100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Community > Posts By > Rachel78745
|
Topic:
looks or brains?
|
|
It's a specific mixture of all the right ingredients. But again..everyone has a different taste, so others might not like what I like. Actually most wouldn't like what I like. well that's a tall order, what do you like? Good question! Haha, I've been here long enough already...ask anyone who knows me..I am definitely not an easy person, or let's say impossible to figure out. Well now that would just be weird. lol I would rather just ask you,but if you don't wanna tell me thats ok. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Capatilism versus socialism
|
|
http://www.peace.ca/truthaboutblackcrime.htm The National Institute of Drug Abuse estimated that while 12 percent of drug users are black, they make up nearly 50 percent of all drug possession arrests in the U.S. (The Black and White of Justice, Freedom Magazine, Volume 128) According to the National Drug Strategy Network, although African Americans make up less than one-third of the population in Georgia, the black arrest rate for drugs is five times greater than the white arrest rate. In addition, since 1990, African Americans have accounted for more than 75% of persons incarcerated for drug offenses in Georgia and make up 97.7% of the people in that state who are given life sentences for drug offenses. In six California counties independently surveyed in 1995, 100% of those individuals sent to trial on drug charges were minorities, while the drug-using population in those same counties was more than 60% white. (The Black and White of Justice, Freedom Magazine, Volume 128) A CNN article in 1996 sited U.S. government figures that show more than 90 percent of all federal prosecutions for crack cocaine in 1995 were of African American defendants. In addition, unlike convictions for powered cocaine and other drugs (which wealthy, Caucasian defendants are more likely to use), a conviction for selling crack cocaine can carry a lengthy prison term without benefit of parole. ------------------------------------- It's also said, in general, that blue collar crimes, such as burglary are done by blacks and other races, and prosecuted heavily. White collar crime is mostly by whites, and not prosecuted nearly as heavily. As far as lambasting Clinton for any perceived problems, Republicans owned both sides, so you can't blame Clinton for signing what those bastions of Republican conservatism put in to effect. They wanted it and he went with it. Yes, those are the kind of statistics that law enforcement uses to back up the need to continue racial profiling. What the statistics leave out are various aspects of interest, like what kind of drugs are these arrests for, and how have the laws changed with regard to the drugs. And other findings of surveys that indicate members of the white community who are also arrested on drug charges, never face prosecution. A CNN article in 1996 sited U.S. government figures that show more than 90 percent of all federal prosecutions for crack cocaine in 1995 were of African The Anti=Drug Abuse Act of 1988 included mandatory sentences for low-level crack ofenses (five years). Five grams of crack led to the maximum sentence. The same pentaly was invoked for powder cocain but for a higher level of 500 grams. Here's the rub, according to the study of the Sentencing Project, 80 percent, or more, of prosecuted crack offences are African-American. But the fact is that more than two-thirds of crack users have been found to be white or Latino. (The Sentencing Project, 2006b) This law was persuent to the Len Bias case, in which a college basketball star drafted by the Boston Celtics died of an overdose in 1986. But as it turned out, Bias did not die of a crack overdose, as originally speculated, but from snorting powder cocaine, which is a more expensive opiate derivitive, most predominantly used by the white affluent population.(Geest, 1995) Institutionalised racism is alive and well within our judiciary system. Do not say another word to me until you provide studies that prove your theory. Otherwise you are just another whining liberal that can't debate. I have a feeling you collect a disability check every month. I get that feeling from you..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Capatilism versus socialism
|
|
firstly,, how is this '"The only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live." Bentsen said that the proposed changes would "make it easier for lenders to show how they're complying with the Community Reinvestment Act", and "cut back a lot of the paperwork and the cost on small business loans".[36] correlate to this 'Here is your proof. Clinton made it easier for people with no money to get credit and not only that but he also made it easier for banks to operate secretly' where is the legislation clinton passed single handedly giving people with NO MONEY credit? the issue here, is that there is alot of information which can be interpreted to mean different things and there are far too many ABSOLUTE opinions expressed which fail to be proven as absolute at all... The Clinton Administration's regulatory revisions [2] with an effective starting date of January 31, 1995, were credited with substantially increasing the number and aggregate amount of loans to small businesses and to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans. Massive new provisions to CRA that forced banks to issue $1 trillion dollars in bad loans and indirectly fund the work of radical left-wing organizations."[3] Part of the increase in home loans was due to increased efficiency and the genesis of lenders, like Countrywide, that do not mitigate loan risk with savings deposits as do traditional banks using the new subprime authorization. This is known as the secondary market for mortgage loans. The revisions allowed the securitization of CRA loans containing subprime mortgages. The first public securitization of CRA loans started in 1997. [4 "Crucially, the new CRA regulations also instructed bank examiners to take into account how well banks responded to complaints. The old CRA evaluation process had allowed advocacy groups a chance to express their views on individual banks, and publicly available data on the lending patterns of individual banks allowed activist groups to target institutions considered vulnerable to protest. But for advocacy groups that were in the complaint business, the Clinton administration regulations offered a formal invitation. The National Community Reinvestment Coalition, a foundation-funded umbrella group for community activist groups that profit from the CRA, issued a clarion call to its members in a leaflet entitled 'The New CRA Regulations: How Community Groups Can Get Involved.' 'Timely comments,' the NCRC observed with a certain understatement, 'can have a strong influence on a bank's CRA rating.'" "'To avoid the possibility of a denied or delayed application,' advises the NCRC in its deadpan tone, 'lending institutions have an incentive to make formal agreements with community organizations.' By intervening, even just threatening to intervene, in the CRA review process, left-wing nonprofit groups have been able to gain control over eye-popping pools of bank capital, which they in turn parcel out to individual low-income mortgage seekers. A radical group called ACORN Housing has a $760 million commitment from the Bank of New York; the Boston-based Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America has a $3-billion agreement with the Bank of America; a coalition of groups headed by New Jersey Citizen Action has a five-year, $13-billion agreement with First Union Corporation. Similar deals operate in almost every major U.S. city. Observes Tom Callahan, executive director of the Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance, which has $220 million in bank mortgage money to parcel out, "CRA is the backbone of everything we do." HAHAHA! MOAR PROOF! of nothing but someones ASSESSMENT of a policy ,,,and an author linking events back to ONE PERSON, just by stating its so instead of PROVING its so.... All I hear is blah blah blah I am ignorant of the truth and I refuse to educate myself because..... A.) I have a duty to my race to always side with black people (we call this the black vote) B.) I would actually have to admit I am wrong.