Part 2: Liberal Welfare Kills
Part 2 is going to be a little different. There’s no real
need for me to add comments since this is pretty much just between Bobby and
me. I answer all his posts directly anyway. I will do it occasionally, but not
as much as in past posts.
You will notice I often point out that what he keeps saying
has nothing to do with the Treyvon Martin case and try to steer it back. But
Bobby won’t have it. He wants to talk about racist Liberal welfare programs
only. He never explains how welfare programs are only Liberal and aimed only at
keeping black people down, but just that they are. And I’m stupid for not
accepting it.
I apologize if the conversation circles back around on
itself a few times. That happens when you insist something to be true without
any proof and it’s the only thing you have to say so you keep saying it. And
your only defense being the absolute denial of any contradictory facts. I tried to edit it down, but it’s
like trying to cut all the lines of fat out of marbled beef. It’s impossible
and you would lose the flavor anyway.
Names changed bla bla bla.
Enjoy…
Bill Mancuso
What I've learned so far:
1. Liberal Government programs murdered unarmed Trayvon
Martin.
2. Racism never has anything to do with anything but
Liberals always blame that straw man just to keep it alive to make money off
it.
3. Democrats are responsible for all racism.
4. The policies Liberals implement should be considered
racist because they only help poor black people. (and no other poor
ethnicities)
5. Liberal Government programs cause racism.
6. Liberal Government programs cause minorities to be
dependent on Liberal Government programs.
7. Listening to conservative news sources only, the
uninformed, myopic view would seem to be that liberals are to blame for
everything always no matter what. Even when they have nothing to do with the
issue.
So, let's for the sake of argument pretend I'm a Liberal and
I see a Tea Party sign that says 'Obama nigar go home Afrika socilist Muslin'
(spelled just like that, too) and I say "That's racist." You would
view my pointing out a racist as me playing the race card just to keep racism
alive so I can make a profit off of it? Because that seems to be the pattern -
a Liberal points out when a Conservative is blatantly a racist, and the Liberal
gets blamed for bringing it up and playing the 'race card.'
I understand Liberals invented a fake "Women's
Rights" issue as well. They conjured up a fake Republican "War on
Women" just to get votes. And it has nothing to do with the actual
barbaric policies that Republicans are implementing.
Of course people take advantage of welfare. The system isn't
perfect. No system is. Of course it should be overhauled to weed out the
ability to abuse it. But you're exaggerating the minority and representing it
as the norm - to further your obvious biased agenda against liberals.
And what does any of this have to do with an armed man with
a documented propensity toward violence who should never have stalked someone
who was minding their own business while walking down a sidewalk? A man who
blatantly racially profiled someone was the entire reason for this encounter.
"He's suspicious. He's black." Those were the only reasons Zimmerman
gave why he stalked and murdered an unarmed kid. Zimmerman was not defending
himself. He was the aggressor. If a strange man with a gun follows me then
harasses me, I didn't cause the encounter. Liberals didn't cause it. Democratic
policies didn't cause it. Obama didn't cause it. Sharpton didn't cause it. The
New Black Panther Party didn't cause it. In fact, I'm pretty confident politics
has not been a part of this in any way. Zimmerman and Zimmerman alone caused
it. People who are wrong seem to always pile on a whole bunch of unrelated
nonsense in order to confuse the issue.
Oh, wait. Is Zimmerman on racism-causing Liberal Government
welfare? Maybe that's why he stalked and murdered an unarmed kid for no reason.
I had no idea poor, poor George Zimmerman was abused by Liberals, which drove
him to commit such a heinous act.
Damn Liberals and their misplaced extreme intellectually
lazy hypocrisy! Why!? Why!!!!????
Bill Mancuso
What? Zimmerman is NOT on racism-causing Liberal Government
welfare? Then how are we supposed to blame liberals for what he did?
Peter
So... as I said earlier... PUTTING RACE ASIDE... the facts
remain that a teenage boy is dead at the hands of an adult male who had no
legal right NOR responsibility to be doing what he did... and had Zimmerman not
been emotionally disturbed, perhaps Trayvon would still be alive today...
Bobby
Okay well back to the lazy thing...you don't seem to be
wrapping your mind around it so lets try a simpler approach....Racism in all
forms is bad. If you really have a problem with racism you should stop
defending a system which results in poor black children being killed. Anyone
can denounce Trayvon's killing. It's just too bad it takes a bandwagon crime
for the average white guy to care.
It’s still March and 3 more black men (all younger than I
am) murdered in my town this morning (also Rev Jackson and Pres Obama's town).
No protests. No marches. So long as a white man didn't pull the trigger giant
groups of liberal white people will meet this news with a yawn.
Bill Mancuso
Yes. Racism in all forms is bad. But your (lack of a) theory
that only Liberals cause racism has no coherence. Just stating 'Liberal
Government programs cause racism resulting in poor black children being killed'
doesn't make that completely absurd, baseless statement magically true. How did
you come to this conclusion? You have only claimed 'This is true because I just
said it.' You haven't shown any causality.
Let's for the sake of argument, pretend that the percentage
of food stamp recipients is NOT 37% blacks and 46% whites. Let's also pretend
Medicaid recipients are NOT 28% black and 49% white. Let's pretend that the percentage
of all 'Liberal Government welfare' programs combined does NOT come to -
blacks: 22%, Hispanics: 20% and whites: 34% plus numerous other minorities
equaling 24%.
Now let's pretend these 'Liberal Government welfare'
statistics ARE directly resulting in poor lazy white children being killed. Of
course, to fit your predetermined Republican conclusion based on absolutely no
information, we would first have to pretend that the ONLY reason white people
are on welfare is because they're all lazy and not just a minority of
recipients abusing the system as is the fact of the matter.
But seriously, please draw the direct causal line between
welfare recipients and racism. And don't just SAY it's true because Rush or
whoever TOLD you it's true. Explain it by using your own thoughts. Actually
make a hypothesis and come to a logical conclusion based on facts and
information. Please, use your mind to help me wrap my simple mind around it. [He
never does it.]
As for your last statement that again tries to confuse the
issue with nonsense, do you really think rallies for all 17,000 murders in
America per year is feasible? Or do you want to break it down to specific
color-on-color murders? Do you also want the President or Jesse Jackson to
preside over each case? Or should nobody ever do anything about anything?
Please, break down every aspect of every situation the way you personally feel
it should be handled. [He never does it.]
George Zimmerman stalked murdered an unarmed kid. None of
the irrelevant things you bring up will change this fact.
Bobby
Who said welfare recipients are lazy? I said people like you
are. No one had to tell me what I get to see with my own eyes every day I go to
work in one of the poorest neighborhoods in the country. The kids there start with
2 strikes because you and the Government you trust so much have decided to
expect nothing from them, give them free housing in the ghetto, and send them
to high crime and low graduation rate schools. It's a wonder they succeed at a
lower statistical rate than their white and Asian equals, and get killed at a
higher rate. Are you saying it's the fault of their skin color? That's what
your policies imply. You misquoted me and said so many illogical things....but
your post was so long let me just say I reject about everything you say. Your
%s are meaningless unless they are showing that blacks are killed at the same
rate statistically as whites? And who is supporting the killing of unarmed
innocent black kids? Not me, so who are you arguing with? Using Trayvon's
tragedy to pretend you are blameless is sad.
Bill Mancuso
So, you reject all the facts I presented because they don't
conform to your preconceived conclusions. You ignore all the questions you
can't answer. When I point out how the things you claim are ridiculously
untrue, you say I'm misquoting you. You keep explicitly stating that 'Liberal
Government programs' cause racism, which is preposterous at a fundamental
level. This is why you can't actually show how 'Liberal Government programs'
cause racism. You make fantastically ludicrous statements about how
"my" policies (somehow, I'm a policy-maker now - or am I misquoting
you again?) imply that skin color causes failure. You take a minority of
system-manipulators and expand them to be the way the system was specifically
designed to run just to back up your prejudicial nonsense. And through all
this, you seem to know I'm lazy and trust the government 'so much.' Or was that
another misquote?
The Government does not cause racism. An individual's mental
state causes racism. Are you saying racism isn't a normally occurring thing and
only Liberals cause it with their government policies? What fantasy planet do
you come from? Or maybe I'm wrong. Which Liberal policy killed Martin Luther
King? Please tell me. I'd like to know, since only Liberal policies cause
racism. And apparently lead to murder. Based on what you keep claiming. Or is
this a misquote, "If you really have a problem with racism you should stop
defending a system which results in poor black children being killed."
My %s (which are not mine, but the Census Bureau's) clearly
point out that vastly more white people are on welfare, so the uninformed
things you say pertaining to black people should, by your reasoning, really
pertain to white people. But go ahead and ignore that or say it's meaningless
or conflate it with something irrelevant - however you wish to deflect the
facts.
At what point are you actually going to come up with reasons
on how these absurdly ignorant things you claim are true? Again, just claiming
they are true doesn't make them true.
And somehow I am to
blame for Trayvon Martin's death now? You really are a special kind of
delusional half-wit.
