No doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Black leaders: Zimmerman verdict is 'old South justice'
|
No doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Black leaders: Zimmerman verdict is 'old South justice'
Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Maybe some of this stuff should be moved to here:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/curren...646411-18.html
Those particular blacks are showing their racism again... typical response.. if they don't get to have their lynching... its got to be rascist... never mind the fact they never had any proof anything was ever illegal at any point... and the prosecution even proved Trayvon and his girlfriend were BOTH racists... with their Crazy white cracker slur. Which was 10 times worse than anything Paula Dean ever said.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I still wouldn't want to be Zimmerman, I hope he'll have a chance at living a normal life once the story blows over.
Yeah.. thanks to the media... an innocent man will always be a target of Racists...Quote:
Originally Posted by earl237
He is hardly innocent since he broke every common sense rule in the book for being a gun owner and captain of his neighborhood watch. He was judged not guilty, not innocent.
Not guilty IS innocent. Have you forgotten about the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
But then Obama breaks every rule of common sense... but the lefties give HIM a free pass every day.
Zimmerman didn't break any rules of being a gun owner... he had a permit to carry... he was Lawfully carrying. He was Lawfully defending himself from w thug from the projects... he LAWFULLY shot and killed a thug that was assaulting him.
And contrary to what the left might believe... lefties aren't entitled to a right to assault a righty... nor are they entitled to any right to not be shot to death when doing it.
Trayvon was a thug.. and he got exactly what every thug deserves.
I don't think this should be about race, and it isn't a liberal or conservative issue. I have some black friends and even they said they found it very biased that the media only showed pictures of the younger, smiling Martin instead of the thuggish, menacing ones. Even they said they would cross the street if they saw him coming toward them in the other direction. I think it's very sad that the left always makes the worst people in society into martyrs and heroes but they don't care about all the innocent people in jail for crimes they didn't commit. Everyone knows about Martin and Omar Khadr thanks to their fan clubs but how many people even know about Brian Banks?
Oh I agree... crime knows no ethnic boundaries... and justice is equal... however certain groups think they are entitled to be more equal than the others... witness the NAACP and their incessant attempts to inject racism into everything... and their racist zeal to go after an innocent man. Because they believe Trayvon was entitled to rob the "Rich folk" and assault anyone he wants and not suffer the threat of payback... just because he was black.Quote:
Originally Posted by earl237
And since Zimmerman was hispanic... not a white guy contrary to the drive by media... it just shows how much disdain the left actually has towards the Hispanic Community.
And I hope they remember this when it comes time to vote.
Math is hard, even with a PhD in economics...
I've always suspected liberal economists used a vastly different form of math than most people and this confirms it. If North Carolina is the 39th richest state then only 11 are poorer, and if it's 12th in percentage of children in poverty then 11 are poorer - the proportion is the same. Somehow she has deduced that GOP dominated North Carolina ranks high in both wealth and children in poverty when that's clearly not so.Quote:
By Teresa Ghilarducci, the Bernard L. and Irene Schwartz chair of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research...
What state makes the best fiscal decisions? In order to rate the states you need criteria. Let’s try this one: Any state that sparks protests called “Moral Mondays” is probably going to rank pretty low. Six months ago, I visited North Carolina's state treasurer, Janet Cowell – the only Democrat in the administration now – and met with citizen advocates to discuss our research finding that North Carolina faces a serious retirement crisis. Middle-class workers in that state – like most others – will face serious deprivation at retirement age.
Our trip had impact, on us at least. On the plane coming home my colleague turned to me shell shocked, "How can it be legal to have so much poverty in such a wealthy state?"
What is a good state? Judge it by tax rates? No, states with the lowest tax rates have among the lowest levels of economic development. Judge it by pension funding? No, pension design and governance matter more.
What about a basic criteria? Judge a state’s finances by its capacity to reduce child deprivation. According to Kids Count, New Hampshire has the lowest rate of child poverty, at 11 percent. Ranked worst is Mississippi, where a third of children are poor. But Mississippi is poor over all; it has the lowest median income in the nation. And New Hampshire is rich; its median income is the third highest. I get that. So the child poverty numbers may say more about income than about the management of the state budgets.
But let’s look at North Carolina. It is the 39th richest state, and yet it ranks 12th for the percentage of children living in poverty – only 11 states fare worse. Which states do the most to reduce child poverty with the money they have? I’d point to West Virginia, the fourth-poorest state but 13th in child poverty.
Of course there are far wealthier states which fare worse then NC in children living in poverty but they aren't dominated by Republicans.
So to the question her colleague asked, "How can it be legal to have so much poverty in such a wealthy state?"
I don't know, maybe you should ask the folks in D.C. one of the wealthiest areas with one of the worst poverty rates. Meanwhile should we make poverty illegal or something?
Hello again, Steve:
Yeah, why not? Or, put another way, should we prosecute the wealthy people who CAUSE poverty?? Yeah, why not?Quote:
Meanwhile should we make poverty illegal or something?
Excon
Wealthy people don't CAUSE poverty... but then maybe you have a point... lets sue Obama who is multimillionare, Nancy Pelosi and don't forget Buffet and Soros. That and Hollywood... if it wasn't for all those greedy lefties we wouldn't have any poverty.
They also provide jobs, so who's going to do that when you throw all the rich people in the slammer (which would include the president and most of congress). Also, how much money should anyone be allowed to make? I want to see those liberal gears spinning out some more good math.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello again,
Ok, I mean the banksters.. They're crooks. They're STEALING ALL the wealth from the middle class.. Occupy a BANK!
Yes.. Obama is bought and paid for BY the banksters. Happy smoothy? But, don't get a swelled head.. They OWN all the Republicans too.
excon
Yep, some of them manage to just misplace billions of other people's money and get a pass.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Oh we know that... George Soros is the king of them. Warren Buffet is his go-fer guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Who would the less well off people go to, to borrow money if there weren't any bankers?
At least you gave billions to deserving people: the Iraq government.
Better them than welfare bums...Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Who is giving billions to welfare bums?
The people who actually work for a living... thats where the money comes from.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:29 PM. |