(probably the real reason) If I am wrong, I want you to tell me why this is not factual, and I want to know why YOU think that the recession happened. Go ahead , and don't post a link I want to know what YOU think happened and why. I am neither ignorant or refusing to educate myself, I just dont see this thread or any random choice of websites(out of the millions posted) as EDUCATIONAL material, most find those sites that back up what they already believe, most people seek out affirmation for their beliefs(psych 101) what I do see is people sharing opinions and posting other random facts and opinions which SEEM to back theirs up my responses are not about a duty to race, my responses are about being truthful and relevant I am not an economist, but if I had to take a laymans guess at what prompted this past recession it would be the wars in iraq and afghanistan, tax cuts, the collapse of the financial industry, the housing market, and the disproportionate rise in the cost of living compared to a stagnate living wage,,, Ok so when you are talking about the housing market and the financial industry, and the rise in the cost of living you are talking about things that I already showed you. I showed you how those problems came to be. The problem is that you have not given a REASON as to why the problems came to be. SOMETHING happened and CAUSED this problem. So since you disagree what's the reason? What caused it? There are many reasons and causes of poverty. Its clear, to those who recognize it, that the greatest contributor to poverty is oppression. Oppression comes from many directions and through many sources, but they seem to have common threads. There is a group, usually some sort of majority, in power and through that power a sense of privilege is derived. Social constructs are built around and for the benefit of the group in power. Eventually the group in power no longer recognizes thier own privilege, which only exists through the oppression of others. Examples: gender - as women have had to battle the oppression of their male counterparts. race - becasue genetic physical characteristics can set people up as a minorty and thus give rise to the priviledge of the majority to oppress them. There are, of course others but gender and, as another poster has indicated, "institutional racism" are the two greatest sources of oppression and thus of "White Male Privelege" within the United States. Institutional Racism - exists within the structures and practices of of our institutions, which begin with our greatest authorities, our governments. It is a fact that this is ongoing and it is a fact that it is extensive within our justice system. It is also a fact that the group who instutiionalizes racism rarely recognize the oppressive nature of their actions, because they are "privileged", meaning they are rarely ever subjects of their own oppressive actions. Therefore, if anyone 'pulls the race card' they may have a very legitimate reason for doing so and it would be wise to ask the person making the claim how they percieve racism in that particular case. But that's just useful information in case someone DOES 'pull the race card'. So tell me, since it's your opinion that Black people tend to live in congregated areas of poverty and maintain that space with an iron grip - can you explain why you think that has occurred? Actually I said that liberal control those masses with an iron grip. Not the black community themselves. Want to see why they live like that why don't you go see for yourself? I grew up with nothing but poor black people as I was a ward of the state due to my mother giving me away. I lived with young black girls who hated me just because I was white. I got beat up constantly just because I was white. They strive to be as ignorant as possible by encouraging each other to act as "black" AKA (use Ebonics and act like a gangster)as possible. If a black person doesn't talk ghetto then they are shunned from the black community and called a white man in a black mans body. When you drive to the ghetto look at the cars and the clothes. They have money!!! They don't save to get themselves out of squaller! No they spend all they're money on rims and gold chains and clothes and shoes! If you have never lived in that community than you don't know but I have and I do! **** I have been robbed at gun point twice! I have had no help but I did it myself!! I got a good job and I moved out of there and I continue to better myself. I don't ask for a ****ing hand out or blame ANYONE for the hardships in my life! I do it myself by working my *** off! I have had a shitty life since I was born and you don't see me bitching about oppression! Why because I am a survivor and a fighter not a ****ing pathetic Vitim! You are also white which automatically gives you pathways to succeed. How many 'individuals' currently have the CHOICE of with whom they will socialize? While even our own class system limits that choice for the 'priviledged' majority, it is a limitation that is more easily accomplished if you are among that 'instituitionalised' priviledged group (white). You may have suffered some oppression in your youth but your path out was your race. You do not have to wake up every day of your life and look in the mirror and wonder if the actions of others toward you today will be acts of racism. There are probably hundreds of 'institutionalized' barriers that limit the power of certain individuals to succeed, equally, accross economic and class structrurs but few of those barriers exist for the privileged groups within those structures. This is why the vast majority of white poeple can acknowledge that other live in oppressed states, but they cannot acknowledge their role in creating that oppression. LOL wow .....I cannot argue with that. You don't know what you are talking about. It's sad really. I guess you missed the part where I worked my *** off and didn't get any help. Not even from white people. I also didn't get any help to go to school like I could have if I was black or Mexican. You are racist against your own race and it's pathetic. I will have to bite my tongue because I have lost total respect for you. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems to me that if you are going to be burning trash on your property, it might be wise to make sure you have paid your fire service dues? Although they most likely were burning the trash so they didn't have to pay the refuse service dues? What kills me is that they all stood there and let 3 innocent animals burn to death.   I wonder if they knew at the time that they're were animals in they're or if it was even possible to save them. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Capatilism versus socialism
|
|
firstly,, how is this '"The only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live." Bentsen said that the proposed changes would "make it easier for lenders to show how they're complying with the Community Reinvestment Act", and "cut back a lot of the paperwork and the cost on small business loans".[36] correlate to this 'Here is your proof. Clinton made it easier for people with no money to get credit and not only that but he also made it easier for banks to operate secretly' where is the legislation clinton passed single handedly giving people with NO MONEY credit? the issue here, is that there is alot of information which can be interpreted to mean different things and there are far too many ABSOLUTE opinions expressed which fail to be proven as absolute at all... The Clinton Administration's regulatory revisions [2] with an effective starting date of January 31, 1995, were credited with substantially increasing the number and aggregate amount of loans to small businesses and to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans. Massive new provisions to CRA that forced banks to issue $1 trillion dollars in bad loans and indirectly fund the work of radical left-wing organizations."[3] Part of the increase in home loans was due to increased efficiency and the genesis of lenders, like Countrywide, that do not mitigate loan risk with savings deposits as do traditional banks using the new subprime authorization. This is known as the secondary market for mortgage loans. The revisions allowed the securitization of CRA loans containing subprime mortgages. The first public securitization of CRA loans started in 1997. [4 "Crucially, the new CRA regulations also instructed bank examiners to take into account how well banks responded to complaints. The old CRA evaluation process had allowed advocacy groups a chance to express their views on individual banks, and publicly available data on the lending patterns of individual banks allowed activist groups to target institutions considered vulnerable to protest. But for advocacy groups that were in the complaint business, the Clinton administration regulations offered a formal invitation. The National Community Reinvestment Coalition, a foundation-funded umbrella group for community activist groups that profit from the CRA, issued a clarion call to its members in a leaflet entitled 'The New CRA Regulations: How Community Groups Can Get Involved.' 