiple reasons.

In the first place, being concerned over the shooting of unarmed black men hardly precludes being concerned over violence within the African-American community. Giuliani and others suggest a dichotomy where none exists.

In the second place, they ignore the obvious: When black people commit crimes against black people, they face prosecution, but when police officers (or certain neighborhood watchmen) commit crimes against black people, they face getting off with little if any punishment.

In the third place, what exactly is “black on black” crime?

Do black people kill one another? Sure they do. Ninety percent of black murder victims are killed by black assailants.

But guess what? White people kill one another, too. Eighty-three percent of white victims are killed by white assailants. See, the vast majority of violent crime is committed within — not between — racial groups. Crime is a matter of proximity and opportunity. People victimize their own rather than drive across town to victimize somebody else.

So another term for “black on black” crime is, crime.

But there is crime and there is crime.

Redlining, loan discrimination and predatory mortgages have stripped generations of wealth from the African-American community. What is that if not robbery?

The Republican Party practices policies of voter suppression. That’s the assault and battery of African-American political rights.


Mass incarceration criminalizes the very existence of black men and boys. That’s the rape of equal justice.

Unarmed people are killed by those who are purportedly there to protect and serve them and the “just us” system looks the other way. That’s the murder of basic human rights.

It is touching that Giuliani and others are so concerned about black on black crime. But African Americans have also been long oppressed by what might be called “America on black” crime.

When do you suppose they’ll be ready to talk about that?

https://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn ... 87602.html

[Humpty Dumpty]

Because those lives aren't good for their political direction. But don't kid yourself thinking republicans would not do the same exact thing if they were in that position.

So you can't protest one wrong without protesting all wrongs?

Here's a good Op Ed that addresses this issue much better than I can:

OK, fine. Let’s talk about “black on black” crime.

That, after all, is where the conversation seems to inevitably turn whenever one seeks to engage a conservative on the American habit of shooting unarmed African-American boys and men. So it was exasperating, but nowhere near surprising, to see former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani go there last week on Meet The Press.

Asked by host Chuck Todd, during a discussion of the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Mo., about the fact that African-American communities like that one are often served by snow white police departments, he offered some perfunctory words about the effort to produce more representative cop shops. But then Giuliani took a sharp turn off topic and into the brambles. “I find it very disappointing,” he told Todd, “that you’re not discussing the fact that 93 percent of blacks in America are killed by other blacks....I would like to see the attention paid to that that you are paying to this.”

There followed a sharp exchange with another panelist, author and professor Michael Eric Dyson, which produced this parting shot from the mayor: “The white police officers wouldn’t be there if you weren’t killing each other.”

Somehow, he managed not to call Dyson “you people.” In nearly every other respect, Giuliani’s words reeked of a paternalistic white supremacy unworthy of a former mayor of America’s largest city — or even a sewer worker in its remotest Podunk. But again, this has become the go-to “reasoning” for those on the right — Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs, Rush Limbaugh — when asked to give a damn about the killings of unarmed black boys and men.

That formulation is false for multiple reasons.

In the first place, being concerned over the shooting of unarmed black men hardly precludes being concerned over violence within the African-American community. Giuliani and others suggest a dichotomy where none exists.

In the second place, they ignore the obvious: When black people commit crimes against black people, they face prosecution, but when police officers (or certain neighborhood watchmen) commit crimes against black people, they face getting off with little if any punishment.

In the third place, what exactly is “black on black” crime?

Do black people kill one another? Sure they do. Ninety percent of black murder victims are killed by black assailants.

But guess what? White people kill one another, too. Eighty-three percent of white victims are killed by white assailants. See, the vast majority of violent crime is committed within — not between — racial groups. Crime is a matter of proximity and opportunity. People victimize their own rather than drive across town to victimize somebody else.

So another term for “black on black” crime is, crime.

But there is crime and there is crime.

Redlining, loan discrimination and predatory mortgages have stripped generations of wealth from the African-American community. What is that if not robbery?

The Republican Party practices policies of voter suppression. That’s the assault and battery of African-American political rights.


Mass incarceration criminalizes the very existence of black men and boys. That’s the rape of equal justice.

Unarmed people are killed by those who are purportedly there to protect and serve them and the “just us” system looks the other way. That’s the murder of basic human rights.

