For those who think Systemic Racism Isn't Real or no longer exists...

[wdefromtx 3,159]

1 hour ago, aubiefifty said:

link or is this just a hate post? shame biden is not the crook or racist trump is huh? but post me that link. it is a rule

Not a hate post and looks like @I_M4_AUcovered some links for me. I do remember something about him talking about school buses and jungles as well. So there's that. 

[I_M4_AU 7,949]

1 minute ago, aubiefifty said:

can you tell us anything about WHITE crime iam?

Are you assuming all of the crime in those two cities are coming from one race?  I don’t believe they are, but I could be wrong.

[aubiefifty 16,871]

Just now, wdefromtx said:

Not a hate post and looks like @I_M4_AUcovered some links for me. I do remember something about him talking about school buses and jungles as well. So there's that. 

oh he has a shady past but i believe when he served with obama he was past all that. you know they vetted him well. but yes i know he told his folks what they wanted to hear to get elected. i did not agree with it then nor do i agree with it now. the problem is this day and times crooks are tolerated and parties will protect them. i imagine it happens on both sides. my point is i think he turned his past around. i think that is fair..............

[aubiefifty 16,871]

5 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Are you assuming all of the crime in those two cities are coming from one race?  I don’t believe they are, but I could be wrong.

no i am saying it appears you just seem to bring out black crime and ignore white crime. do you want me to be honest with you or lie? i am not one to lie.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

8 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

No pass, just asking for a trial before calling him guilty. Same with Hunter and his father.

Hunter taking money from Burisma is not a crime.  You have no evidence that Joe has taken anything from anyone.  We know Thomas took graft, quite a bit.

If we find out that Joe did take money.  I will not defend him.  Why would you defend corruption?  No need to answer, it is rhetorical.

[AU9377 5,023]

On 4/18/2023 at 12:36 PM, icanthearyou said:

 

 

Trump appointed judges and Ron DeSantis are instigating more than Biden has ever contemplated.

[I_M4_AU 7,949]

5 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Hunter taking money from Burisma is not a crime.  You have no evidence that Joe has taken anything from anyone.  We know Thomas took graft, quite a bit.

If we find out that Joe did take money.  I will not defend him.  Why would you defend corruption?  No need to answer, it is rhetorical.

If Hunter’s involvement stops with Burisma you are correct.  I have no evidence that Joe has taken anything from anyone, but he is being investigated by Congress, so I’ll wait for more it come out.

You don’t know if what Thomas received was illegal, you’re reading some information that you don’t know is real or against the law and condemning the man.

Like you; IF we find out Thomas broke the law he would be guilty.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

7 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

no i am saying it appears you just seem to bring out black crime and ignore white crime. do you want me to be honest with you or lie? i am not one to lie.

You should check out Fox digital.  It is updated hourly with a new crime story and, the obligatory picture of a black criminal.  They are conditioning a response.  Those with racism, racial bias, in their hearts will lap up the fear, the prejudice, the anger.  

But,,, do not forget, the real agenda is not racism.  The racists are merely useful idiots (always have been).  The real agenda is to distract, to redirect blame from a crumbling society with extreme corruption and extreme inequality.  In short, it is the age old trick of,,, do not blame those in the capital class, the political class (unless they are from the opposing party), blame the powerless, the poor, the disenfranchised.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

don’t know if what Thomas received was illegal

I do not care if it is illegal.  I know that selling a seat on the Supreme Court is highly unethical.   I know that profiting from public service, particularly in a non-elected, lifetime position is highly unethical.  I do not need a code to tell me right from wrong.

Just because someone hasn't written a law,,, that doesn't change the foundations of ethical behavior, if you have any principles.

[aubiefifty 16,871]

5 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

You should check out Fox digital.  It is updated hourly with a new crime story and, the obligatory picture of a black criminal.  They are conditioning a response.  Those with racism, racial bias, in their hearts will lap up the fear, the prejudice, the anger.  

But,,, do not forget, the real agenda is not racism.  The racists are merely useful idiots (always have been).  The real agenda is to distract, to redirect blame from a crumbling society with extreme corruption and extreme inequality.  In short, it is the age old trick of,,, do not blame those in the capital class, the political class (unless they are from the opposing party), blame the powerless, the poor, the disenfranchised.

but they still promote racism and if that tool taken away from them we would be better for it. how that could be done  i have no idea.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

2 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

but they still promote racism and if that tool taken away from them we would be better for it. how that could be done  i have no idea.

You cannot stop people from being racists.  It is a waste of time.  You simply have to continue to promote equality and justice. 