'Timely comments,' the NCRC observed with a certain understatement, 'can have a strong influence on a bank's CRA rating.'" "'To avoid the possibility of a denied or delayed application,' advises the NCRC in its deadpan tone, 'lending institutions have an incentive to make formal agreements with community organizations.' By intervening, even just threatening to intervene, in the CRA review process, left-wing nonprofit groups have been able to gain control over eye-popping pools of bank capital, which they in turn parcel out to individual low-income mortgage seekers. A radical group called ACORN Housing has a $760 million commitment from the Bank of New York; the Boston-based Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America has a $3-billion agreement with the Bank of America; a coalition of groups headed by New Jersey Citizen Action has a five-year, $13-billion agreement with First Union Corporation. Similar deals operate in almost every major U.S. city. Observes Tom Callahan, executive director of the Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance, which has $220 million in bank mortgage money to parcel out, "CRA is the backbone of everything we do." HAHAHA! MOAR PROOF! of nothing but someones ASSESSMENT of a policy ,,,and an author linking events back to ONE PERSON, just by stating its so instead of PROVING its so.... All I hear is blah blah blah I am ignorant of the truth and I refuse to educate myself because..... A.) I have a duty to my race to always side with black people (we call this the black vote) B.) I would actually have to admit I am wrong.(probably the real reason) If I am wrong, I want you to tell me why this is not factual, and I want to know why YOU think that the recession happened. Go ahead , and don't post a link I want to know what YOU think happened and why. I am neither ignorant or refusing to educate myself, I just dont see this thread or any random choice of websites(out of the millions posted) as EDUCATIONAL material, most find those sites that back up what they already believe, most people seek out affirmation for their beliefs(psych 101) what I do see is people sharing opinions and posting other random facts and opinions which SEEM to back theirs up my responses are not about a duty to race, my responses are about being truthful and relevant I am not an economist, but if I had to take a laymans guess at what prompted this past recession it would be the wars in iraq and afghanistan, tax cuts, the collapse of the financial industry, the housing market, and the disproportionate rise in the cost of living compared to a stagnate living wage,,, Ok so when you are talking about the housing market and the financial industry, and the rise in the cost of living you are talking about things that I already showed you. I showed you how those problems came to be. The problem is that you have not given a REASON as to why the problems came to be. SOMETHING happened and CAUSED this problem. So since you disagree what's the reason? What caused it? in order two wars - 9/11 and the government's (under Bush leadership) choice of reaction tax cuts - more government policy (under Bush leadership) financial and housing collapse - corporate greed, or more specifically, taking advantage of policies intended to assist more people by purposely misleading people instead(believing they would be legally able to force more money from them through interest rates,,,) cost of living rise compared to living wage stalemate - this is harder to pinpoint to any one event or time period,, basically as outsourcing and automation have increased, jobs have been lost and employers have been able to employ for a lower wage while continuing to increase profits,,, LOL ok , I cant keep repeating myself. Here you go ....AGAIN! Over the last 30 years, environmentalists have become the most powerful lobby in history. This has happened for two reasons: They have many, many ultra-rich backers in the urban and suburban socialist elite. And they get free, favorable media coverage for any crisis they wish to declare. This media coverage is worth tens of billions of dollars in free advertising every year. Ecologists have used their power to restrict the harvesting of natural resources for decades now, pushing up the price for consumers, because reduced supply causes an increase in price through the law of supply and demand. Oil and timber are particular commodities that enviros have been restricting. Conservative response: Use our natural resources wisely for the common good. Do not deny access so that an elite minority of backpackers and birdwatchers can feel satisfied, while average "working" citizens, along with "the poor", pay more for housing and gasoline. The power to tax is the power to destroy, goes the old saying. Indeed it is. Throughout history, heavily taxed economies have suffered, while lightening tax loads has in every single case produced more wealth, and more evenly distributed wealth. Average Americans, including "working families", are being made poorer by relentless taxation. The money that he/she already has in his/her pocket is disappearing. This is a travesty. And ruthless taxation of private business is preventing those businesses from paying their workers better wages, or accumulating capital to modernize their plants and ultimately employ more workers. Meanwhile media liberals insistently call for higher taxes, which equal wage cuts (impoverishment) for "workers". Conservative response: Lower taxes and reduce government spending. It's really simple. >>> "Over the last 30 years, environmentalists have become the most powerful lobby in history."<<< I can't quite make the connection between the beginning of the postings above and the lobbying of Environmentalist. So I'll I will try to make the connections and end with a questions that can lead making a better connection. Lobbyists have varying degrees of influence which is leveraged contingent to current issues. Our knowledge base with regards to the environment has developed through the efforts of science. The scientific evidence which supports the environmental movement has arisen independently throughout the world. Obviously environmental issues are a hot topic because these issues will effect the global population. So makes sense that the influence of this international group of people would (and should) have a great deal of influence on the policies of any particular government regarding the focus of the groups issues. But what does that have to do with how this relates to your opinion. Are you suggesting that “conservatives” are not at all concerned with the environmental effects of their policies, and that’s a good thing? Exactly how is that good? According to Wiki: In the United States today, the organized environmental movement is represented by a wide range of organizations sometimes called non-governmental organizations or NGOs. These organizations exist on local, national, and international scales. Environmental NGOs vary widely in political views and in the amount they seek to influence the environmental policy of the United States and other governments. http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/80917-report-five-percent-jump-in-lobbying-expenditures-last-year The healthcare debate took up much of the oxygen in Washington last year. So not surprisingly, the pharmaceutical and health products industry spent a record amount last year — close to $266.8 million — on federal lobbying. That is the biggest lobbying expenditure ever by a single industry in one year, according to the report. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-21/goldman-sachs-doubled-lobbying-expenses-amid-financial-revamp-sec-probe.html New York-based Goldman, which paid $550 million last week to settle the SEC suit, spent $2.7 million to lobby during the first six months of 2010, more than double the $1.3 million it spent during the same period a year earlier, according to new congressional filings. Bank of America Corp. spent $2 million, up 33 percent from $1.5 million spent during the first six months of 2009. Wells Fargo & Co.’s spending rose to $2.3 million from $1.4 million in 2009. Morgan Stanley spent $1.6 million, compared with $1.4 million a year earlier, though its second-quarter lobbying expenses were lower than a year ago. The banks’ trade group, the Washington-based American Bankers Association, spent $4.2 million, up from $3.9 million. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/12/politics/main6202526.shtml Makers of pharmaceuticals and health products spent $267 million lobbying, the most ever recorded by a single industry in a year. Business associations spent the second highest total, $183 million. Among individual groups, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was easily the biggest spender at $145 million. Exxon Mobil Corp. was a distant second at $27 million. If you’re interested in lobby “influence” try checking out the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPA) So when considering the groups of some of the most “financially influential” lobbyists, listed above, can you how their influence has affected policy, if the policy effected was due to conservative or liberal ideals and then show that effect has been counterproductive or productive, as the case may be? Those questions have already been answered. Feel free to read the thread and find out how I feel. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thats a little better more numbers and less assessment here is an assessment from another source As sociologist Robert O’Brian has noted (using Census data), the odds of a given white person (or white criminal for that matter) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand, the odds of a given black person (or black criminal) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater, or fifty-seven percent (6), meaning the actual interracial victimization gap between black-on-white and white-on-black crime is smaller than one would expect. In 2002, blacks committed a little more than 1.2 million violent crimes, while whites committed a little more than three million violent crimes (7). If each black criminal had a 57 percent chance of encountering (and thus potentially victimizing) a white person, this means that over the course of 2002, blacks should have been expected to victimize roughly 690,000 whites. But in truth, blacks victimized whites only 614,176 times that year (8). Conversely, if each white criminal had only a three percent chance of encountering and thus victimizing a black person, this means that over the course of 2002, whites would have been expected to victimize roughly 93,000 blacks. But in truth, whites victimized blacks 135,931 times: almost 50 percent more often than would be expected by random chance (9). Please post a link as soon as you do,,,   I already did !! That's from the study I posted earlier !! LMAO!!!! I warned you about debating with me without reading the post . LOL Proof you didn't read the study. It's ok you can remain ignorant. Keep being a victim and thinking your races failures are our fault. See how far that gets you, seems to be working just fine right? LOL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Rachel78745
on
Wed 10/06/10 11:11 AM
|
|
thats a little better more numbers and less assessment here is an assessment from another source As sociologist Robert O’Brian has noted (using Census data), the odds of a given white person (or white criminal for that matter) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand, the odds of a given black person (or black criminal) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater, or fifty-seven percent (6), meaning the actual interracial victimization gap between black-on-white and white-on-black crime is smaller than one would expect. In 2002, blacks committed a little more than 1.2 million violent crimes, while whites committed a little more than three million violent crimes (7). If each black criminal had a 57 percent chance of encountering (and thus potentially victimizing) a white person, this means that over the course of 2002, blacks should have been expected to victimize roughly 690,000 whites. But in truth, blacks victimized whites only 614,176 times that year (8). Conversely, if each white criminal had only a three percent chance of encountering and thus victimizing a black person, this means that over the course of 2002, whites would have been expected to victimize roughly 93,000 blacks. But in truth, whites victimized blacks 135,931 times: almost 50 percent more often than would be expected by random chance (9). Ok your post is theory. The study I posted is of actual events that took place! Not some speculative data on how often whites and blacks interact. What if they took a drive? what about if they lost they're dog and were looking for it? What if they got lost on the wrong side of town? I mean are you serious???? That's ridiculous!!! How can you calculate how often blacks and whites mingle?? WTF??? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thats a little better more numbers and less assessment here is an assessment from another source As sociologist Robert O’Brian has noted (using Census data), the odds of a given white person (or white criminal for that matter) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand, the odds of a given black person (or black criminal) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater, or fifty-seven percent (6), meaning the actual interracial victimization gap between black-on-white and white-on-black crime is smaller than one would expect. In 2002, blacks committed a little more than 1.2 million violent crimes, while whites committed a little more than three million violent crimes (7). If each black criminal had a 57 percent chance of encountering (and thus potentially victimizing) a white person, this means that over the course of 2002, blacks should have been expected to victimize roughly 690,000 whites. But in truth, blacks victimized whites only 614,176 times that year (8). Conversely, if each white criminal had only a three percent chance of encountering and thus victimizing a black person, this means that over the course of 2002, whites would have been expected to victimize roughly 93,000 blacks. But in truth, whites victimized blacks 135,931 times: almost 50 percent more often than would be expected by random chance (9). Please post a link |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Capatilism versus socialism
|
|
the op was an ASSESSMENT of certain events in history, anyone can tie events together and give their opinion of them,,, for example, I will do so now.. the idea of free market is a false premise that has never existed here in america anymore than true socialism has or will dont believe me,,need facts? pick an industry that has operated in the free market and done well for themself banking, credit cards, oil, insurance, drugs they all make the most profit SCREWING over the common man for another buck when people are only valued by a dollar sign, its not going to work for too long,,,not that anything will when you have a large number of human beings involved here is an article with some isolated FACTS surrounded in opinion, I just dont wish to post a whole book http://tabacco.blog-city.com/why_capitalism_does_not_work_4u_pits_big_biz_against_middle.htm Actually no, you obviously didn't dead the post. Typical. If you had read the post you would know EXACTLY what point you would need to debate. If you are too lazy to read the ENTIRE post I am not going to help you by telling you what you are missing. READ, EDUCATE YOURSELF! oh, I read it (especially nice are the little references to 'race') and I still have enough reading comprehension to recognize facts from opinions,,, LOL OOOH THE RACE CARD WHAT A SURPRISE!!! A black woman is the first one to pull the race card!! LMAO!!! Let me let you in on a little secret. I grew up in the ghetto in girls homes with nothing but black women. BLACK PEOPLE ARE THE MOST RACIST PEOPLE ON THE ****ING PLANET. As you just PROVED , you guys are the first one's to pull the ****ing race card. Get over yourself I have no patience for that pathetic argument. That **** makes me so angry I could spit! You people get EVERYTHING HANDED TO YOU! You were NOT a slave so you will get NO pity from me! Especial when YOU get more help to make it in this country than I DO!!!!! really? really?!! did you read your own OP....lol lol I will quote the section I referred to( a reference not a 'card') ''First: Consider the black inner cities of America – New York, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, etc. -- that include tens of millions of citizens. Who controls these areas with an iron grip? The Democrat party does, that’s who. Why is the unemployment rate, dependence on food stamps and other government handouts, the poverty rate and the murder rate always much higher in these areas than elsewhere in the nation? '' race card,,,haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa so it comes out,, the 'you people' defense lol, ,please continue condescending,, I and 'my people' progress in SPITE of racism not because racism is gone,,, Hmmm so because he stated statistical FACTS, you are calling him a racist? LMAO!! So am I a racist if I say that black people have commit more crimes and fill up more of our prisons and jails? Would that be racist of the truth? You seem to get the two confused. See you don't disagree it just ticks you off that it's true . So you pull the RACE CARD to try to ***** and moan and cry because you don't like the truth. Yea you and "your people" are the reason racism exsist. It's because you are always whining about the "white man keeping you down" Yet the WHITE MAN gives your people so much that he COMPLETELY BANKRUPTED THE COUNTRY!! And all you can do is complain and ***** and moan. Well **** that ****! Get the **** out of this country then, if it's so bad for you and "your people" Go back to Africa where YOUR OWN BLACK ANCESTORS SOLD YOUR OWN PEOPLE TO THE WHITE PEOPLE!! If you want someone to blame go ***** at the Africans who enslaved your people int