And to that, since you can't figure it out - I was not
saying you support killing unarmed people. I was merely pointing out how
everything you keep bringing up has nothing at all to do with the Martin case.
I did not kill him. The government did not kill him. Ghetto
housing did not kill him. Low graduation rate schools did not kill him. Jesse
Jackson did not kill him. Nor did marches, Liberals, Obama, Sharpton, black
neighborhoods, government dependence, unemployment or intellectual laziness.
George Zimmerman did.
Bobby
Oh yikes. Who is blaming you for Trayvon's death? Or denying
there are racist crimes? Your stats aren't proportional, so they are
meaningless (unless there is an equal number of whites and black in the US),
but yes it would take a little more brainpower to get that. You are having
trouble with the basic point here-you are very upset about the tragedy of a
young black man named Trayvon, but couldn't care less about the racist results
of policies you support resulting in the deaths of so many THOUSANDS more. Who
are the few manipulating the system? I'm not blaming black people-I'm blaming
people like you. They are only living in the system exaclty as you want it
Bill. You are not responsible for Trayvon's death though-and that will make you
and every other intellectually lazy white man sleep better and believe yourself
to be blameless.
Peter
Oh my... let's keep it civil... LOL!!!
Bill Mancuso
"Using Trayvon's tragedy to pretend you are blameless
is sad." This either means you think I am to be blamed directly for his
murder or blamed for writing or supporting policies that directly caused his
murder. Or is this another misquote? An unarmed kid minding his own business is
stalked and murdered. Tell me which Liberal policy am I responsible for that
killed him? Then I won't pretend I'm blameless anymore.
Again, policies are not racist. This is a nonsensical claim,
which has still not been proven by anyone. And it can't be because it is false,
which is why you ignore attempting to prove it. Talk about intellectually lazy
- you just repeat nonsense that some right-wing talking head told you because
it conforms to your prejudice about Liberals. And you never bother to figure
out if it's true.
There are more whites in America. And there are more whites
on welfare. You are again trying to conflate the issue. What do you believe is the
proper percentage a race needs to be on welfare before it is considered a
racist policy? If policies cause failure, why do you believe it doesn't apply
to the white people who are on it as well? Come on, use that intellectually
active brain of yours and tell me the proper percentages.
In 2008, the conservative Heritage Foundation estimated that
social welfare amounted to $491 billion. The HF also estimated corporate
welfare at $2.5 trillion. Explain why you think corporate welfare, which costs
over 5 times as much as social, is not racist. Or do you think bankers and oil
CEO's are racist because of their Liberal welfare programs as well? Is this
corporate welfare policy directly resulting in racist hedge fund
manager-on-banker crimes?
The Treyvon Martin case has nothing to do with the THOUSANDS
of other cases, as I already clearly pointed out, but you ignored that and keep
repeating irrelevant information. Either way, the policies are STILL not
racist, no matter how many times you repeat it and try to brainwash me in lieu
of any facts.
But yes, I am to blame for the current welfare system. This
is exactly how I want it. Because I am intellectually lazy. I am responsible
for racist Liberal policies that only kill black people. How do you know me so
well? Keep saying the same thing over and over. That will eventually make it
true. I'm sure of it.
And before I forget - you're right. I only care about this
one murder. I know about all the other 17,000 murders every year and I know
there should be 17,000 individual protests, but I don't care about them. And I
control the media and what it brings to my attention. And there will be no
ramifications from the outcome of this case at all. It will only pertain to
this one case alone and the future will forget it and move on. No precedent
will be set. No one case ever changes the future. Like that Parks lady sitting
in the front of the bus. If that was so important, how come nobody's ever heard
of her? Why should I care about anyone else? And you're not once again conflating
the issue to make some prejudiced point that isn't real.
I hope my post wasn't too long for you this time. But feel
free to reject everything I said in bulk again. And certainly don’t answer my
questions that expose your nonsense.
When you blame me for something I have nothing to do with,
and I point out that you're blaming me, am I misquoting you, meaningless,
intellectually lazy or just playing the ‘blame card’?
Do you actually believe that social welfare only creates
welfare recipients and that if there was no welfare, people would just get
jobs? What jobs?
Do you believe that I am personally responsible for killing
black people by my lazy votes for politicians who create racist welfare
programs for people who don't need welfare that only apply to black people but
never white people?
Do you actually believe that only Liberals support social
welfare programs and not Conservatives?
Will you ever give even one fact to support any of your
baseless claims, or just continue repeating unfounded suppositions? [Guess
the answer to that one.]
Are you viewing life through FOX-colored glasses? Or
Rush-colored glasses?
All these questions are rhetorical. I'm asking them just so
they're out there, not that I think they'll be answered. You've ignored all the
rest. Why start now?
I tried to be civil. I hope it worked.
Bobby
Blameless for the policies which cause the majority of
murders, problems etc - not Trayvon's. Seriously I've said the same thing
several times not sure what is so difficult. Supporting policies that have
terrible results for black people is racist-the policies themselves are not
people.
Peter
[A full transcript of the discussion between Marc Morial
and Kieth Olbermann in this link is at the end of this blog. Olbermann was
fired and I don’t know if the link will stay active.]
Bill Mancuso
These policies are not racist and do not cause the majority
of black murders, problems, etc. Seriously, I've said the same thing several
times and keep asking you to give even one fact in support of your baseless
claims. I am sure what is so difficult, though - the fact that there are no
facts to back your fantasies.
Bobby
I'm pretty sure I've addressed everything else you've
written at length. [When? Where? In an alternate dimension?] Lets say 70% of welfare recipients are white...but
70% of black people are on welfare...does that mean white people are tied into
more than black people? Math is scary, I know. Get it?
It's be cool if you got upset by ... maybe every 100
murders?
Bill Mancuso
"Let's say?" How about using real math instead of
randomly making something up? You do seem to be scared of math.
Bobby
But picking 1 out of 17,000 is okay for everyone who really
doesn't care. I'm sure Rosa Parks would approve.
Bill Mancuso
What are you even talking about?
Bobby
Why get off welfare when Bill and friends want you on for
life?
Bill Mancuso
Seriously. What are you talking about?
Bobby
Exactly.
Bill Mancuso
Exactly what, Bobby? You're making up nonsense then mocking
me for not understanding.
Peter
The sad thing is, we are still talking black and white!
Can't we move into something a little more purple and grey?
Bobby
Exactly, we are on completely different pages. I find what I
see as your lack of logic maddening and I'm guessing you think the same of me.
No mock intended.
The conversation was dead for two days, then, like
Dracula rising from his coffin…
Bobby
For Bill...Juan Williams making 50% of my point:
Bill Mancuso
I don't disagree with much of that. But - again - are we
supposed to protest every murder, or none of them? What is the particular
amount of murders and color combinations of murders we are supposed to protest?
Do we deny organically formed protests because they do not fit a specifically
designated protest-approved murder-type? And do we try to force a protest when
one doesn't organically form? How come you don't start protests about specific
murders you think are worthy? Should I start complaining that you didn't start
a protest after every murder I learn about? What is it about this murder that
you feel is not worthy of protest? And if you do think it is worthy of protest,
then why are you complaining? Or do you complain about every protest because
there wasn't one for every other murder ever? Also, Juan Williams never blamed
imaginary "racist Liberal Government policies," which is about 95% of
your imaginary point. What he said is about 5% of your point - which has
nothing to do with the topic.
It seems you are just randomly complaining about this one
particular protest in order to invent a non-existent excuse to go out of your
way to find some made-up reason to blame Liberals for some non-existent racist
policy - exposing your real goal, which is simply to call Liberals racist. And
this topic has absolutely nothing to do with liberal or conservative politics.
It has to do with a nut stalking and executing someone for no reason.
But if you really want to make it about politics anyway,
then the problem is the spineless Liberal pussies that let the militant Fascist
Republicans put yet another harmful, extreme, NRA-sponsored gun law into place
without so much as a whimper in protest. This time, a 'stand your ground' law
that lets a vigilante shoot first and have no questions asked later - which has
increased the 'self defense' claim of vigilante murderers by 300%. [He never
addresses any of this. And even after I call Liberals ‘pussies,’ he still calls
me a Liberal.]
Like the man chasing a fleeing unarmed burglar for a block
and a half, then stabbing him to death, then claiming he felt his life was in
danger - and having the second-degree murder case thrown out after Miami-Dade
Circuit Judge Beth Bloom cited "stand your ground" for doing so. Even
Police Sgt. Ervens Ford called it a “travesty of justice.” He said, “How can it
be 'stand your ground'? It’s on video! You can see him stabbing the victim.”
Under no conceivable circumstance can Zimmerman claim self
defense since he is the one that initiated contact. It was Martin who was
standing his ground. No matter what color his skin is. Excuse me - was. And no
matter how many black person statistics you and Juan Williams present that have
nothing to do with this case.
