Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cautious_Optimist who wrote (88453)	5/21/2012 9:18:13 PM
From: Farmboy	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

You do not understand the foundation of America and innocent until proven guilty by the state. How many times did I cite that exact language, and passage, to you, earlier on in this case when you were so wholeheartedly condemning Zimmerman, and you refused to acknowledge even it's existence? Now you use it to frame your argument ? Glad to see you did learn a lesson from me, even if you were to arrogant and narcissistic to admit it at the time. Continue to sit at my feet, my son, and you will learn many more valuable lessons.

To: Cautious_Optimist who wrote (88453)	5/22/2012 1:47:51 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 89467

Of course minority representation in the crime statistics is significant, and somewhat skewed. What do you mean by minority? I'm not so sure it represents what you think it does anymore.. thetandd.com And btw, "black on black" crimes far outweigh "black on white", and certainly more than "white on black". including the history of buying and selling African Americans as assets in a market, that destroyed black families and took until the 1960's to be granted full civil rights; Hmm.. most blacks were sold into slavery by fellow blacks while in Africa. Why no "reparations" from those countries? Why aren't they pssed off at their fellow blacks who decided to sell them for profit rather than killing them (after taking their women)? As for my ancestors, they were sharecroppers and treated worse than slaves. Should my family receive reparations as well for those wrongs from decades long past? As for civil rights, if your logic held true, then women would be the second greatest perpetrators of hate crimes against men, who oppressed them for FAR LONGER than they did African slaves. and the way the War on Drugs Enterprise targets the poor in a vicious cycle,* I don't disagree that user of narcotics are unfairly targeted at the expense of the dealers.. But let's get real here.. most of the dealers now are not Caucasians. I'm a big advocate of treatment first for those who are willing to seek it. Those who refuse need to do hard labor to sweat it out and get their heads straight. We also need to get a handle on corruption in the prisons. Too many people are being handed Felony DUI and Drug possession when they need to be in treatment, and counseling.. But let's face facts.. drug addiction has a social cost, especially when violent crimes are committed to obtain money to buy them. You love the second amendment and hate the rest of the Bill Of Rights, except when it protects YOUR INTERESTS. You seem to hate the second amendment, and promote all the others.. None of those righs are greater than the rest. They are ALL mutually equal. So don't think that the right to bear arms is less of a right than the right to free speech (or any other right). they will come for YOU. And that kind of language means exactly what? That they will advance their agenda above the rights of others? Personally speaking, I don't care who comes for me.. Let them step across the threshold of my house without permission, in commission of a criminal violation against me, and they will regret it. Hawk

To: Cautious_Optimist who wrote (88453)	5/22/2012 8:32:30 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

It doesn't matter if it's "because of the color of their skin' or not, the cause of the over-representation doesn't matter .... it's just a fact. Does that give you or anyone the right to profile innocent citizens and take away their rights because they might be guilty of something?? Profiling isn't illegal and EVERYONE does it including you and Jesse Jackson. You just make up excuses for the necessity of it. There isn't a right to not be suspected. You love the second amendment and hate the rest of the Bill Of Rights, I love the Bill of Rights. All of them. Including the 'free exercise of religion' one. You can come for the African Americans, for the gays, for the Mexicans, for the atheists, for the "communist" Jews in Hollywood, sooner or later, they will come for YOU. Nobody's coming for any of those folks. The paranoid hysteria makes you look silly.

To: Cautious_Optimist who wrote (88453)	5/22/2012 8:38:50 AM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