the first place!!!!! who did I call racist exactly? not sure who you are referring to,,,, If you say black people 'have commit more crimes and fill up more of our prisons and jails ' I would most likely consider you misinformed instead of racist UNLESS you were making the statement in a context to imply some inherent criminality amongst black people,,, the truth is just fine with me, but opinions are a dime a dozen and truthful FACTS are a different issue which rarely come up in these threads,, and my 'family' have been in the US of A for several generations,probably more than plenty of 'your' people so I will 'go back' to Africa, as soon as they go back to wherever the Mayflower brought them from, better yet, lets not go into the whole my people and your people smokescreen,, lets stick to the debating and stop making it personal,,,, for now, I am an american with just as much right to an opinion as anyone else even if it means I dont blindly agree with whatever Im told or allow others to bully me with opinions that they deem to be 'truly' worthy of my residence here Blacks do commit more crimes. LOL I won't waste my time with facts because you stare facts in the face and say they just ain't so. Most black people even know that's true. LOL uhhuh, quite literally, black people are CONVICTED of more 'violent' crimes, relatively speaking this is different than actually COMMITTING more crimes ( I wouldnt be able to say what 'race' holds that honor) http://www.bop.gov/news/quick.jsp I didn't read the link, I don't have to. But does it also show how black people are sententanced, by the courts, by maximum penalties and that more black people recieve the death sentance for crimes against whites, that whites who commit the same crime against a black person? Those are facts too, and don't require a lot of research to prove. Why not? If they are more likely to commit crimes and even more likely to repeat the offence why bother letting them out to hurt more people? They knew what they were getting into when they made the choice to commit the crimes in the first place. I like how you refuse to read an actual study and choose to debate me anyway. How about this, I am not going to waste my time debating with you until you do read it That way you are not wasting my time with blind accusations and denial. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Capatilism versus socialism
|
|
firstly,, how is this '"The only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live." Bentsen said that the proposed changes would "make it easier for lenders to show how they're complying with the Community Reinvestment Act", and "cut back a lot of the paperwork and the cost on small business loans".[36] correlate to this 'Here is your proof. Clinton made it easier for people with no money to get credit and not only that but he also made it easier for banks to operate secretly' where is the legislation clinton passed single handedly giving people with NO MONEY credit? the issue here, is that there is alot of information which can be interpreted to mean different things and there are far too many ABSOLUTE opinions expressed which fail to be proven as absolute at all... The Clinton Administration's regulatory revisions [2] with an effective starting date of January 31, 1995, were credited with substantially increasing the number and aggregate amount of loans to small businesses and to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans. Massive new provisions to CRA that forced banks to issue $1 trillion dollars in bad loans and indirectly fund the work of radical left-wing organizations."[3] Part of the increase in home loans was due to increased efficiency and the genesis of lenders, like Countrywide, that do not mitigate loan risk with savings deposits as do traditional banks using the new subprime authorization. This is known as the secondary market for mortgage loans. The revisions allowed the securitization of CRA loans containing subprime mortgages. The first public securitization of CRA loans started in 1997. [4 "Crucially, the new CRA regulations also instructed bank examiners to take into account how well banks responded to complaints. The old CRA evaluation process had allowed advocacy groups a chance to express their views on individual banks, and publicly available data on the lending patterns of individual banks allowed activist groups to target institutions considered vulnerable to protest. But for advocacy groups that were in the complaint business, the Clinton administration regulations offered a formal invitation. The National Community Reinvestment Coalition, a foundation-funded umbrella group for community activist groups that profit from the CRA, issued a clarion call to its members in a leaflet entitled 'The New CRA Regulations: How Community Groups Can Get Involved.' 'Timely comments,' the NCRC observed with a certain understatement, 'can have a strong influence on a bank's CRA rating.'" "'To avoid the possibility of a denied or delayed application,' advises the NCRC in its deadpan tone, 'lending institutions have an incentive to make formal agreements with community organizations.' By intervening, even just threatening to intervene, in the CRA review process, left-wing nonprofit groups have been able to gain control over eye-popping pools of bank capital, which they in turn parcel out to individual low-income mortgage seekers. A radical group called ACORN Housing has a $760 million commitment from the Bank of New York; the Boston-based Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America has a $3-billion agreement with the Bank of America; a coalition of groups headed by New Jersey Citizen Action has a five-year, $13-billion agreement with First Union Corporation. Similar deals operate in almost every major U.S. city. Observes Tom Callahan, executive director of the Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance, which has $220 million in bank mortgage money to parcel out, "CRA is the backbone of everything we do." HAHAHA! MOAR PROOF! of nothing but someones ASSESSMENT of a policy ,,,and an author linking events back to ONE PERSON, just by stating its so instead of PROVING its so.... All I hear is blah blah blah I am ignorant of the truth and I refuse to educate myself because..... A.) I have a duty to my race to always side with black people (we call this the black vote) B.) I would actually have to admit I am wrong.(probably the real reason) If I am wrong, I want you to tell me why this is not factual, and I want to know why YOU think that the recession happened. Go ahead , and don't post a link I want to know what YOU think happened and why. I am neither ignorant or refusing to educate myself, I just dont see this thread or any random choice of websites(out of the millions posted) as EDUCATIONAL material, most find those sites that back up what they already believe, most people seek out affirmation for their beliefs(psych 101) what I do see is people sharing opinions and posting other random facts and opinions which SEEM to back theirs up my responses are not about a duty to race, my responses are about being truthful and relevant I am not an economist, but if I had to take a laymans guess at what prompted this past recession it would be the wars in iraq and afghanistan, tax cuts, the collapse of the financial industry, the housing market, and the disproportionate rise in the cost of living compared to a stagnate living wage,,, Ok so when you are talking about the housing market and the financial industry, and the rise in the cost of living you are talking about things that I already showed you. I showed you how those problems came to be. The problem is that you have not given a REASON as to why the problems came to be. SOMETHING happened and CAUSED this problem. So since you disagree what's the reason? What caused it? There are many reasons and causes of poverty. Its clear, to those who recognize it, that the greatest contributor to poverty is oppression. Oppression comes from many directions and through many sources, but they seem to have common threads. There is a group, usually some sort of majority, in power and through that power a sense of privilege is derived. Social constructs are built around and for the benefit of the group in power. Eventually the group in power no longer recognizes thier own privilege, which only exists through the oppression of others. Examples: gender - as women have had to battle the oppression of their male counterparts. race - becasue genetic physical characteristics can set people up as a minorty and thus give rise to the priviledge of the majority to oppress them. There are, of course others but gender and, as another poster has indicated, "institutional racism" are the two greatest sources of oppression and thus of "White Male Privelege" within the United States. Institutional Racism - exists within the structures and practices of of our institutions, which