It is touching that Giuliani and others are so concerned about black on black crime. But African Americans have also been long oppressed by what might be called “America on black” crime.

When do you suppose they’ll be ready to talk about that?

https://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn ... 87602.html

Hey sheetforbrains, op Ed's are like assholes and those that put credence in them are no more than the Canadian goose flying at the back of the delta formation.

Yiddle is right; do you ever shut up?

[easyrider16]

Yiddle is right; do you ever shut up?

I'm not sure if you noticed, but this is a discussion forum. The whole point is for people to post their opinions and discuss them. Why do you find this so alarming? If you disagree with something I post, feel free to say why. But coming here just to hurl insults? I don't understand what motivates this behavior from you. I am beginning to suspect that you also have several hiders and use them to reply to my posts (and others on this board like Asher). If true, that's really sad behavior. Do you not have something better to do with your time?

I like talking politics. It's a hobby. It's why I come here, and it's the point of this forum. You, on the other hand, have yet to post anything of substance relating to politics. You're like a child, coming here to piss in the punch bowl others are drinking from because you derive some perverse delight from it. I really think you should feel a sense of shame for what you do here. I suspect if we met face to face, you would be embarrassed. At least you should be.

[deadheadskier]

No chance Humpty would ever have the balls to ever meet anyone from Kzone face to face. Zero

He uses a VPN to mask his identity posting here

[easyrider16]

No chance Humpty would ever have the balls to ever meet anyone from Kzone face to face. Zero

He uses a VPN to mask his identity posting here

I'm fairly certain that his common themes of not getting laid, having few friends, and being ridiculed for being a nerd are the result of projection from his childhood. I see humpty as a poor, hurt boy who grew up but never learned to deal with his emotional problems, and now he comes to internet forums and lashes out as a coping mechanism. It's a sad thing to see in a grown man.

[yiddle on da fiddle]

Seriously..... not enough beds in McLeans and Bellevue for peeps like CheeezySlider....

[yiddle on da fiddle]

who NOW dispenses faux Dr advice

[Humpty Dumpty]

No chance Humpty would ever have the balls to ever meet anyone from Kzone face to face. Zero

He uses a VPN to mask his identity posting here

I'm fairly certain that his common themes of not getting laid, having few friends, and being ridiculed for being a nerd are the result of projection from his childhood. I see humpty as a poor, hurt boy who grew up but never learned to deal with his emotional problems, and now he comes to internet forums and lashes out as a coping mechanism. It's a sad thing to see in a grown man.

Sorry to disappoint there moo chach oh. I just cum in here to see what you social pariahs are up to. Of course that would include your butty deadheadskier. He seems a little lacking in personality, butt certainly makes up for it with his time well spent in a political forum on a ski website. I mean, cmon; you cant find a better place to geek out? Butt you guys keep going and I will poke the rat with a pointy stick once in awhile to get my jollies.

Ok. I've enjoyed my mental break. I'm gonna go analyze some sh*t now.

[Fancypants]

@fancy, your assumptions are far off the mark. I'm not sure if it has to do with a limited perspective based on your upbringing, or if you're just trying to be funny and failing at it, but there are intelligent people in the world who can both think and write as well as work with their hands. Just because you disagree with someone is no reason to disrespect them.

Dude! You have no idea who I am, how dare you make those discriminatory remarks. How do you know I'm not one who can think, write and work with the hands?

[easyrider16]

@fancy, your assumptions are far off the mark. I'm not sure if it has to do with a limited perspective based on your upbringing, or if you're just trying to be funny and failing at it, but there are intelligent people in the world who can both think and write as well as work with their hands. Just because you disagree with someone is no reason to disrespect them.

Dude! You have no idea who I am, how dare you make those discriminatory remarks. How do you know I'm not one who can think, write and work with the hands?

I think you probably misread the post you're quoting, and maybe you should read it again. I started my statement with "I'm not sure if..." which is a pretty explicit acknowledgment that I don't know who you are or why you're writing the things you're writing. And the remarks aren't discriminatory. You should look up the definition of that word. And by the way, didn't you just say a few posts ago that I need to grow a spine? What happened to yours? You sound like a snowflake, here.