Democrats, liberals, progressives should stop playing into the partisanship, the anger, the culture wars.  Stop being baited into a fight and simply work for justice and equality,,, socially, economically, politically.   That is how you promote a thriving democratic, capitalistic society.  If the majority of Americans reject that idea then,,, so be it.  Our founding and our country will cease to exist as we know it. 

I know it is sad.  I know it is infuriating.  I know it is being orchestrated.  But hey, democracy is messy.  However, the sooner we get out of the political BS and return to basic principles, basic human decency, the better off we will all be.

 

[Son of A Tiger 561]

[I_M4_AU 7,949]

1 hour ago, aubiefifty said:

no i am saying it appears you just seem to bring out black crime and ignore white crime. do you want me to be honest with you or lie? i am not one to lie.

I’m not ignoring white crime, I know it exists and is all too frequent.  The media is all over these two cities with their coverage, should we ignore it?  It seems we have ignored it for too long.  NYC elected a new Mayor not long ago and things have gotten worse.  Chicago just elected a new Mayor and he is making excuses for the rioters.

If there is a white crime spree or riots involving white protesters, I’m sure it will make all the media.  I started a thread about the Louisville mass shooter a week or so ago.  So there goes your narrative.

[I_M4_AU 7,949]

1 hour ago, icanthearyou said:

I do not care if it is illegal.  I know that selling a seat on the Supreme Court is highly unethical.   I know that profiting from public service, particularly in a non-elected, lifetime position is highly unethical.  I do not need a code to tell me right from wrong.

Just because someone hasn't written a law,,, that doesn't change the foundations of ethical behavior, if you have any principles.

You don’t think the SCOTUS doesn’t have a code of ethics they go by?  I would think they do and I believe Thomas has investigated what was in the code and has abided by it.  That’s just a guess, because I haven’t read or even seen it

If you believe what was done was unethical write someone, maybe it will change, but in the mean time your not going to retroactively convict Thomas of a crime.

[I_M4_AU 7,949]

54 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

You cannot stop people from being racists.

Is it racist to critique a person of color if you believe they are doing something wrong?

Edited April 21, 2023 by I_M4_AU

[icanthearyou 4,463]

2 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

You don’t think the SCOTUS doesn’t have a code of ethics they go by?  I would think they do and I believe Thomas has investigated what was in the code and has abided by it.  That’s just a guess, because I haven’t read or even seen it

If you believe what was done was unethical write someone, maybe it will change, but in the mean time your not going to retroactively convict Thomas of a crime.

I have no desire to convict him of a crime.  And, no matter how hard you try,,, that has never been my contention.

My point, again, is that anyone with basic principles knows that his actions compromise the integrity of the Court.  That should not be allowed, should not be accepted.  And, if he peers had any real principles, any true convictions, and weren't equally as corrupt, they would take action.

It is not partisan, it is principled.  And yes, I have reached out to the Court.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

34 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

You don’t think the SCOTUS doesn’t have a code of ethics they go by?

If they do, it's not working.  I know that they have no ethical oversight, none.

[I_M4_AU 7,949]

@icanthearyoua face palm in not an answer.  Is critiquing a person of color racist if you believe they are doing something wrong?

[icanthearyou 4,463]

2 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

@icanthearyoua face palm in not an answer.  Is critiquing a person of color racist if you believe they are doing something wrong?

If you are going to be so overtly disingenuous,,, you will have to do it with someone else.

[I_M4_AU 7,949]

Just now, icanthearyou said:

If you are going to be so overtly disingenuous,,, you will have to do it with someone else.

From this I gather criticism of Clarence Thomas in not racist, because he is a conservative, however, criticism of say Kamala Harris is because she has no faults.

I’m not the one being disingenuous here.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

From this I gather criticism of Clarence Thomas in not racist, because he is a conservative, however, criticism of say Kamala Harris is because she has no faults.

I’m not the one being disingenuous here.

Once again,,, this has nothing to do with politics, racial politics, race, ideology, the law.

This is about fundamental/foundational principles and ethics.

And again,,, you are a liar.

[I_M4_AU 7,949]

2 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Once again,,, this has nothing to do with politics, racial politics, race, ideology, the law.

This is about fundamental/foundational principles and ethics.

And again,,, you are a liar.

So, criticizing a person of color is not being racist.  Is that your stance?

[DKW 86 7,439]

On 4/19/2023 at 1:44 PM, aubiefifty said:

you look at things wrong. i can see right through you. those dirty colored folk getting away with murder with crooked lib DA's putting them back on the streets fudging the numbers. i bet you think blacks are lazy too? blacks been on welfare and hand me outs and are just killing this country. guess what. in most cases whites double blacks on any assistance. lets show some facts.