New Black Panther Leader Shabazz: Be Thankful We’re “Not Hanging Crackers By Nooses…Yet” Here's the only folks who say they're 'coming for' you. Now these are just a bunch of sickos who are mostly talk, trying to scare folks, trying to goad some dumbass black kids into committing crimes for them. What's most alarming about these people is Barack Obama has actually appeared together with these disgusting scumbags. Course for someone who hobnobs with terrorists like Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, maybe that shouldn't be surprising. Unlike the NBP's (so far) Ayers and Dohrn have actually killed people themselves. Another big problem is that Eric Holder has these scumbags back, protecting them from prosectution for voter intimidation they didn't even defend themselves against. Posted by Andrea Ryan on Monday, May 21, 2012, 9:39 PM The Obama Administration actively defends black racists. Attorney General Eric Holder allowed the New Black Panthers to walk free after intimidating white voters at the polls, said nothing when the black supremacists announced a bounty for George Zimmerman, and was conspicuously silent when they called for a race war against the whites, chanting “ kill a cracker for Trayvon”. Now, King Samir Shabazz, the National Field Marshall for this “ all black army formed to kill whitey”, has said whites “should be thankful we’re not hanging crackers by nooses…yet, yet, yet”. He, also, has “wet dreams about killing the godamn cracker”. The Blaze reported on this recent vile, racial hatred coming from the New Black Panthers, According to National Field Marshal for the New Black Panthers King Samir Shabazz: “I love white-on white-crime, because that is the best crime.” “I hate the gddamn white man, woman, and child, grandma, aunt, uncle, Pappa Billy Bob, and whoever else.” “You should be thankful we’re not running around here hanging crackers by nooses and all that kind of stuff — yet, yet, yet” *He has a “wet dream about killing the gddamn cracker.” “We don’t allow faggots and lesbians” in the New Black Panther Army Envisions a world where every black person is “ready to bang on this cracker” Wants to take over neighborhoods “block by block” so “crackers…or even the developer” would be scared to come into them “We’re taught to send this cracker to the cemetery… so kiss ‘em goodbye”** The National Field Marshal for the New Black Panther Party (NBPP), King Samir Shabazz, engaged in multiple vicious tirades on his national radio show this weekend, calling for broad violence against whites. Shabazz, you may remember, made national news in 2008 when the Department of Justice brought a voter intimidation suit against him and a NBPP accomplice. They got in trouble for wearing Black Panther uniforms and brandishing a police-style baton outside a Philadelphia precinct during the Presidential election. Shabazz was charged on the grounds of violations to the Voting Rights Act. But on May 29, 2009, against the advice of prosecutors who had worked on the case, the Department of Justice ordered the suit dropped, even though Shabazz and the other defendants in the case refused to appear in federal court. Obama and the Panthers go back a few years. They marched together in Alabama. New Panther National Chief Malik Zulu Shabazz is seen speaking at a Selma rally in 2007 on the left. Then Obama speaks to the radical group at the same rally. The MSM should be screaming for Obama to denounce this group. But, they won’t…. And neither will Obama. And these thugs continue to spew their threats at innocent Americans. This is unbelievable. thegatewaypundit.com

To: Cautious_Optimist who wrote (88453)	5/22/2012 9:24:09 AM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Respond to of 89467

Newly Released Police Timeline: Zimmerman Was the One Screaming Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:24 pm An article in the Orlando Sentinel today quotes a timeline from prosecution documents released last week in the murder case against George Zimmerman. Get ready to rub your eyes with disbelief: 1913:36 – Dispatcher asks Zimmerman if he is following suspicious person 1913:36 – Dispatcher advises Zimmerman “Okay; we don’t need you to do that” 1915:23 – Approximate time call with Zimmerman ends 1916:43 – 911 call placed by (blacked out name) where Zimmerman is heard screaming for help 1917:20 – Shot fired; screams from Zimmerman cease 1917:40 – Officer T. Smith arrives on scene 1919:43 – Officer T. Smith locates and places Zimmerman in custody. Has this already been released and I missed it? Because this seems like what Joe Biden would call a big deal. (OK, he’d call it something else, but we’re not as crass as the Vice President here at patterico.com.) At the bottom of the short article we see where this timeline came from: Source: The office of Special Prosecutor Angela Corey from the Report of Investigation prepared by Sanford police Investigator Chris Serino. Serino wanted Zimmerman arrested and charged, albeit with manslaughter. Is this a Freudian slip? Or are they really saying Zimmerman was the guy screaming on the tape?

To: Cautious_Optimist who wrote (88453)	5/22/2012 9:28:42 AM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Respond to of 89467

"There are many reasons, including the history of buying and selling African Americans as assets in a market, that destroyed black families" man you need to read a history book, welfare destroyed the black family However, as classic work by Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman has shown, despite the horrors of slavery, overall, during the pre-emancipation era, about two-thirds of enslaved families had two parents—far more than today. More recent revisionist work has stressed that, while forced separations were always an important part of the picture, the two-thirds figure remained dominant ( Wilma Dunaway is especially handy on this). And this tendency continued into the Jim Crow era, contrary to a false sense one might have of daily life in a black ghetto of the 1930s and ’40s—think Richard Wright’s 12 Million Black Voices or Claude Brown’s Manchild in the Promised Land. Namely, it is wrong to suppose that, amid the misery of those neighborhoods, all but a sliver of children grew up without a dad. That is a modern phenomenon, whose current extent—fewer than one in three black children are raised by two parents—would shock even the poorest black folk 100 or even 50 years ago. A standard reference on the subject by University of Minnesota historian Steven Ruggles in 1994 is most often taken as evidence of the uninteresting—that, gosh, in the old days poor black people didn’t find single parenthood unusual. What is actually more important in its findings is that, from 1880 to 1960, fewer than one in three black children nationwide didn’t grow up with two parents. Another key statistic, from Barbara Agresti in 1978, is that, just past emancipation, in 1870 in Walton County, Florida, about 57 percent of black children lived with two parents; just 15 years later, 89 percent did. Or, as St. Clair Drake and Horace Cayton told us in Black Metropolis, in Chicago in the 1920s, it was considered a problem that just one in seven black children were born to single mothers. What’s more, that number went down during the Depression, not up.