begin with our greatest authorities, our governments. It is a fact that this is ongoing and it is a fact that it is extensive within our justice system. It is also a fact that the group who instutiionalizes racism rarely recognize the oppressive nature of their actions, because they are "privileged", meaning they are rarely ever subjects of their own oppressive actions. Therefore, if anyone 'pulls the race card' they may have a very legitimate reason for doing so and it would be wise to ask the person making the claim how they percieve racism in that particular case. But that's just useful information in case someone DOES 'pull the race card'. So tell me, since it's your opinion that Black people tend to live in congregated areas of poverty and maintain that space with an iron grip - can you explain why you think that has occurred? Actually I said that liberal control those masses with an iron grip. Not the black community themselves. Want to see why they live like that why don't you go see for yourself? I grew up with nothing but poor black people as I was a ward of the state due to my mother giving me away. I lived with young black girls who hated me just because I was white. I got beat up constantly just because I was white. They strive to be as ignorant as possible by encouraging each other to act as "black" AKA (use Ebonics and act like a gangster)as possible. If a black person doesn't talk ghetto then they are shunned from the black community and called a white man in a black mans body. When you drive to the ghetto look at the cars and the clothes. They have money!!! They don't save to get themselves out of squaller! No they spend all they're money on rims and gold chains and clothes and shoes! If you have never lived in that community than you don't know but I have and I do! **** I have been robbed at gun point twice! I have had no help but I did it myself!! I got a good job and I moved out of there and I continue to better myself. I don't ask for a ****ing hand out or blame ANYONE for the hardships in my life! I do it myself by working my *** off! I have had a shitty life since I was born and you don't see me bitching about oppression! Why because I am a survivor and a fighter not a ****ing pathetic Vitim! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
did he? “I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of Afri can-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately,’’ the president said. “That’s just a fact.’’ where did he call the officer racist exactly? was there not an inaccurate post made here about blacks committing more crimes and defended as a 'fact'? was that , by this definition, a racist declaration too? except, blacks and latinos being disproportionately stopped has ACTUALLY been proven, as he stated,,, I present PROOF in the form of a STUDY Here is the link to the downloadable PDF . http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf Major Findings: Police and the justice system are not biased against minorities. Crime Rates Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery. When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife. Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate. The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic. Interracial Crime Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent. Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black. Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery. Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa. Gangs Only 10 percent of youth gang members are white. Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely. Incarceration Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million. Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are three times more likely. nice numbers,, they are my favorite resource of manipulation actually the post I refuted was the simplistic 'blacks commit more crimes' first, because crime covers a broad range of activities and second, because a significant amount of 'crime' goes unnoticed and unprosecuted making it nearly impossible to know who is actually COMMITTING the most crimes only who is arrested and prosecuted most often for crimes,,, your numbers merely reflect arrest and prosecution rates for VIOLENT CRIME, which I wont dispute(although there is probably a difference between us two in the assessment of what those numbers mean) LOL opinion, opinion, opinion...... Does it bother you that you are exactly as the study indicates? You have NO PROOF at all! The study covers all interracial crime not just violent crime. Are you sure you wanna do this again? The last time you tried to debate me over a post that you didn't read you failed are you sure you wanna try again? I suggest reading the study and then comment . I'll wait for you. lol, you are quite the comedian,, the POST you supplied actually references 'violent' crime in nearly every sentence,.... Incarceration • Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million. • Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are three times more likely. which goes to the argument about INCARCERATION (prosecution of crimes)not the commission of crimes Your white's against black conspiracy doesn't apply here sorry . In fact this study proves that your idealism is incorrect. It's something that you believe due to your surroundings. good grief, is conspiracy the word of the day or something? I havent mentioned a conspiracy, in fact I implored you to stick to the topic of THIS situation and THESE players,,,IM curious as to why YOU seem to keep referring to racial groups? we all foster a significant amount of beliefs that stem from our surroundings, inluding yourself but I am actually using LOGIC , unless you believe that everyone who commits a crime goes to jail....which I find to be quite an idealistic view that I dont share,,, Are Police Biased? For someone to go to prison, four things have to happen. The police must arrest him for a felony, charges must be filed, he must plead or be found guilty, and a judge must sentence him to prison. Racial bias could enter at any stage. Blacks are certainly more likely to be arrested than other groups. According to the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), blacks accounted for 27 percent of arrests in 2002, even though they were only 13 percent of the population, whereas whites and Hispanics (W&H) accounted for 71 percent of arrests, but were 81 percent of the population. This means that when all crime categories are added together, blacks were more than twice as likely to be arrested as W&H. Blacks were four times more likely to be arrested for violent crimes, and no fewer than eight times more likely to be arrested for robbery.4 Many people believe blacks are arrested so often because police target them unfairly. Brian Nichols, the Atlanta gunman, seems to think police are arresting blacks en masse whether they are guilty or not. Many local authorities have passed laws to correct what they believe to be police bias.5 Police argue that they are targeting criminals, not non-whites, and that they arrest large numbers of minorities only because minorities are committing a large number of crimes.6 The best test of police bias is to compare an independent and objective count of the percentage of criminals who are black with the percentage of arrested suspects who are black. If they are about the same—if, for example, we can determine that half the robbers are black, and we find that about half the robbers the police arrest are black—it is good evidence police are not targeting blacks unfairly. But what information do we have about the race of criminals other than arrest reports? The best independent source is the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). For the most recent report, the government surveyed 149,040 people about crimes of which they had been victims during 2003. They described the crimes in detail, including the race of the perpetrator, and whether they reported the crimes to the police. The survey sample, which is massive by polling standards, was carefully chosen to be representative of the entire US population. By comparing information about races of perpetrators with racial percentages in arrest data from the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) we can determine if the proportion of criminals the police arrest who are black is equivalent to the proportion of criminals the victims say were black. UCR and NCVS reports for the years 2001 through 2003 offer the most recent data on crimes suffered by victims, and arrests for those crimes. Needless to say, many crimes are not reported to the police, and the number of arrests the police make is smaller still. An extrapolation from NCVS data gives a good approximation of the actual number of crimes committed in the United States every year. The NCVS tells us that between 2001 and 2003, there were an estimated 1.8 million robberies, for example, of which 1.1 million were reported to the police. The UCR tell us that in the same period police made 229,000 arrests for robbery. Police cannot make an arrest if no one tells them about a crime, so the best way to see if police are biased is to compare the share of offenders who are black in crimes reported to the police, and the share of those arrested who are black. Figure 1 compares offender information to arrest information for all the crimes included in the NCVS. For example, 55 percent of offenders in all robberies were black, 55.4 percent of robbers in robberies reported to police were black, and 54.1 percent of arrested robbers were black. For most crimes, police are arresting fewer blacks than would be expected from the percentage of criminals the victims tell us are black (rape/sexual assault is the only exception). In the most extreme case, burglary, victims tell police that 45 percent of the perpetrators were black, but only 28 percent of the people arrested for that crime were black. If all the NCVS crimes are taken together, blacks who committed crimes that were reported to the police were 26 percent less likely to be arrested than people of other races who committed the same crimes. 