But, I guess you could be correct after all. The Liberal
Government policy of never standing up to Fascist Republican policies is
partially what enabled Treyvon Martin's murder by George Zimmerman. Because if
he didn't have the confidence of being able to get away with murder by simply
claiming self defense, would Zimmerman have deliberately stalked and murdered
Martin in the first place?
Although, I still don't see how any 'Liberal Government
policy' is racist since guns don't only kill black people. Nor does any
'Liberal Government policy' ever only apply to black people. Nor are 'Liberal
Government policies' ever only Liberal - you have to intentionally ignore the
Conservatives who also signed on to those policies in order to make your false,
unsubstantiated accusations. [These obvious facts, which completely
eviscerate his nonsensical fantasy about ‘racist Liberal welfare policies’ are
100% ignored.]
And these days, most Liberal policies (like bipartisan
deficit commission, pay as you go, cap and trade, health reform individual
mandate, the DREAM Act, the TARP bail-outs, contraception being covered by
health care plans, the Nuclear START program, bailing out the Auto Industry,
Israel going back to pre-1967 borders, public education, infrastructure
spending, child labor laws, civil rights, the EPA, deficit spending, the
Federal Reserve, women's rights, End of Life Counseling in health care,
financial disclosure, minimum wage, military intervention in the Middle East,
the Constitutionally protected abortion right, the Economic Development
Administration, Medicare and Social Security) are actually policies written
and/or triumphantly supported by Conservatives that Conservatives suddenly go
against since the black guy in the White House agreed to implement them. So,
who's being racist hypocrites here? Unless there's some other reason Conservatives
suddenly hate their own policies, decreeing that they somehow suddenly 'take
away freedom'? "Taking away freedom" is the hollow, catch-all,
dog-whistle excuse for Conservatives when there's no real reason to oppose
something other than Obama is for it. Even when it applies to their own
policies - which are all on congressional record and on video and easily
researchable.
And finally, no matter how you look at it, Treyvon's murder
has absolutely nothing to do with welfare programs. You just desperately want
to twist the topic in order to call Liberals racist. Completely out of context
and totally unsubstantiated.
If I said eating healthy is good for you, would "You
Liberals want to take away my freedom!" be your baseless, topic-twisting
reply? It's how FOX "News" and Limbaugh and every other right-wing
talking head ignorantly reacted when Michelle Obama said it.
Yeah. The freedom to be a fat bastard and die young.
As this topic is still about, George Zimmerman stalked and
murdered unarmed Treyvon Martin for no reason other than what was in his head.
And no amount of your throwing in of baseless, unrelated topics can ever change
that fact.
Or, the way I see it versus the way you apparently see it:
George Zimmerman stalked and murdered unarmed Treyvon Martin
for no reason other than what was in his head.
vs.
Liberals are racist because your conspiracy theory wouldn't
work otherwise. Welfare policies are racist because contrary to facts, they
only apply to black people. Liberals implement these racist welfare policies in
order to keep only the black man down, because contrary to facts, they never
apply to white people. Racist Liberals inexplicably keep the black man down
while simultaneously pretending to help them, contrary to the whole point of
welfare, which only applies to black people, just to get their votes. Then you
somehow have to connect either Zimmerman or Martin to a welfare program (of
which neither are partaking in) so your wildly convoluted conspiracy theory
works. Then circle back to racist Liberal welfare programs caused Zimmerman to
murder Martin.
Unless I'm misunderstanding you completely. Lazy as I am.
Do you have any other pointless arguments that you'd like me
to address? Maybe how CFL lightbulbs are taking away your freedom?
Bobby
Bill, thanks for taking the time to read that. [I read
and reply to everything. I don’t ignore the parts I don’t like, as some people
do - who shall remain nameless.] The 50% I
was referring to was: I find it disingenuous to be so upset about something that
is not difficult to be upset by (a white guy saying white guys should not shoot
black people is easy) when a problems hundreds of times greater (black on black
crime is ignored). Look, you are very much parked in your ideals, I get it. I
find your arguments completely lacking. [Most Conservatives do find
facts completely lacking. That’s why they ignore them. Completely.] I am not going to insult you-I just disagree. Let me
just end on this: I was raised in mostly white Sussex County. Went to a very
liberal college and even more liberal law school. I arrived in Chicago with
your ideals and felt pretty good about myself. I supported everything you think
is good for the poor and minorities. Then I went to work in the poorest black
neighborhood in the country. I observed black children living in conditions you
would not believe existed in America. I donated my time and money to black
charities. I wanted to make a difference and thought people like you and Obama
did too. And you probably really do. I have these circular arguments with my
cousin, a PHD in nuclear physics and I say this: If everyone in the world was
as good hearted as you and I, liberalism and socialism would work. Once you are
exposed to the real world it no longer is enough to theorize and central
plan-you need to do what works for people. You can't ignore results because the
plan was made with such good intentions. Liberal policies have kept a greater
proportion of minorities poor (the opposite of their stated intent) for
decades. Whites too, yes, but not as great a proportion. I have taken the time
to listen to both sides and then saw what each side accomplishes. I just think
you are wrong. No offense. I'm not saying you need to work or volunteer in the
projects in Newark out by you to have an opinion, but it couldn't hurt. [I
am assuming he wholeheartedly believes trickle-down Reaganomics works. But only
because there isn’t one fact or example in 30 years that ever supports it. That’s not
racism, though. Just class warfare.]
Bill Mancuso
No one ever ignored other crimes. You just keep saying this
in order to make your "Liberals are racist" point. Everyone else is
only talking about this one murder. And you keep saying it is disingenuous to
be upset at this one murder because every other murder hasn't upset people as
well. I do not care who murders whom - they all upset me. Nobody was talking
about which race murdered which race except you and Richard. This seems to be
of your and Richard's infatuation alone in this thread. Everyone else was
talking about a man who murdered a boy for no reason. Not the races of who did
what to whom.
And you've never explained how "Liberal" policies
A.) are racist and B.) keep people poor. You have never explained how
"Liberal" policies are actually Liberal and not Conservative as well.
You (conservatives) have never introduced an alternate "Conservative"
plan other than 'end welfare programs'.
You can't just proclaim something to be true based on
nothing but for the fact you said it.
You can't tell me I've not been exposed to the real world.
How would you know this? You don’t know me. Except here on Facebook.
And you can't keep saying what you said is never what you
said. How can even the idea of progress ever be made in this discussion? You
keep saying we're both set in our ideals, but mine are based on researchable
facts and yours seem to be based on nothing more than feelings you demand to be
true.
And still none of this has anything to do with the murder of
Treyvon Martin.
It seems that your personal disheartening experience with
poverty in America, justifiable as it is, has made you cynical. Somehow making
you believe that helping people is pointless. That helping people hurts people.
Then you jump to the wild conclusion that Liberal policies are somehow racist.
I do not see this connection. It is not based on any data. You have yet to
actually make the connection other than simply stating it is so.
Feelings are not facts.
Yes, there are people (of all races) with iPhones using food
stamps. This is welfare system abuse, not racism. Yes, people (of all races)
are generations into welfare never having worked. This is welfare system abuse,
not racism. These things are also the minority of people on welfare, not the
norm. Laws need to be made to prevent these systematic abuses. But to believe
that these welfare programs are racist and keep people poor is only cynically
misinformed feeling, not fact.
[I wish I added this… Richard’s girlfriend once talked
about how she was on welfare for six months. She said it helped support her
until she could find a job. Two things: 1.) That is exactly what welfare was
designed for; temporary support, not a way of life. 2.) You probably don’t
count this because she’s white and welfare can only apply to black people for
your ignorant fantasy theory to be true.] [Of course, she was making the case against welfare when she told this story,
so there’s no accounting for where peoples’ heads are firmly planted.]
The roadblock to progress seems to be that Conservatives
find facts to be completely lacking and put their faith entirely in feelings.
As clinical study after clinical study shows. Barring that Conservatives don't
believe in scientific methodology. As clinical study after clinical study
shows.
I, too have taken the time to listen and see what both sides
accomplish. And one is needless welfare for the rich, whereas the other is
welfare for the needy poor. I just think you are wrong. No offense. I'm not
saying you can't have feelings on the matter, but basing those feelings on
facts couldn't hurt.
Peter
Bobby, it isn't liberal policies alone that have kept the
greater portion of minorities poor... both liberal and conservatives are at
fault here... but so too are the people who are in that environment. As you may
or may not know, I lived for several years in a very poor part of Paterson...
spent a lot of my time working with inner city kids and young adults... even
taught through three Paterson Schools; Eastside, JFK, and Paterson Catholic. I
also spent a lot of time with kids in East Orange and working with the
street-hard kids at Hackensack High. I lived in and amongst crime, and saw my
share of crimes committed on the street outside my home and up and down my
block... but I have also seen the generosity and the caring from these very same
people... and the drive to DO something when they put their heart and soul into
it, or when they are simply accepted and empowered to fulfill it. I have some
stories I could tell... but ultimately, it is the system that has let them
down, and that system has only two parties to blame: Democrats AND Republicans.
