America - The Official Thread

[sturk0167]

Any data or evidence. There's certainly a lot of feelings in there, and quite a bit about the worship of a palestinian socialist for some reason, but nothing by way of actual evidence.

Surely there's some out there, given the myriad studies done into racial disparities from birth to death? I mean, I've seen a lot - covering maternal death rates, infant death rates, childhood poverty, childhood mortality, poverty, school investment, value-added education, social investment, college attendance, university attendance, police stop and search rates, police-involved shooting rates, police-involved death rates, medical outcomes from preventable diseases, medical outcomes from heritable diseases, medical outcomes from age-related diseases - and in every case the outcome is worse if you're black than if you're white. @UKMikey posted some of it.


But I guess none of that is systemic (despite all coming from the system of governance) because there was a black president seven years ago. He fixed it all and anything that still looks like systemic racism is just... black folk getting uppity?

Nothing you listed is systemic. That's why Megan Rapinoe is an idiot.
Why in the world are you trying to become a race hustler, too? It's a zero sum game, that only perpetuates tension.
What is your motivation?

 

[Famine]

Nothing you listed is systemic.

Why not? What do you understand by the term "systemic" if not "relating to a system" - and in the case of systemic racism, the system being society as a whole and its governance?

 

[UKMikey]

Why not?

"Because God didn't say so. He defines what racism is, not its victims or independent research. But it can't be independent because it concludes black people are doing worse when we all know that's a fallacy unless you're of the liberal ilk.

"Single motherhood is to blame despite black people with two parents also doing worse. If you don't believe me I'll post another meme. That'll teach all you race hustling victimhood claimers to keep ganging up on me because my feelings don't care about your facts. If systemic racism was real it'd be in the bible, not some liberal professors' research."

That about cover it?

 

[sturk0167]

the system being society as a whole and its governance

That's the problem. Society is not the system.
Official government policy would be the system in question.
Systemic is not a belief, but an official policy.
There's not any official "systems" in place to suppress any particular groups.

 

[Liquid]

Conservative views get bashed here.

Cry more.

Facts don't care about your feelings.
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.

If you think nobody on this forum holds any conservative viewpoints, you've clearly never discussed fiscal policy, auditing the Federal Reserve or taxes.

 

[eran0004]

That's the problem. Society is not the system.
Official government policy would be the system in question.
Systemic is not a belief, but an official policy.
There's not any official "systems" in place to suppress any particular groups.

Systemic means that it’s a predominant phenomenon rather than limited to “a few bad apples”. There’s no requirement for an official policy.

 

[Famine]

That's the problem. Society is not the system.
Official government policy would be the system in question.
Systemic is not a belief, but an official policy.

Yeah, so, firstly this isn't right at all. "Systemic" can be accidental or deliberate; it merely describes a wide-ranging outcome.

What you're describing here means that nothing short of actual apartheid can be systemic racism and... well we already have a word for that: apartheid.

In any case, from where do you think underfunding of schooling, education, social programs (and, in the UK, healthcare), and so on, in areas with higher black populations comes if not from governance?

 

[Danoff]

There's not any official "systems" in place to suppress any particular groups.

Racists like being police officers. If you use your imagination it's easy to understand the appeal. If you have a group of police officers who are racist, and you have laws which can be selectively enforced by said racist police officers against people they don't like, the net result is systemic racism. It doesn't require an official policy or law, it can simply be a system that results in prevalent racism via its structure.

One person gets a warning. One person gets a ticket. Another person gets pulled over randomly and suspicion of drugs results in a car search, and if the racist officers imagine they're looked at threateningly it goes down hill.

Edit: And for the love of god this does not mean I'm saying all police officers are racist.

Edit 2: A great example of a specific policy that perpetuates systemic racism is qualified immunity.

 

[TexRex]

lol. I had fun last night but it looks like others did as well.

Conservative views get bashed here. It's absurd.

lmao. It wasn't that long ago, before the Trumpers what were so prevalent in this subforum noped out, that views which were purported to be counter to conservative orthodoxy were bashed regularly and if anyone bitched about the bashing they were roundly and rightly ridiculed.

Of course this was not without hypocrisy. Still among the funniest things I've seen on this website was one of the aforementioned noped-out Trumpers, what demonstrated a propensity to rail against "political correctness," crying like a bitch because the New York Times ran an animated short through Twitter (likely also on the website) depicting their fat, Fake Baked bitch-king in a romantic relationship with Putin--because it's offensive to the gays.

The high seas of political correctness can be difficult to navigate these days, even for such venerable media giants as the New York Times. Yesterday they published a cartoon short that shows Donald Trump in a gay relationship with Vladimir Putin. They hold hands, ride a pony together, do a little nipple twisting, kiss, and a closeup of some tonsil hockey. Now obviously, especially since the series of shorts are entitled "Trump Bites" this is an attempt at mockery of the Leader of the Free World. Being gay is bad right otherwise why use it to mock the President? After all, they only way these "jokes" work is if being gay is a punchline. Trump is submitting to a gay relationship with another man and that's funny because it's gay. That's the only way it works IMO. Their intent was to shame and embarrass a man by projecting him as being in a submissive, gay relationship.