7 These figures lend no support to the charge that police arrest innocent blacks, or at least pursue them with excessive zeal. In fact, they suggest the opposite, that police are more determined to arrest nonblack rather than black criminals. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
did he? “I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of Afri can-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately,’’ the president said. “That’s just a fact.’’ where did he call the officer racist exactly? was there not an inaccurate post made here about blacks committing more crimes and defended as a 'fact'? was that , by this definition, a racist declaration too? except, blacks and latinos being disproportionately stopped has ACTUALLY been proven, as he stated,,, I present PROOF in the form of a STUDY Here is the link to the downloadable PDF . http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf Major Findings: Police and the justice system are not biased against minorities. Crime Rates Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery. When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife. Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate. The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic. Interracial Crime Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent. Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black. Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery. Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa. Gangs Only 10 percent of youth gang members are white. Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely. Incarceration Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million. Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are three times more likely. nice numbers,, they are my favorite resource of manipulation actually the post I refuted was the simplistic 'blacks commit more crimes' first, because crime covers a broad range of activities and second, because a significant amount of 'crime' goes unnoticed and unprosecuted making it nearly impossible to know who is actually COMMITTING the most crimes only who is arrested and prosecuted most often for crimes,,, your numbers merely reflect arrest and prosecution rates for VIOLENT CRIME, which I wont dispute(although there is probably a difference between us two in the assessment of what those numbers mean) LOL opinion, opinion, opinion...... Does it bother you that you are exactly as the study indicates? You have NO PROOF at all! The study covers all interracial crime not just violent crime. Are you sure you wanna do this again? The last time you tried to debate me over a post that you didn't read you failed are you sure you wanna try again? I suggest reading the study and then comment . I'll wait for you. lol, you are quite the comedian,, the POST you supplied actually references 'violent' crime in nearly every sentence,.... Incarceration • Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million. • Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are three times more likely. which goes to the argument about INCARCERATION (prosecution of crimes)not the commission of crimes Your white's against black conspiracy doesn't apply here sorry . In fact this study proves that your idealism is incorrect. It's something that you believe due to your surroundings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Rachel78745
on
Wed 10/06/10 10:29 AM
|
|
did he? “I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of Afri can-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately,’’ the president said. “That’s just a fact.’’ where did he call the officer racist exactly? was there not an inaccurate post made here about blacks committing more crimes and defended as a 'fact'? was that , by this definition, a racist declaration too? except, blacks and latinos being disproportionately stopped has ACTUALLY been proven, as he stated,,, I present PROOF in the form of a STUDY Here is the link to the downloadable PDF . http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf Major Findings: Police and the justice system are not biased against minorities. Crime Rates Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery. When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife. Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate. The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic. Interracial Crime Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent. Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black. Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery. Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa. Gangs Only 10 percent of youth gang members are white. Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely. Incarceration Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million. Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are three times more likely. nice numbers,, they are my favorite resource of manipulation actually the post I refuted was the simplistic 'blacks commit more crimes' first, because crime covers a broad range of activities and second, because a significant amount of 'crime' goes unnoticed and unprosecuted making it nearly impossible to know who is actually COMMITTING the most crimes only who is arrested and prosecuted most often for crimes,,, your numbers merely reflect arrest and prosecution rates for VIOLENT CRIME, which I wont dispute(although there is probably a difference between us two in the assessment of what those numbers mean) LOL opinion, opinion, opinion...... Does it bother you that you are exactly as the study indicates? You have NO PROOF at all! The study covers all interracial crime not just violent crime. Are you sure you wanna do this again? The last time you tried to debate me over a post that you didn't read you failed are you sure you wanna try again? I suggest reading the study and then comment . I'll wait for you. lol, you are quite the comedian,, the POST you supplied actually references 'violent' crime in nearly every sentence,.... Who's laughing now? How about them apple's?  Incarceration • Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million. • Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are three times more likely. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is the ACTUAL police report. Provided by FOX NEWS! A police report of the incident written by Officer Carlos Figueroa, who responded to the call with Crowley, says Crowley was already in the house when he walked in. The report says Crowley had asked Gates for some identification and Gates shouted that he would not give any information and called the sergeant a racist. According to the report, Gates then yelled, "This is what happens to black men in America." When Crowley tried to calm him down, Gates shouted, "You don't know who you're messing with." The report continues that the shouting went on after Gates and the officers walked out onto the front porch. When Gates allegedly wouldn't cooperate or calm down, Crowley arrested him. http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Gates_Arrest.pdf So as you can see for yourself, he didn't provide proof. He got pissy and pulled the race card. What a surprise there ! LOL http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/henry-louis-gates-jr-police-report not quite, he initially requested to see the officers ID first, but he DID present ID and the officer knew he resided there and continued on to arrest him , basically for being upset,,, and there is also some discrepancy between the police report and what the caller says happened,,,go figure, (those trustworthy cops just doing their jobs and not POSSIBLY capable of dishonesty or ego tripping,,and abusing their authority,) LOL of course! It's a conspiracy against blacks!!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Rachel78745