The only way things will change is if PEOPLE- not Parties - challenge and
change the system to INCLUDE those who are less fortunate and let them know
that they have the opportunity and the resources to do so without having to
kill someone to do it.
Bobby
Bill, the poor do not need you version of "help."
Welfare abuse is built into the system-by design. I am the least cynical person
you could ever meet. I am very realistic, but also very positive. I doubt you
lose lots of sleep over all the dead black children since you and you friends
are absent 99% of the time, and the 1% is always the same story. Peter-so true
my friend. What I say is conservatism is really my own brand-and I am certainly
not holding the Republicans blameless...I get even more pissed at their
mistakes. If more people were of the mindset of you, me and probably even Bill
although I don't know him and will likely never agree on any Facebook topic
with him, the world would definetly be moving in the right direction.
Bill, there are 50 City Council members in Chicago, land of
your Dear Leader. [Calling President Obama by the North Korean dictator’s
title of “Dear Leader” doesn’t in any way expose Bobby’s prejudice by trying to
make Obama seem un-American and placing ‘your’ in front of the title certainly
doesn’t make it seem like he doesn’t believe Obama is the President of everyone
in America - further exposing his prejudice.] All 50 are Democrats like you.
So is the mayor. The City has been controlled in this way for decades. These
are not my feelings. The bad public schools and dead children are also not my
feelings. The fact that Obama and J. Jackson chose this latino (sorry...white)
on black killing alone to take a stand on, like yourself, is not my feeling. I
once subscribed to the idea that because I thought your policies meant well,
they probably did well (my feelings). Then I got to see them in practice
(facts) and realized that people like you were not helping the poor brown and
black people, you were trying to buy their votes and in doing so keeping them
in hopeless situations. If Obama shared my views I would support him and you
know it. One good thing i can say about the man-he has been an inspiration for
many young black kids here and given them a beautiful sense of pride. Instead
of trying to develope a political opinion using google "data" perhaps
you should get out and see what it is your friends are doing in the real world.
And let me ask you this, Bill: What is the name of that town
or neighborhood in America where generations of white people on welfare,
disability, food assistance and government housing send their kids to horrific
schools and experience high dependancy rates, heartbreaking heinous crime, an
insane murder rate and a bunch of well-meaning liberals like you offering the
same solution which has failed for 50 years? Is it near you? I have a FEELING
that you won't be able to think of one. And that illustrates why your liberal
policies area a failure. A racist failure. I'm sure your friends would like to
get the whole country there some day, but so far you've only succeeded in a
racist way.
Hank
remember the best way to preserve order is through chaos [That
is just stupid.]
Peter
Bobby... I can tell you that neighborhood... it is in Pasco
and Pinellas County Florida
Bill Mancuso
Yes, Bobby. You've convinced me simply by repeating the same
thing over and over - even though you have never provided an actual fact to
back it up. Welfare is specifically designed to be abused. That makes complete
sense. It's so obvious, how could I have missed it? Liberals have come up with
an intricate master plan that separates and keeps only black people poor but
not white people - wait. Why, again? To get votes? Because they're racist?
Lazy? You've invented a Liberal conspiracy to fit your predetermined
conclusion. But you still haven't explained how it actually works. Or how it
relates to this topic. And you've ignored all the facts that contradict your
conspiracy theory. [And he will continue to do so.] [I seem to be
commenting more on my own posts. Hmm.]
And I never said bad schools and dead children are only your
feelings. Let's not play that game. I said your claims that welfare policies
are only Liberal and intentionally keep only black people poor and are racist
were your feelings - since they're not based on anything but your feelings.
Because you deliberately exclude generationally poor white people from your
equation to make your biased point. Your eyes are only able to see poor black
people and not poor white people, apparently. And anyone can scroll up to see
exactly what I said.
You see a lot of poor black people and instantly recognize
racist Liberal policies are the cause. Why can't it be racist Conservatives
continually cutting funding for these programs in order to give rich people
more tax cuts? Completely as plausible as your unfounded conspiracy theory.
And again, please stop saying these are 'my' policies and
calling me a racist. Yes, saying the policies are racist, then saying they are
my policies means you are trying to call me a racist without actually saying
it. That is quite clear. And please stop telling me to get out into the real
world. And please stop saying this is the only Latino (sorry...white) on black
murder I've taken a stand on. It is not - you are apparently doing a terrible
job of following me around in my everyday life and reporting my every move. And
please stop claiming I am trying to make this about a white on black crime as I
never once have. And to that point, please stop making this about race - only you keep doing that, as I have pointed out countless
times and you keep ignoring me in order to make your false point of racism.
Just saying things does not magically make them true.
Zimmerman murdering Martin is not about race. Only you keep
making it about race. I wonder how many times you'll ignore me saying that. No,
I don't. It'll be every time. Which forces me to address it.
Let me ask you: How do I personally benefit by keeping black
people poor? Never mind. I forgot that I'm racist. Now it makes sense.
61% of all Americans on welfare are white.
Yes, I Googled it. Does it upset you that I'm using facts
instead of feelings to back up my points?
You keep intentionally ignoring facts in order to perpetuate
your biased and uninformed feeling that Liberal welfare programs are racist and
only apply to black people. Demanding that I name specific towns where only
white people are generational welfare recipients is a silly attempt to
obfuscate facts. But then to go on with the criteria that if I can't name one,
it somehow means I'm racist? That is just stupid. There is no connectivity in
your accusations. You're again ignoring that more white people are on welfare
just to make your claims of racist Liberals. And you're again ignoring that
these programs are also backed by Conservatives. And once again, you can't just
proclaim something to be true and it magically becomes true without any facts
in support.
But to answer your demand - Every single WalMart in every
single town contains every single generational white welfare recipient. Have I
just proved you're racist? Or was I just as stupid as you by insisting I'm
racist? You somehow don't see the 61% of welfare recipients who are white
living in Chicago and Boston and New York and Detroit or any other city and
suburb where there are people. Or in North Dakota (10.8% poverty rate) and
Maine and Vermont where white poverty vastly outnumbers black poverty because
virtually no black people live there. Why do you only see the 33% of recipients
that are black? How is it racist when it applies to all races? Let me ask
again: How is it racist when it applies to all races? Have you started your
conspiracy theory with a biased conclusion, then worked backward, ignoring all
facts that don't fit?
You are right on one aspect, though. Welfare was not
designed to reduce poverty. Welfare - like Social Security, WIC, SNAP,
community health centers, LIHEAP grants, etc - was designed as a safety net.
Not as a way of life. The programs are too lax in their restrictions, so abuse
is easily possible. But none of them are racist and aimed by Liberals (and the
Conservatives that you ignore) at intentionally keeping only black people poor.
No matter how much you want them to be. Both Liberals and Conservatives have
not reformed their policies to become more efficient and helpful, so how does
that work into your 'only Liberals are racist' conspiracy theory? Is everyone
racist? No one racist? Does racism actually have nothing to do with welfare programs?
Are the bulk of politicians just generally inept? All plausible.
I also seem to remember President Obama speaking about white
Jared Loughner murdering six white people in Arizona. Does this not count in
your racist equation? Obama has spoken about one 'white on six whites' murder
and one 'Latino (sorry...white) on black' murder so far. How many other murder
color combinations in your formula does he have to speak about before he wins
Racist Bingo? Doesn't six dead whites trump one dead black? Please explain your
formula to me. It is very confusing.
Poor is poor, regardless of color. No matter how hard you
want it to be a black thing just to call me a racist.
And this is still about a man stalking and murdering an
unarmed kid for no reason. Government policies still have absolutely nothing to
do with it. You keep insisting they do, but you still never said which racist
Liberal policy forced Zimmerman to murder Martin. I won't hold my breath.
But hey, at least you managed to squeeze in a claim that I
don't lose sleep over dead black children. That's classy.
May you never let facts sway your baseless accusations.
Oh, and not to blow your mind or anything, I am neither a
Liberal nor a Democrat. Never was, never will be. But I was a Republican a long
time ago. It's OK, though. I'm fully recovered now.
Peace. Out.
I tried to quit this thing again. I didn’t think there
would be much of a response based on my barrage of facts and questions that
completely negate his ignorant theory. I forgot to take into account that facts
are easily ignored by Republicans. It’s as if I never said anything.
Bobby
What's that thing they say about statistics Bill? The
important one would be the % of black population vs white on welfare, not
percentage of recipients. Seems like a simple distinction-but I guess Google
doesn't explain the statistics to you, it expects you to apply them yourself.
And where was that town you failed to come up with Bill? How many poor white
kids were killed there this month? Your idealistic brothers have done a great
job for the poor Muslim minorities in France, and I know that's what you want
here too (for all races so maybe you aren't racist deep down!), but for now
it's hitting minorities hardest. Which makes YOUR POLICIES racist. Thus making
you either lazy or racist for the time being. Seriously though, let me know
when Google tells you that neighborhood.
Bobby Sorry Bill...I am slow reader and you write so
much...Re: Jared Loughner: Really? Do you not remember the political anger?