But being gay isn't bad is it? It shouldn't be the subject of mockery and ridicule should it? I've known this since I watched an episode of All in the Family when Archie found out his gay, macho football player friend Steve was gay but apparently, 47 years later, the NY Times hasn't figure out that being gay is ok and it's not a tool in the arsenal to shame and ridicule people. Perhaps this goes beyond an issue of political correctness and ventures into outright homophobia on the part of the NY Times.

Modern [North] American* conservatism is mental illness.

(*That one's actually Canadian.)

We, the "normal" people, are all in for Trump. Best economy, best everything. Just waiting to see you guys screaming in the streets on November 4th, 2020.

Now I know who one of the crybabies will be next November.

Tonally indistinguishable.

For the record, the former is also one of the funniest things I've seen on this website but the hilarity is dependent upon context, specifically the events early in the year following the stated date. The post was actually four years ago.

And simply because this is putting a smile on my face, also gunning for that top slot is this one:

Let's face it, Trump could walk on water and all you'd be hearing is how terrible he is because he can't swim.

One can probably understand why it's so tough to choose. Trumpism, man.

Racists like being police officers. If you use your imagination it's easy to understand the appeal. If you have a group of police officers who are racist, and you have laws which can be selectively enforced by said racist police officers against people they don't like, the net result is systemic racism. It doesn't require an official policy or law, it can simply be a system that results in prevalent racism via its structure.

One person gets a warning. One person gets a ticket. Another person gets pulled over randomly and suspicion of drugs results in a car search, and if the racist officers imagine they're looked at threateningly it goes down hill.

Edit: And for the love of god this does not mean I'm saying all police officers are racist.

Edit 2: A great example of a specific policy that perpetuates systemic racism is qualified immunity.

This is amazing and on the nose. Expect the goalposts to be shifted.

 

[Tornado]

I will say, if nothing else of the man: He had good reflexes.

 

[sturk0167]

Yeah, so, firstly this isn't right at all. "Systemic" can be accidental or deliberate; it merely describes a wide-ranging outcome.

What you're describing here means that nothing short of actual apartheid can be systemic racism and... well we already have a word for that: apartheid.

Clearly, we don't define systemic the same way. Your definition is something I would call a trend.

In any case, from where do you think underfunding of schooling, education, social programs (and, in the UK, healthcare), and so on, in areas with higher black populations comes if not from governance?

Well, I believe that a majority of predominately black areas/municipalities have lower than average household incomes, resulting in the local governments having a lower than average amount of tax revenue to spend on everything.

 

[Liquid]

resulting in the local governments having a lower than average amount of tax revenue to spend on everything.

Cop out. That's not the only source of funding such an area has or has access to.

 

[TexRex]

This is amazing and on the nose. Expect the goalposts to be shifted.

Or just evasion.

 

[Hayden]

Racists like being police officers. If you use your imagination it's easy to understand the appeal. If you have a group of police officers who are racist, and you have laws which can be selectively enforced by said racist police officers against people they don't like, the net result is systemic racism. It doesn't require an official policy or law, it can simply be a system that results in prevalent racism via its structure.

One person gets a warning. One person gets a ticket. Another person gets pulled over randomly and suspicion of drugs results in a car search, and if the racist officers imagine they're looked at threateningly it goes down hill.

Edit: And for the love of god this does not mean I'm saying all police officers are racist.

Edit 2: A great example of a specific policy that perpetuates systemic racism is qualified immunity.

This nails it. If football games used the same selective enforcement system, combined with the same bias to one side, people would be screaming that it’s not fair.

If this graph…

View attachment 1309889

read “penalty’s awarded against a team per quarter”, there is no way the fans would tolerate it. What chance would team “Black” have to win the game when they are more than twice as likely to be shot and killed by a police officer awarded a penalty against.

 

[TB]

Judge criticizes Trump's expert witness as he again refuses to toss fraud lawsuit

Former President Donald Trump has lost his latest bid to end the business fraud lawsuit he faces in New York as he campaigns to reclaim the White House.

apnews.com

“Bartov is a tenured professor, but the only thing his testimony proves is that for a million or so dollars, some experts will say whatever you want them to say,” Engoron wrote.

 

[sturk0167]

Judge criticizes Trump's expert witness as he again refuses to toss fraud lawsuit

Former President Donald Trump has lost his latest bid to end the business fraud lawsuit he faces in New York as he campaigns to reclaim the White House.

apnews.com

“Bartov is a tenured professor, but the only thing his testimony proves is that for a million or so dollars, some experts will say whatever you want them to say,” Engoron wrote.

The irony is that that judge is bought and paid for.
He is morally bankrupt, and a true scumbag that's a disgrace to his position.
Nothing he says is legally credible.
His ultimate ruling will, of course, be struck down by a federal appellate court.