on
Wed 10/06/10 10:25 AM
|
|
did he? “I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of Afri can-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately,’’ the president said. “That’s just a fact.’’ where did he call the officer racist exactly? was there not an inaccurate post made here about blacks committing more crimes and defended as a 'fact'? was that , by this definition, a racist declaration too? except, blacks and latinos being disproportionately stopped has ACTUALLY been proven, as he stated,,, I present PROOF in the form of a STUDY Here is the link to the downloadable PDF . http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf Major Findings: Police and the justice system are not biased against minorities. Crime Rates Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery. When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife. Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate. The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic. Interracial Crime Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent. Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black. Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery. Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa. Gangs Only 10 percent of youth gang members are white. Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely. Incarceration Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million. Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are three times more likely. nice numbers,, they are my favorite resource of manipulation actually the post I refuted was the simplistic 'blacks commit more crimes' first, because crime covers a broad range of activities and second, because a significant amount of 'crime' goes unnoticed and unprosecuted making it nearly impossible to know who is actually COMMITTING the most crimes only who is arrested and prosecuted most often for crimes,,, your numbers merely reflect arrest and prosecution rates for VIOLENT CRIME, which I wont dispute(although there is probably a difference between us two in the assessment of what those numbers mean) LOL opinion, opinion, opinion...... Does it bother you that you are exactly as the study indicates? You have NO PROOF at all! The study covers all interracial crime not just violent crime. A 2003 national poll found that only 28 percent of blacks, as opposed to 66 percent of whites, thought whites and blacks receive equal treatment at the hands of the police.2 Are you sure you wanna do this again? The last time you tried to debate me over a post that you didn't read you failed are you sure you wanna try again? I suggest reading the study and then comment . I'll wait for you. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What a pile of crap responses. First off it was a man whose house burned...killing 3 of his grandkid's pets. He and a neighbor offered to pay the $75 but the firemen refused. The fire did spread to his neighbors area but the firemen put that one out and drenched the property line...leaving his house to burn. At least 4 homes in Obion County have burned to the ground because they either could not afford the fee or had missed it in the mail. The man's son's house was on fire and they came even tho~ he had not paid the fee...they (he and his son) put the fire out before they arrived but the firemen were going to help. It seems selective who they help. What if there was a person trapped in the fire??? People who post w/o a clue are the same. Clueless. Having the gender wrong is not a sign of clueless. If this was an act of nature that destroyed the houses and the people had neglected (for whatever reason) to obtain home owners insurance, this would not even be an issue. No one would be mad at the insurance companies. It's only because the people allowed it to happen that you people are all upset. Well too bad!!!! No one cares! The houses still burnt down and they still lost they're stuff! Your pity doesn't help them! But guess what, they all learned a valuable lesson and that is helpful! The fact remains they should have taken the steps to take care of they're house and they didn't. But go ahead and try to place blame on the fire department! Of course it's they're fault! LOL WEAK SAUCE MY FRIEND WEAK! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is the ACTUAL police report. Provided by FOX NEWS!
A police report of the incident written by Officer Carlos Figueroa, who responded to the call with Crowley, says Crowley was already in the house when he walked in. The report says Crowley had asked Gates for some identification and Gates shouted that he would not give any information and called the sergeant a racist. According to the report, Gates then yelled, "This is what happens to black men in America." When Crowley tried to calm him down, Gates shouted, "You don't know who you're messing with." The report continues that the shouting went on after Gates and the officers walked out onto the front porch. When Gates allegedly wouldn't cooperate or calm down, Crowley arrested him. http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Gates_Arrest.pdf So as you can see for yourself, he didn't provide proof. He got pissy and pulled the race card. What a surprise there ! LOL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
did he? “I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of Afri can-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately,’’ the president said. “That’s just a fact.’’ where did he call the officer racist exactly? was there not an inaccurate post made here about blacks committing more crimes and defended as a 'fact'? was that , by this definition, a racist declaration too? except, blacks and latinos being disproportionately stopped has ACTUALLY been proven, as he stated,,, LOL you are making up your own version of what happened to suit your argument. Sorry but it wont work. Thats not what happened. Why don't you go google it and get back to us. haaa,, here we go,,,, no answer is an answer I guess,,,lol but if google is the authority for anyone,, http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/07/23/obama_scolds_cambridge_police/ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32092715/ http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/us/politics/23gates.html perhaps someone from mingle was actually PRESENT to explain something else that happened thats not in these sources though,,,, All three of those are liberal cities and stations what a surprise LOL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Rachel78745
on
Wed 10/06/10 09:58 AM
|
|
did he? “I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of Afri can-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately,’’ the president said. “That’s just a fact.’’ where did he call the officer racist exactly? was there not an inaccurate post made here about blacks committing more crimes and defended as a 'fact'? was that , by this definition, a racist declaration too? except, blacks and latinos being disproportionately stopped has ACTUALLY been proven, as he stated,,, I present PROOF in the form of a STUDY Here is the link to the downloadable PDF . http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf Major Findings: Police and the justice system are not biased against minorities. Crime Rates Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery. When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife. Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate. The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic. Interracial Crime Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent. Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black. Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery. Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa. Gangs Only 10 percent of youth gang members are white. Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely. Incarceration Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million. Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are three times more likely. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
did he? “I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of Afri can-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately,’’ the president said. “That’s just a fact.’’ where did he call the officer racist exactly? was there not an inaccurate post made here about blacks committing more crimes and defended as a 'fact'? was that , by this definition, a racist declaration too? except, blacks and latinos being disproportionately stopped has ACTUALLY been proven, as he stated,,, LOL you are making up your own version of what happened to suit your argument. Sorry but it wont work. Thats not what happened. Why don't you go google it and get back to us. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