Seriously? Re: Politicians- no I do not share your overwhelming trust of the
government. Who voted against the last welfare reforms? Conservatives? Jeez
man, you gotta try a different search engine to base you beliefs on!
And finally Bill, I think what bothers me most about your
thought process is that it is so theory based. Is it more classless to point
out your general apathy for black murder victims (unless they are killed by a
white man), or for you to call my experience disheartening? It is not "disheartening"
to see murdered people, it is a tragedy that makes normal people want to change
the circumstances which created the environment. And normal people don't get
cynical when they see it (you would just get cynical and say 'well that's life
in the ghetto'???) but motivated to discover why it happens on such a much
higher basis in black neighborhoods and do something about it. Or are you
saying that the murder rate is so high because of the skin color of the
shooter? It's not. It's because of your policies. And no, you don't care.
But I'm guessing you'll stay "Out," because that
is the easy way.
Bill Mancuso
A whole lot of white people are on welfare, so it can't be
racist toward black people. That's all that 61% statistic means. You are trying
to make a pointless distinction to support your already imaginary point.
This was never about white or black kids being murdered. It
was always about a man murdering an unarmed kid and getting away with it. You made it about race.
I do not need to come up with a poor white town to prove or
disprove your imaginary racist point that you brought up. White people are on
welfare. Both concentrated and dispersed. This is a fact.
But if I must:
Los Angeles, CA
121,237 white, 88,405 black
Phoenix, AZ
71,350 white, 22,337 black
Clearwater (Pinellas Co, FL)
12,917 white, 3,553 black
New Port Richey (Pasco Co, FL)
3,411 white, 28 black
Bismarck, ND
4,138 white, 54 black
Rutland, VT
2,863 white, 25 black
Augusta, ME
2,988 white, 0 black
www.city-data.com
There, am I not racist anymore? Does this disprove your
cockamamie statement that if I can't name places with more poor white people on
welfare, then that somehow means I'm racist? Or do I now have to list each
program that every single one of them are on in order to prove I'm not racist?
We've added Muslims to your complaint, now? Oh, goody. Yes.
I want poor Muslims in France in America for all races because I'm racist and
lazy because of whatever the hell you're rambling on about now.
Why does information scare you? Or is it just Google?
I do not understand your Loughner comment. Or why that
situation is disqualified from your murder protest equation. Except that it
doesn't fit into your imaginary Liberal racist conspiracy theory.
I never said I had an overwhelming trust of the government.
You seem to thoroughly enjoy telling me what I know and say and do.
No. I never said Conservatives vote against welfare reforms.
I said they vote to end them. Because
they do. Then give that money to the rich.
I never pointed out a general apathy for black murder
victims unless they are killed by whites. You said I said that. Because you can't stop bringing up racism and
calling me a racist. Based on what evidence no one will ever know.
I did not say it was disheartening for you to see murdered
people. I said it was disheartening to see so many poor people. Well, hey, let's take a look at my exact
quote, shall we? "It seems that your personal disheartening experience
with poverty in America, justifiable as it is, has made you cynical."
Where did I mention murder? I did not. You made that up. And yes, your
invention of a racist Liberal conspiracy against black people is very cynical
and also baseless, no matter how much you deny it.
I would never say, 'Well, that's life in the ghetto.'
Seriously, where are you coming up with this fantasy life you're inventing for
me?
I never talked about
murder rates based on skin color. You keep talking about it. Because you can't stop bringing up racism.
These are not MY POLICIES. Is there any possible way I can
convince you of this fact? Brainwashing by repetition won't make it true.
Demanding that I don't care does not somehow make it true.
Are you off your meds? Because you have constructed an
elaborate imaginary world where I've said things I've never said, I'm some sort
of policy-maker, I'm a Liberal, I'm a Democrat, you didn’t really say the
things you have said, people are doing things that never happened, whole towns
contain only one race of poor people, you're infatuated with racism but demand
it's me, you take things I've said and apply them to made up situations, you
have certain criteria that has to be met in order to protest but you won't tell
anyone what it is, you ignore all the questions I ask then claim to have
answered them, you repeat things over and over that are patently false and you
generally just invent the outcome you want, demanding and repeating it to be
true - never bothering to find or explain the events leading to that outcome.
So yes, now I'm out of here because how could I possibly
compete with the intricate fantasy world you've created? It's a racist version
of 'Alice in Wonderland' meets 'Inception.'
Peter
Bobby, Pasco and Pinellas are more like Pleasantville gone
by the wayside... not ALL of it, but a lot. It is mostly little housing
developments that were created for returning veterans and their families during
and after the war. Most of them grew old in the developments and retired there,
and as they die off, the houses are taken over by lower to median income families.
There is also a large amount of trailer park housing there, and every other
block there is a pawn shop and a strip club, lots of Checkers restaurants [Hey,
Checkers rocks.] and Walmarts... biggest
crimes in this area are violent home invasions, robberies and
shootings/stabbings. I live in a relatively quiet and peaceful neighborhood,
but even on my street, two houses away from me there was a home invasion. My
parents live in a country area not much different from Byram, and THEY had a
home invasion and a murder right behind their house, one street away. Remember
those three white kids
that were robbing banks and stores and went on a cross country shooting spree
and rampage about six + months ago? They started in Pasco, on a highway two
blocks away from my home. Again, a few miles in any direction and you have
wealthy homes and millionaire properties, but the bulk of the town is the
working poor and retired senior citizens on fixed income. A more urban
environment would be Tampa and Ybor City, the latter is known for its poor
areas and violent crime.
Bobby
Bill. you're right. I live in fantasy land in the ghetto,
and you live in reality world with Google (how many murders in Rutland and
Augusta again???).
Fucking hell. I wasn’t going to reply, laughing off the
absurdity of that statement. But he just won’t let this die. One day later…
Bobby
For Bill...a quote from another Alice in Wonderland:
"There is a class
of colored people
who make a business
of keeping the troubles,
the wrongs and the
hardships of the Negro race
before the public.
Some of these people
do not want the Negro
to lose his grievances
because they do not want
to lose their jobs.
There is a certain class
of race-problem solvers
who don't want the patient
to get well."
Bill Mancuso
Christ on a cracker. Why am I even going to respond?
Way to pull out the 100-year-old Booker T. quote. You learn
that quote from Rush? (And no, I didn't need to Google that one. I already knew
it.) It's a great quote. Applicable to what was going on at that time and a
great history lesson. But...
Right now, there are still 20,000,000 white people on welfare, and Conservatives still had a hand in drafting those programs as well, so it
still doesn't apply to your
increasingly sad attempts to convince me of 'racist Liberal Government
programs.' And you still have
never explained how you think welfare was intentionally designed to keep only
the black man down. You just keep claiming it was by obsessive-compulsively
focusing on black people and Liberals to the exclusion of everyone and
everything else. If you could maybe point me to the "Negros Only"
door of the welfare program, written and supported only by Liberals - and not
also by Conservatives, as they are now - I would wholeheartedly accept your
conspiracy theory. But, as I have explained, welfare, which applies to everyone, not just black people alone, was never designed to
end poverty. It was designed as a safety net. And restrictions are too lax,
which is how abuse occurs. That does not automatically conclude a Liberal
intent only toward black people. But if you ignore all the facts that
contradict your factless conspiracy theory, then sure, it makes total sense!
I could post random, irrelevant quotes all day if that's
what you want to do now. No. Sorry. I won't, even if you do want to.
But regardless, this is still simply about a man stalking
and murdering an unarmed kid. See? No colors. That's your bag.
How many times you wanna circle this drain?
Oh, and since you're here (I was going to leave it alone), I
never said your fantasy world was in a ghetto. You made that up. And the next
time you demand someone prove something, like name cities with more white
welfare recipients, don't get all smarmy and try to insult them when they do.
It's really rather childish to get upset when they've done exactly what you've
asked - even though you only did it because you thought it was an impossible
task and you could put a check in your 'win' column. As if this is some sort of
competition.
Bobby
Sorry Bill, was trying to help you out with your statistics
in small doses. My point you are missing around the drain is that while Google
tells you there are many million more whites than blacks on welfare, the
important number you refuse to get is which race has a higher percentage, and
therefore is more impacted by welfare policy. [No. The point will always be
that welfare applies to everyone. Not just black people. Which is why he
ignores that fact, which completely nullifies his argument. Side note: I
learned “nullify” from the 1967 Spider-Man cartoon.] Shall I simplify? [Warning: Extreme overdose of nonsense ahead.] If there are 100 purple people in the world and
10000 green people...and 99 purple people and 990 green people are on welfare,
your statement that green people are more affected than purple people because
there are 10 times as many on welfare misses the fact that the purple people
are more than 9 times more likely to be a participant. Then lump those 99
purple people into some free crappy housing in a high crime neighborhood, give
them crappy schools and low expectations. Are you more likely to succeed if you
are purple or green? Your argument that a few green people on welfare are
living near each other in Maine is empty. (I didn't ask for a poor white
town-they are a plenty...I wanted the town or neighborhood in America where
generations of white people on welfare, disability, food assistance and
government housing send their kids to horrific schools and experience high
dependancy rates, heartbreaking heinous crime, an insane murder rate and a bunch
of well-meaning liberals like you offering the same solution which has failed
for 50 years...thus proving your policies have no racist impact) And whether
you accept your government programs are designed to keep the poor poor is
pretty irrelevant. Just the results are. The quote is neither random nor
irrelevant-it explains the media's obsession with Trayvon's death perfectly.