How does everyone not know, that at this point, that it's just election interference by far-left activists?
The recent ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court is just the latest of their feckless attempts at suppressing democracy.

*Don't even respond if you don't have legal backing for your argument.

 

[TexRex]

Conservative is when you cry like a bitch that everything is rigged against your side.

 

[TB]

He is morally bankrupt, and a true scumbag that's a disgrace to his position.

I agree - Trump is horrible.

 

[NotThePrez]

The irony is that that judge is bought and paid for.

And your evidence for this is...?

He is morally bankrupt, and a true scumbag that's a disgrace to his position.

Glad to see that we're on the same page concerning Trump, then.

His ultimate ruling will, of course, be struck down by a federal appellate court.

Proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Supreme Court in its current form does not exist to the benefit of the United States as a whole, but to benefit an actual scumbag who tried to take the presidency by force, thereby putting the country and its other leaders at risk.

I mean, if you have a pulse, that should be more than obvious at this point. But it would still be incredibly damaging if they just up and did it.

The recent ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court is just the latest of their feckless attempts at suppressing democracy.

Umm, no. The Colorado Supreme Court cited Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, which states:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Like, there's no ambiguity or vagueness. That's an actual description of Donald Trumps actions, and the current position he's in from the last days of his presidency to now.

*Don't even respond if you don't have legal backing for your argument.

See above.

 

[sturk0167]

Conservative is when you cry like a bitch that everything is rigged against your side.

That's your contribution?
Good luck luck with that.

 

[TexRex]

That's your contribution?
Good luck luck with that.

"Contribution"? This isn't a food drive. This is an internet forum and that's a forum post.

Modern American conservatism is mental illness.

 

[sturk0167]

And your evidence for this is...?

Glad to see that we're on the same page concerning Trump, then.

Proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Supreme Court in its current form does not exist to the benefit of the United States as a whole, but to benefit an actual scumbag who tried to take the presidency by force, thereby putting the country and its other leaders at risk.

I mean, if you have a pulse, that should be more than obvious at this point. But it would still be incredibly damaging if they just up and did it.


Umm, no. The Colorado Supreme Court cited Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, which states:

Like, there's no ambiguity or vagueness. That's an actual description of Donald Trumps actions, and the current position he's in from the last days of his presidency to now.

See above.

Read your quote again, numb nuts.
None of it is applicable, or actually true.

Modern American conservatism is mental illness.

Like it or not, it will ultimately benefit you. You're welcome.

 

[TB]

Disagree all you want, but drop the name calling.

And the double posting.

 

[UKMikey]

Some substantiation for his claim would also be welcome, considering he demanded and received it from others and it wasn't good enough for him.

 

[Joey D]

How does everyone not know, that at this point, that it's just election interference by far-left activists?

Or, you know, Trump actually violated the 14th Amendment. Trump actively tried to overturn an election that he very clearly lost and that, despite a ton of people's best efforts, there was no evidence that showed it was rigged in any way. There's no election interference going on by Trump not being on the ballot because there are plenty of other Republican candidates who didn't try to overthrow the US government who are allowed to be a part of the primary.

Seriously, people who deny the election are unpatriotic traitors who should probably move to Russia where that sort of blind loyalty is praised. America isn't some banana republic (despite being a republic with available bananas and having Banana Republics) in Central America where we can change the government whenever we feel like it.

 

[TexRex]

despite a ton of people's best efforts

Garbage people are incapable of mustering more than garbage effort.

 

[sturk0167]

drop the name calling

Numb nuts is worse than crybaby?
Okay. I got it.
I wasn't sure, at first, which one had the hierarchy.

 

[NotThePrez]

Read your quote again, numb nuts.
None of it is applicable, or actually true.

Trump actively asked for Justices to declare the election corrupt, and both he and his allies tried, and failed, to pressure the Justice Department to overturn the 2020 election. I, and many others, including the state of Colorado, would very much consider attemps to overthrow a confirmed federal election result rebellion against the country.

Still waiting on evidence that Judge Arthur Engoron has been bought and paid for, since you directly claimed it.

 

[sturk0167]

Or, you know, Trump actually violated the 14th Amendment.

That's a lie. Read the amendment.

America isn't some banana republic (despite being a republic with available bananas and having Banana Republics) in Central America where we can change the government whenever we feel like it.

Are you sick?
That's precisely what the left is attempting to do.
Ignoring federal immigration laws.
Attempting to jail a political opponent and trying to remove him from the ballot.
What do you think banana republic means?

 

[Blitz24]

Trump actively asked for Justices to declare the election corrupt, and both he and his allies tried, and failed, to pressure the Justice Department to overturn the 2020 election. I, and many others, including the state of Colorado, would very much consider attemps to overthrow a confirmed federal election result rebellion against the country.

Still waiting on evidence that Judge Arthur Engoron has been bought and paid for, since you directly claimed it.

I sadly do not think you will be getting any evidence on that.