Americans Are Mistaken About Who Gets Welfare

Arthur Delaney, Ariel Edwards-Levy

7–8 minutes

---

WASHINGTON ― President Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress may soon embark on a racially-fraught policy battle over “welfare.”

“We can lift our citizens from welfare, from dependence to independence, and from poverty to prosperity,” Trump said in his State of the Union address last week, the latest signal that Republicans want “welfare reform” this year.

Trump has often pandered to racists among his supporters. He said Mexico sends “rapists” to the United States and that there were some “fine people” among the neo-Nazis who staged a deadly protest last year in Charlottesville, Virginia. When the president said Mexican heritage made it impossible for a judge to be fair, House Speaker Paul Ryan called it the “textbook definition” of racist.

The word “welfare” is different. It’s a standard political term that Democrats, Republicans and journalists alike use ― though Republicans use it the most often. There’s nothing overtly racialized about welfare. You can even find it in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution.

And yet, the word is often loaded with racial meaning. As a new HuffPost/YouGov survey shows, much of the public has a distorted view of which groups receive the bulk of assistance from government programs. Fifty-nine percent of Americans say either that most welfare recipients are black, or that welfare recipiency is about the same among black and white people.

HuffPost

The numbers reflect a significant overestimation of the number of black Americans benefiting from the largest programs. Medicaid had more than 70 million beneficiaries in 2016, of whom 43 percent were white, 18 percent black, and 30 percent Hispanic. Of 43 million food stamp recipients that year, 36.2 percent were white, 25.6 percent black, 17.2 percent Hispanic and 15.5 percent unknown. (Food stamps are formally known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.)

In one sense, HuffPost’s survey asked an abstract question: The federal government doesn’t run a program that is actually called “welfare.” The word can describe any instance of the government helping people or businesses, though it’s most commonly used to describe programs that benefit the poor.

These days, to Republican lawmakers, welfare means Medicaid, food stamps and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. Paul Ryan and hardline conservatives in the House of Representatives have said they want to make changes to those three programs this year under the banner of welfare reform.

Historically, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families is probably the program that has most frequently been called welfare, as it was created in the famous “welfare reform” of 1996. As a result of that reform, the program today is much smaller than its predecessor, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and it only served 2.7 million people in 2016. Of those, 36.9 percent were Hispanic, 27.6 percent white, and 29.1 percent black ― meaning that if they had this particular program in mind, HuffPost’s survey respondents who said the number of white and black beneficiaries are “about the same” were basically right.

Survey respondents’ estimation of who receives welfare tracked closely to their estimation of who gets food stamps. Nearly two-thirds of poll respondents said the program’s recipients are mostly black or that there are as many black Americans as white Americans receiving benefits. Only 21 percent correctly said there are more white than black food stamp recipients.

“Across the programs people overestimate the share of recipients who are black,” said Elizabeth Lower-Basch, a senior analyst with the Center for Law and Social Policy. “It’s not surprising because we all know people’s images of public benefits is driven by stereotype.”

Trump himself harbors mistaken views of who receives welfare benefits, according to reporting by NBC News. During a meeting with members of the Congressional Black Caucus last March, one member of Congress told Trump that welfare cuts, which the president had proposed in his budget, would harm her constituents, specifying that not all of them were black.

According to NBC News, Trump said, “Really? Then what are they?”

Trump supporters are also more likely than Clinton voters to overestimate the share of welfare and public housing benefits that go to black recipients.

HuffPost

The perceptions of who benefits from programs may affect the favorability of the programs themselves. White Americans are more likely to support “assistance to the poor” than “welfare,” one 2014 study found. And other polling has shown that whites are 30 points likelier to agree that “average Americans have gotten less than they deserve” than they are to say the same about black Americans.

Last year, House Republicans and Trump signaled they wanted reforms to food stamps, specifically increased “work requirements” that would deny benefits to the sliver of SNAP and Medicaid recipients who are able bodied but don’t have jobs. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) suggested he didn’t have much interest in pursuing major changes to safety net programs.

Even without McConnell’s support for a full-fledged reform of food stamps, Congress will definitely have to consider the $70 billion program later this year because it needs to be reauthorized.

Last week, Trump and Ryan talked about “workforce development,” in what might be a new euphemism for Ryan’s longstanding goal of shrinking the federal safety net. Ryan reportedly told fellow Republicans at a GOP retreat in West Virginia last week that workforce development means “getting people the skills and opportunity to get into the workforce.”

That is pure delusion on the part of the trump voters. Pure delusion.