Peter
Dancing around the drain... Bill you are cracking me up! And
Bobby, thanks... now I have the one eyed one horned flying purple people eater
song in my head!!!
Peter
…ok you said CIRCLE the drain... but I felt like dancing...
Bill Mancuso
Wow. Um... what about all the Conservatives who also signed
on to the welfare policies? I see you're still conveniently ignoring them so your
racist Liberal conspiracy theory works. And still, I'm not a Liberal, but that
doesn't fit into your conspiracy either, so it's also ignored. And are you
suggesting the 20 million white people on welfare are insignificant and
irrelevant? And you STILL have NEVER explained how black people are targeted
ONLY - excepting the 20 million collateral white people damage. 'Percentages'
is not a point of yours that I am missing. I just understand why that is
irrelevant to the reality of the situation. But sure, keep giving me
percentages - that SEEMS to support your conspiracy theory - barring all the
facts that STILL continue to contradict it.
Here's one of my many old questions you've ignored: The
conservative Heritage Foundation said social welfare costs $491 billion and
corporate welfare costs $2.5 trillion. Explain why you think corporate welfare,
which costs over 5 times as much as social, is not racist. It seems
Conservatives only want to give money to already rich white people (there are
statistically more rich whites than blacks) who don't need it just to kill off
your statistically more poor black people, resulting in neighborhoods across
America where generations of black people on welfare, disability, food
assistance and government housing send their kids to horrific schools and
experience high dependency rates, heartbreaking heinous crime, an insane murder
rate. And a bunch of malevolent conservatives like you just offer the same
solution, which has failed for 50 years - give even more money to rich white
people. Now, THAT seems racist to me.
So, let's recap: Liberals give money to black people to
intentionally keep them down. And Conservatives give money to rich white people
to intentionally keep the black man down.
My racist Conservative conspiracy theory is just as
plausible as your racist Liberal conspiracy theory. But you probably only see
how stupid mine is. Right?
And Peter, dancing is
probably more fun than circling
the same drain for days. I say you should choose dance!
Bobby
Re: Conservatives who currently support your policies: the
racist impact ['racist impact' is not a real thing] of the policies can not be ignored. I don't know any true
conservatives who support your status quo. Re: Your use of caps-I have said
over and over and over it is the results that matter regardless of intention. [You
have said it over and over, but it’s STILL not true.] There comes a time where original intention no longer matters [If
one wishes to invent the false point that you are trying to make.] and the results dictate the current design. What
started out as your good intentions have turned into a nightmare for poor brown
and black kids. To ignore is to support the current design. Social welfare
(among the many other programs with racist impact) [Just calling
something that’s not working ‘racist’ doesn’t even make sense.] could cost $1 or a few trillion, if the results have
a racist impact, they are wrong. The problem isn't the monetary cost, it's the
human one. And no, I don't think we should be handing out so called corporate
welfare to your friends at Solyndra, all the Obama connected Chicago companies
getting rich, unions and all other bad use of tax payer money. I'm pretty sure
the CONSERVATIVE Heritage Foundation thinks the corporate welfare is a bad idea
and I agree. Unlike liberals like you who love the government, I don't trust it
to make those decisions. To think otherwise wouldn't be very conservative.
Bill Mancuso
So, Conservatives who support welfare don't count because
they are not "true" Conservatives and Liberals are racist whether or
not they are racist. You really have an excuse to get around any unwanted fact,
don't you? You still think I'm Liberal and I love the government even though I
have told you otherwise at least half a dozen times (I understand for you I
need to be these things in order for your baseless accusations to work.) The
CONSERVATIVE Heritage Foundation absolutely
supports corporate welfare - they are one of its biggest proponents - but I see
you hilariously wish to ignore that fact. And you've picked the ONE-TIME $550
Million Solyndra clusterfuck boogieman [I forgot to mention what
Republicans always conveniently pretend never happened: Bush energy officials
wanted to get the Solyndra loan closed before leaving the White House in 2009 —
the loan was #1 on their "three highest priorities through January
15." (Obama took office on the 20th.) But the Energy
Department's credit committee first wanted more analysis, which held it up into
the Obama administration.] and unknown
'Chicago companies' and evil unions as Liberal corporate welfare. I don't even
need to go past the $5 Billion EVERY YEAR to oil companies for Conservative
corporate welfare - that leaves all those others put together in the dust.
Those are racist Conservative rich white man welfare programs - regardless of
intention. Hah! And congratulations on yet again ignoring all the things you
don't want to answer.
Bobby
So the answer to stopping your government programs which
destroy the black family is to end corporate welfare? Not really, but that
would be a good idea on its own. I am going to hilariously tell you that the
Heritage Foundation does not support "corporate welfare" unless you
have misunderstood what that term means. They support the free market - not the
government - deciding winners and losers. The opposite of corporate welfare.
Unions aren't evil-I've been a member for a dozen years and know what good roll
they play. But giving tax payer money to them for political reasons is pretty
evil. Bankrupting our pensions and refusing to reform them due to liberal
pressure is pretty evil. You should join the Heritage Foundation-they have a
great article on welfare and its results up on their site. So the point was not
to call you a liberal-it was to point out that an innocent 6 year old girl gets
shot to death for standing on a porch in a neighborhood in Chicago where
liberal policies are in full effect for decades with results available for all
to see...and around the same time a latino man who gets into his fight, has his
nose broken, shoots a black teen in an incident with media coverage full of
lies and you: determine Zimmerman guilty of murder with no other information or
trial...and then yawn about the state of the poor black community.
Bill Mancuso
Once again, they are not my programs. How dense is that
skull of yours? Does any information ever penetrate?
I never said ending corporate welfare would help the 'black
family.' You made that up. I created a stupid conspiracy theory about racist
Conservatives that equals your stupid conspiracy theory about racist Liberals.
Then I predicted you would only see what I created as stupid. And you did. But
you did it by saying I said something I never said. Because that's what you do.
There's a little bit of a difference between the Heritage
Foundation denying corporate welfare exists and not supporting it. It does
exist and they do support it. They even have an article explaining how the Bush
Tax Cuts were awesome for the country and says how Democrats are lying about
them. Most of what that article says is complete bullshit, according to
economists - and common sense, for that matter - and the rest is only partly
true, according to economists. They, like you, just try to blame everything on
Democrats. Mostly by ignoring facts. Partly by twisting them.
Liberal policies do not shoot people. You still haven't
explained how they do. Or how they only pertain to black people. Because they
don't. But you keep ignoring facts contradictory to your conspiracy theory just
so you can keep repeating the same baseless nonsense ad infinitum.
Zimmerman 1.) did not ‘get into a fight,’ he initiated the fight and 2.) did not have his nose broken like
portrayed by family lies (which you are choosing to believe because it supports
your wishes). Lies that contradict both the police video evidence from 35
minutes after the murder showing him not having a broken nose and the
dispatcher recording canceling the ambulance for Zimmerman. The unarmed dead
kid did it - says the murderer/instigator with everything to lose. But, no,
it's the media that's lying, not the liars.
I did not yawn about the state of the poor black community:
you made that up.
Then you ignored (again) all the things I said that you
could not or did not want to answer.
Circling, circling, circling. And *gurgle* goes the drain.
Bobby
No Bill, I think I covered all of your circular,
well-informed "arguments." [You may think so, but the virtual lack
of responses to the bulk of what I said may prove different. Not that proof is
ever something you seek.] And I get it.
Zimmerman is guilty because you conducted a Google search of liberal blogs. The
6 year old was way more suspect than Trayvon and had it coming. [Do
they know exactly who killed the 6-year-old girl and didn’t arrest the killer,
like in the Treyvon case?] Or she was
killed because corporate welfare destroyed the black family in America over the
last 50 years. And conservatives who don't support it do. Makes perfect sense. [He’s
still not understanding (or intentionally ignoring) that I was pointing out the
ignorance of his theory; I was not claiming it is corporate welfare’s fault.]
Bill Mancuso
Again, I never said any of those things. You made them up.
My arguments are based on facts and information. Of which
you have shown animosity toward. Your arguments consist entirely of "black
people are dying so Liberal policies are racist." Now, THAT makes perfect
sense.
I do not check liberal blogs. I check original sources. It's
not my fault they don't agree with your wishes. And just because the right-wing
news sources that you only watch have not shown the police video and played the
ambulance dispatcher recording because it contradicts the desire to somehow
blame Liberals, does not mean that every other news outlet has not shown them.
It's really easy to find on the internet. Google it.
*gurgle* *gurgle*
Bobby
On the off chance I'm right though, how many more decades of
evidence should we collect before we admit the wrong we are committing and
right it?
Bill Mancuso
I never said the policies are working. I completely admit
that they are not. In fact, I've said several times that stricter rules are
needed for them to work more efficiently. It's that you've jumped to the
conclusion that the policies are only Liberal and not Conservative, that this
somehow means Liberals are racist, that Liberals have intentionally designed
these policies only to wipe out black people, and these policies are
responsible for killing Martin. And you did it based on contradictory facts or
the complete lack of facts.
As to his religious insistence that welfare policies are
only Liberal and only designed to kill black people (based on no facts
whatsoever), I wonder if it has anything to do with the laughably insane claims
by the pair of extreme right-wing nut-jobs, Mark Crutcher and Lila Rose, that
the main driving forces behind liberal pro-choice rights are people pushing for
eugenics in order to get rid of blacks in America? It’s very hard to keep up
with all the conspiracy theories the right-wing manufactures. Seemingly by the
hour.
* * *
At this point, Jon Stewart and Larry Wilmore did this on The
Daily Show. Yes. My point made in a 6-minute comedy/satire bit...
* * *
Bobby
Never blamed the policies for killing Trayvon. Pointed out
your interest in Trayvon's murder was insincere.
(And yes, ignoring a half century of history and continuing
to support policies with racist results is a racist act...don't hear any
liberal seeking stricter rules, only advocating for more of the same)
Another
black man makes 60% of my point...a few on point statistics (your favorite)
used in context as well:
Bill Mancuso
First of all, you said 'racist Liberal welfare programs' are
responsible for killing black people about 100 times. Specifically Treyvon Martin.
But suddenly Trayvon Martin's murder is excluded from this theory? Nice try. Or
should I say nice lie? It rhymes nicely.
Second, where do you get off telling me how I think?
Seriously, you're so desperate to twist everything to fit your ludicrously ignorant
theory that now you're telling me how I think and feel? And you know I'm
insincere? That's desperate.
Third, both Conservatives and Liberals supporting policies
that haven't worked for 50 years that apply TO ALL RACES is NOT racist, no
matter what your delusional fantasies are. Bad policy, yes. Here are the
criteria for your fantasy to be true, none of which are met: only white people
would have to have written the policies, only Liberals would have to have
written the policies, only black people would have to be effected by the
policies. Not only does your theory have more holes than a moth-eaten sweater
in a spaghetti strainer with three pieces of Swiss cheese and a used shooting
range target, but it is also completely asinine.
Fourth, I don't see any Conservative seeking stricter rules
either, only ending the programs completely so they can give more free
hand-outs to the rich.
Fifth, I can't even begin to start picking through all the
bullshit in that Shelby Steele article. Suffice it to say, after the one
accurate prison statistic - with a caveat: blacks are aggressively sentenced
for the same crimes that whites are let go for and have higher penalties than
whites for the same crimes, which artificially inflates their percentage -
- which is completely irrelevant to the topic anyway and not
used in context, Steele wrote an entire article full of generally anti-Liberal
statements without any concrete evidence whatsoever. His absurd agenda seems to
be that there is no racism anymore, so only people like Sharpton and Jackson
who point out racism are pretending racism is real so they are relevant. It
seems to me that Steele is actually the one who is insincere and only
exploiting this Martin case for his own purposes. But his denial of facts
certainly supported your denial of facts, so I can plainly see why you posted
his article as support. And by the transitive property, does your support for
his insincerity make you insincere as well? Do you also believe the civil
rights establishment is redundant? That white racism is a defeated idea? That
it's the Liberal media's fault and not the murderer's fault? Funny. In an
extremely stupid sort of way. Waitaminit - if there's no such thing as white
racism as Steele says, how does this support your idea that Liberals are racist?
It's difficult to twist reality to fit into something illogical that you
invented without contradicting yourself, isn't it?
Sixth, a black man trounces 100% of your point:
And seventh, as for your insistence that 'racist Liberal
policies' are the sole cause of a higher percentage of blacks on welfare, you
seem to be intentionally ignoring these facts: A.) blacks didn't even have any
real opportunity to vote until the mid 1960's, so their interests were
virtually never supported until then, unlike whites, who had always been in
control B.) blacks had no real opportunity in the educational system until
then, either, unlike whites C.) there is still great income disparity for
blacks, which has to do with racially prejudiced corporate policy, not welfare
policy. Imagine if, in 1492, blacks had the same opportunities to wipe out the indigenous
population of North America and grow on equal terms with whites. Where would
they be now? Mostly back on the African continent, probably. So, you see,
having a centuries-long head start may have more to do with poor black
communities than your ridiculous notion of policies only written by Liberals
that only effect blacks.
OK. I had thought this to be done at this point. Again.
But four fucking days later he hit me with a reply. A reply with statements as
predictable as the sun coming up in the morning. I did not reply to them
because there was no need to listen to him continue denying what he said and
saying other things that didn’t happen or twisting the things that were or
weren’t said or ignoring things that contradict his fantasies. But I most
certainly will add comments now.
Bobby
Wheh...just finished reading.
1-Nope. Didn't say it. Said you were not sincere. [Yes.
You did say Liberal welfare programs are responsible for killing black people.
Anyone can go back and read what you wrote. Fucking Christ. How easy is it for
Republicans to deny anything they don’t like? Even what they themselves have
said. Not that this surprises me. Republicans are against all their own
policies now that Obama is implementing them. Examples, you ask? I already gave
a list of Republican policies that they now believe to be anti-Constitutional
previously in this thread. Weren’t you paying attention?]
2-Never suggested what you think. Just that you weren't
doing enough of it. All suggestions of your thoughts are inferences. [As you
JUST said in your #1 reply, you said I was not sincere. That is explicitly
telling me what I think. And in this very #2 reply, you state that you said I
wasn’t doing enough of it. That is also explicitly telling me the level of what
I think. Then you said your SUGGESTIONS of my thoughts are INFERENCES. That is
AGAIN explicitly telling me what I think. For fuck’s fucking sake, man. WORDS
HAVE FUCKING MEANING.]
3-Very, very wrong. Not even sure how you don't get it, but
not surprised. [FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!!! I wonder if a Republican credo
is: ‘If you deny the truth, it will no longer be true.’ I also wonder which
policies only white Liberals wrote that only apply to black people and no one
else.]
4-Me for one. I'm guessing you can Google countless others
(including the Heritage Foundation...how soon we forget) [So, you’re a
policy-maker now? Just like me? You’ve written policy to tighten welfare
restrictions? Why are you only guessing you can Google others? Why not
do it and prove me wrong? ‘If you deny the truth, it will no longer be true.’]
5-Result of policies are racist (repeated repeated
repeated). Your opinion of the article is based on a total lack of critical
thinking, much like the blog post. [That’s me. The notorious uncritical thinker.] The argument of your wrong because your wrong isn't
really an argument. the guy totally misses it, and stating Steele opposes the
measures designed to remove the blah blah blah...really? So we just need to do
MORE of the same "helping?" Yikes. [Repeated results are
not racist. It does not matter if you repeat it and repeat it and repeat it. I
realize you are subject to that standard right-wing brainwashing tactic. I,
however am not. They certainly are bad policy. Maybe even profit-driven somehow
– most things are. But not racist. And the argument was not ‘You’re wrong
because you’re wrong.’ You have a fantastic ability to see what you want to see
and ignore any fact that contradicts your wishes. Like the fucking FACT that your guy Steele claims that there
is no more racism in America, which totally contradicts your insistence that
Liberal policies are racist. And you say I
lack critical thinking? Sheesh!]
oh that was 6
7-What an incredible history blacks of African descent have
here in America. I have met so many elderly black men and women in the City who
have told some incredible stories about the struggles endured. If you ever have
the chance to talk to someone who endured the Jim Crow laws at length you
should take it, it will open your eyes. These same people who have such an
amazing story of overcoming adversity will tell you what they think about the
state of the younger generations today, and I guaranty your view will not come
up unless it is to deride it. All you need do is look at the success of recent
immigrants from Africa and you will understand it is not racism in the simple
form you think, but racism in the policies you support that is to blame..... [So,
let’s see…racism is dead except for racist Liberal policies, blacks have it
just as shiny, happy and easy as whites – especially all the wonderfully
successful recent black immigrants, there is no income disparity between blacks
and whites, and a few hundred years of slavery and not being able to vote or go
to public schools until the mid/late 1960’s is not a factor in equality. Did I
get that right?]
PS...I was interested to see where you were going with your
stats on sentencing, because I'm going to say you were going to once again take
them and attempt to fit them into an agenda without context. [It’s true.
I’ve been taking things out of context and fitting them into my agenda this
whole time. Not you. I’ve also been making up phrases like “racist impact” and
repeating it over and over in the hopes it will suddenly become the truth.] If you do, it would be helpful to know that criminal
history is the 2nd most important factor in determining sentencing, so when a
young black man grows up in one of your utopian neighborhoods in the ghetto [Yes,
my utopian neighborhoods. That’s what I’ve been saying all along.] and gets arrested, he is more likely to get a more
severe sentence do to the fact that he has probably been through the system
before. [Whites are never repeat offenders.] So yes, he is a victim of racism-but not in the way
your Google stats suggest... [That is true about repeat offenders.
Absolutely not true in every single case, though - as the article points out, which, I suppose you would have ignored anyway, even if had you read it. But I guess I’m just taking
that out of context and fitting it into my agenda again. I should keep in mind
all the times I’ve been pulled over for ‘driving while white’ down here in
Georgia.]
This “discussion” is another wonderful example of how
Republican minds have this innate ability to treat anything that doesn’t
support their righteous fantasies as if it never happened. He answered
practically none of what I said and yet, insisted that he did. And he
blissfully ignored Shelby Steele’s insistence that there is no more racism in
America. They also are experts at inventing something out of thin air and yet
become completely convinced of its authenticity. Like racist Liberal programs
that only apply to black people, which are intentionally designed to ‘wipe them
out.’
I've also notice that many of the things I pointed out that he is doing, like taking things out of context, he later proclaimed I was doing. Though, he was doing it out of context.
Hypocrisy. Ain’t it a stinker?
**********
As of the posting of this blog entry, yesterday Zimmerman’s two
attorneys dropped their client, citing that they lost contact with him, hinting
that he may not be in the country. Zimmerman, somewhere in hiding, called Sean
Hannity on FOX “News” for some reason. Hannity promoted that for ratings, then went on TV and said he couldn't say anything, and didn't know anything - knowing full well he would fling himself into the middle of a legal shitstorm if he did say something. And today, the special prosecutor announced
Zimmerman is now in custody, charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of Treyvon Martin. This is 44 days after the murder happened.
**********
Peter posted this in the middle of the thread somewhere. It
interfered with the flow so I put it down here at the end. It is worth the
read.
Peter
Alan Grayson weighs in on the murder:
I live in Orlando, so a number of people have asked me what
I think about the death of Trayvon Martin. Trayvon, a teenager, was shot dead
by a "neighborhood watch" member as Trayvon was walking home from a
convenience store. Trayvon was armed with nothing but a bottle of iced tea and
a bag of Skittles. For me, it calls to mind the sentiments in the speech that
Robert F. Kennedy gave from his heart on April 4, 1968, in Indianapolis, after
Martin Luther King, Jr. was killed. This is what Robert F. Kennedy said:
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I'm only going to talk to you just for a minute or so this
evening, because I have some – some very sad news for all of you – Could you
lower those signs, please? – I have some very sad news for all of you, and, I
think, sad news for all of our fellow citizens, and people who love peace all
over the world; and that is that Martin Luther King was shot and was killed
tonight in Memphis, Tennessee.
Martin Luther King dedicated his life to love and to justice
between fellow human beings. He died in the cause of that effort. In this
difficult day, in this difficult time for the United States, it's perhaps well
to ask what kind of a nation we are and what direction we want to move in. For
those of you who are black – considering the evidence evidently is that there
were white people who were responsible – you can be filled with bitterness, and
with hatred, and a desire for revenge.
We can move in that direction as a country, in greater
polarization – black people amongst blacks, and white amongst whites, filled
with hatred toward one another. Or we can make an effort, as Martin Luther King
did, to understand, and to comprehend, and replace that violence, that stain of
bloodshed that has spread across our land, with an effort to understand,
compassion, and love.
For those of you who are black and are tempted to be filled
with hatred and mistrust of the injustice of such an act, against all white
people, I would only say that I can also feel in my own heart the same kind of
feeling. I had a member of my family killed, but he was killed by a white man.
But we have to make an effort in the United States. We have
to make an effort to understand, to get beyond, or go beyond these rather
difficult times.
My favorite poet was Aeschylus. And he once wrote:
Even in our sleep, pain which cannot forget
falls drop by drop upon the heart,
until, in our own despair,
against our will,
comes wisdom
through the awful grace of God.
What we need in the United States is not division; what we
need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is
not violence and lawlessness, but is love, and wisdom, and compassion toward
one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our
country, whether they be white or whether they be black.
So I ask you tonight to return home, to say a prayer for the
family of Martin Luther King, but more importantly to say a prayer for our own
country, which all of us love – a prayer for understanding and that compassion
of which I spoke.
We can do well in this country. We will have difficult
times. We've had difficult times in the past, but we – and we will have
difficult times in the future. It is not the end of violence; it is not the end
of lawlessness; and it's not the end of disorder.
But the vast majority of white people and the vast majority
of black people in this country want to live together, want to improve the
quality of our life, and want justice for all human beings that abide in our
land.
And let's dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so
many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this
world. Let us dedicate ourselves to that, and say a prayer for our country and
for our people.
Thank you very much.
Courage,
Alan Grayson
**********
Full transcript of Marc Morial link:
KEITH OLBERMANN: For more on Congressman Rush's protest in
the House and what Trayvon Martin's dad had called the "Trayvon Movement,"
I'm joined by Marc Morial, president and CEO of the National Urban League, and
former mayor of New Orleans. Thank you for your time tonight, sir.
MARC MORIAL: Hey, Keith, thank you. I appreciate it.
OLBERMANN: Let me start again with this new video. I've been
trying to contextualize this. We've only all seen this for about the last 40
minutes or so. What do you see in this video that's relevant to our
understanding of what happened on February 26?
MORIAL: What's relevant is that it impeaches the story that
George Zimmerman has floated, that somehow he was injured in the altercation,
that he had a broken nose, that he had scratches — it impeaches that story, and
that story has been part of an orchestrated effort by George Zimmerman and his
supporters to sort of advance an alibi, if you will, advance a version of the
story that is not supported by this video, and isn’t supported by the 911
tapes.
So, I think it's very important to look at this video.
People can see what — it does not appear that this gentleman was involved in an
altercation.
And then, also, I'm interested to note today this sort of
new twist that the Sanford police did, in fact, want to conduct an arrest. I
question why they would have consulted the prosecutor. The typical procedure is
that the police would, in fact, arrest and book and the prosecutor would make a
decision later as whether to bring criminal charges. So, this is a deviation
from what I think, in most jurisdictions, is standard procedure.
OLBERMANN: A question I wanted to get in to you, and I'm
glad you did that for me — let me ask you one more question about the
videotape, then we'll get to Congressman Rush. Let’s, for the sake of argument,
say there is something left out of the timeline that we know of — and he's been
to a doctor, he's been to a bathroom, he's been to a hospital — and the chain
of custody, as our previous guest Corey Dade used that term, allows for some
place where he could have been cleaned up. That's not the evidence we're
talking about in this, is it?
I mean, there is no gushing blood, and I don't think anybody
would expect that, necessarily, but there is no — he doesn't seem to be halted
in his walking. He doesn't seem to be somebody who just went through a
traumatic experience. Is that what we're seeing? Can we assume somewhere along
the line he might have gotten a Handi Wipe or something?
MORIAL: Well, he doesn't seem to be in distress.
OLBERMANN: Exactly.
MORIAL: He doesn't seem to be someone who was involved in
any sort of altercation, and I think we have to be on guard at this effort
under way to damage Trayvon Martin's reputation — this teenager's reputation —
and slander a dead man, as well as the effort to continue to advance this story
which now — is now unsupported by this tape which, along with the 911 tapes,
are pieces of what I would call independent evidence, not some person who said,
"I'm telling you what someone told me," but actually something that
people can see.
And I'm hopeful that the prosecutor will quickly make a
decision to bring the original charges, or stronger charges, that the police
originally wanted to bring. I think that would constitute the first step
towards justice in this case.
OLBERMANN: The protest on behalf of justice, as we've
already discussed, got to the floor of the House today, and Congressman Rush
pulling up the hoodie while denouncing racial profiling and reading verses from
the Bible and getting thrown out because he violated an obscure rule of the
House while in session, because you can't wear a hat, which is — I guess, a
relatively new rule in the last 130 years or so. Did he make his point? Did
that resonate the way he wanted it to, do you think?
MORIAL: I think he makes the point that a man, an
African-American man, wearing a hoodie is not, by definition, suspicious. In
America, which looks on it that way, that's the very essence of what we mean
when we talk about racial profiling, so I think you're going to see the wearing
of the hood as a universal protest sign in connection with Trayvon Martin.
Because the troubling thing with George Zimmerman is this
pattern that existed before this incident of him calling 911, and
inconsistently reporting quote/unquote, "black men" as being
suspicious in that neighborhood. So, this is why this incident has struck a
nerve, because Trayvon Martin is a teenager. It struck a nerve because this
person was a self-anointed — self-appointed, if you will — neighborhood watch
sheriff. And that people can, in fact, can listen to the 911 tapes, now they
can see this video, and I think it's becoming clear what, in fact, happened. We
want justice for Trayvon.
OLBERMANN: The president of the Urban League, former mayor
of New Orleans, Marc Morial, great thanks. Good to see you. Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment