Example of systemic racism

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
Actually, that is how you identify the problem call a spade a spade. You think turning a blind eye will somehow make the problem disappear. If black people react to racism with racism it is racism. I am not one to deny that racism usually causes a racist reaction. A racist reaction is not the same as a racist ideology.
He is a black man clocking a 60 year old white woman


Racist ideology.

Blaming others for "reaction" was a failure from Genesis 3 on. It does not work.
 

Towerwatchman

Active member
I asked you if the following statement was racist. =="Black men are racist."
Your answer.
the statement could be either true or false.
Pointed out that your statement was racist. "White people rigged the system".
Your answer.
the statement could either be true or false.
When racism becomes the answer to everything, racism becomes the answer to nothing. Why? Because if everything is racist we have nothing to compare it to in order to judge it is racist.
The truth usually does.
Lies cause division, not truth.

Actually, that is how you identify the problem call a spade a spade. You think turning a blind eye will somehow make the problem disappear. If black people react to racism with racism it is racism. I am not one to deny that racism usually causes a racist reaction. A racist reaction is not the same as a racist ideology.

Accusing the white race of racism is calling a spade a spade???

Accusing a race of racism is racism. If you believe all whites are racist, then you are no better than the pre-Civil War slave owners. Back in the 1800's slave owners used eugenics to justify their ownership of blacks. The practitioners of eugenics stated that blacks were genetically inferior. In other words, their inferiorities were in their DNA. They used the genetic argument when they proposed that blacks were one step above chimps on the evolutionary scale. If you write that all whites are racist, one has to ask what would be the common denominator that they all share. Being white? How is that possible? Their DNA. When you write that the white race is racist you are stating that the white race is genetically racist, and if that is true then the white race cannot do anything about it; it is ingrained in their DNA. Also if it is ingrained in the white DNA then no one can do anything about it. You are going to have to live with it.
So if the Klan walks down your street, you cannot accuse the man under the sheet of racism. Just as a bird is genetically inclined to fly, he is genetically inclined to burn crosses.
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
First I have to make a correction. It is not Johnson's Great New Deal, but Johnson's Great Society.
So what law in the great society was designed to trap Blacks in poverty? Where is your evidence of intent?
In a court of law, evidence supports the idea that X exists or X has happened.
That is the reason why people are charged for racist actions.
If your intention is to show that systemic racism causes Black hardships,
The point is not that it creates black hardships the point is that it exists. You already admitted that racism exists. I have pointed out how individuals use the system to promote their racist ideals.
you would have to show evidence proving this.
You twisting the discussion from the evidence of systemic racism to evidence of hardship caused by systemic racism. Two different things.
The hardship is the effect, not the evidence.
Lol, a longer prison sentence is the effect of systemic racism but it is not evidence of systemic racism?
Your argument is similar to finding a dead body and claiming that Y killed the person based on the fact that the person is dead.
There is no similarity in your analogy....people know exactly who racially profiled them when they are profiled.
The dead person is not evidenced that Y killed him, it is evidence that the person had died.
The person who is racially profiled by another already has the evidence based on the actions of the one doing the profiling. Cellphone video and audio have worked wonders for people who would not have been believed in those situations.
And unlike my example, you don't have a Y to point to.
Your example has nothing to do with systemic racism it has to do with the killing.
If you are referring to our correspondence, I use my visual ability to read not my auditory.
When you read do you not hear a voice saying the words that you are reading?
Again ambiguous accusations. For argument's sake let's say there are discriminatory judges; are you able to make the leap from individuals practicing their racial worldview to following government policies?
No, I have shown you the racist people working in government use the system to carry out their racist agenda,
Do you think that is a just statement? Let's break down this logic.
Premise 1 The Great Society was designed to trap Blacks in poverty.
I would ask....Where is your evidence of this? and Please show the bill that
Premise 2 Johnson promoted and singed the Great Society
That is not proof that the great society bill was designed to trap Blacks in poverty,
Premise 3 Johnson is white
That would be a fact
Conclusion: the aim of the white man is to keep blacks in poverty.
that would be a personal conclusion
Similar to the racist propaganda of the KKK

Premise 1 A white woman was raped.
Premise 2 She was raped by a black man
Conclusion All white women were raped by black men.
I don't know that was the KKK conclusion. I know women usually say black men rape them when they were not raped by black men. Your premise is bogus. It should be. Premise (1) A woman was not raped.
Premise (2) A woman claimed she was raped by a black man.
Conclusion. All black men are rapists.
The hardships caused by the GS were caused by Democrats not whites.
I don't know that Democrats were not whites, are you for real? You seem to be saying that Democrats were black in 1964
Notice the hardships exist, and the Democratic party is multiracial.
Both parties are multi-racial. The majority of both parties are whites
The Democratic Party is all about control. It is at the heart of their platform. They always speak of 'fairness' and 'equal results' =that is control. The Republicans speak of freedom, liberty, and equal opportunity. Minimum control.
So you believe both parties want control.
I think you missed the point. It was written into the GS policy that the government would only support single-parent households. That was meant to trap by design.
You have to show proof and intent of this,
Example for comparison. Suppose a neighboring family loses their jobs. Both the husband and wife are unemployed, out of cash, to be evicted, utilities turned off, have four children, etc. They ask me for help, and I intend to get them on their feet and running again. Which approach is righteous.
Help both husband and wife to get employment, help them keep as much of their assets as possible, keep the family together, and ensure that everything possible is there so the family is off my assistance as quick as possible with the least amount of loss. Or explain to the wife that I only support verifiable single-parent households that are destitute and any indication that the father or a male figure lives in the household, or the household has a possession that I deem they should not possess, I will pull my support regardless of their situation at that moment?
Why are you explaining only to the wife? Both are unemployed one could be looking for a job while the other looks after the kids...in a single parent situation who looks after the kids when the single parent is looking for a job?
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
continued...
The chances of households recovering from financial setbacks grow exponentially when there are two parents in the home.
as opposed to what? Two parents in a home mean one could be looking for a job while the other looks after the kids as oppose to a single parent who has to look after the kids and look for a job.
If the GS true intention was to lift families out of poverty then everything possible to keep the father or husband in the household should have been done.
You are not making any sense...you want both parents at home while the government supports them?
Instead, GS required that the male figure is out of the house before any assistance was provided.
I doubt that was a requirement...A single parent could be either male or female.
Let's clarify the statement. That was a major contributor to the rise of Black single-parent households from 20% before the Great Society [1964-1965] to 70% today.
That would be your clarification. I can clarify that the cause for black single-parent households' major contributor was the high incidence of black male incarceration. And of course lynchings.
This statement is very interesting. You state that you oppose discrimination of any sort, but here you justify it because black people get sports scholarships.
Not once did I say I support it. I am just pointing out to you that the reason for your assumed discrimination is actually white profiteering.
What about the Oriental? He does not matter when a black benefit?
You missed the point ...the black only seems to benefit... Orientals are used the same way they are given scholarships for their technical skills for white profiteering
That is huge and rather contradictory. I can conclude from this statement that you accept any racist act as long as blacks benefit and that blacks are not cognitively capable of getting into Harvard, but they are capable because of their anatomy and physiology.
You can conclude whatever you want...I don't accept any racist acts I am just pointing out what is actually happening.
Interesting how you refer to the judicial system that believes innocent till proven guilty, and you deem it guilty without any evidence.
The evidence is there, the fact that you refuse to accept it does not make it disappear.
You keep stating this happens but where is the proof.

Don't make assumptions. I believe the events happened, I don't have any reason to believe the events did not. If you make the accusation that this is systemic racism then it's your obligation to post the evidence.

It is illogical to argue absolutes.
Do you have any instance when ALL WHITE X are discriminating against blacks?
I suppose when all white people on the bus agree that black people must sit at the back
BTW when you use 'all white' that is racist.
No, it is not.
This is exactly what a racist would write.
You are insinuating that I am racist because I am pointing out racism.
How do you come to this conclusion? Based on Tulsa. And this is a typical racist ploy.
You are saying that I am racist for pointing out that black communities were successful until they were destroyed.
Accuse me of racism, and the evidence that I am a racist is an event that happened before I was born.
Nope, you asked why things were not a certain way with black people I showed you that they were but they were not allowed to continue. If you are racist it is because you are racist not because of what happened before you were born.
Another racist comment "average white person"
How is that racist?
Remember what I wrote.

When this topic comes up on either talk radio or on TV it is entertaining to watch or hear the discussion. One side makes the same ambiguous claim. The opposition asks for one new voting rule, regulation, or practice that makes voting difficult for anyone. The one's making the claim has never cited one item.

Seems you fall in that category also.
When black people say certain rules or regulations make voting difficult for them, white people say it does not make voting difficult you have to accept it. White people make the rules and black people must abide by them...You should ask how many black people had input in the making of the rules that affect their ability to vote?
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
He is a black man clocking a 60 year old white woman

What is your proof that was a racist attack? Violent criminals prey on the vulnerable...that may or may not be racially motivated...whites attack whites too...
Racist ideology.

Blaming others for "reaction" was a failure from Genesis 3 on. It does not work.
That is not a racist ideology....your statement proves it, that ideology was here before racism since you are showing it happened in Gen 3.
 

Towerwatchman

Active member
So what law in the great society was designed to trap Blacks in poverty? Where is your evidence of intent?
Johnson a Dixiecrat came up with an idea to end poverty. With that goal in mind, Johnson initiated the largest expansion of government, initiated new policies and programs, and named the package ‘The Great Society’.
What effect has the welfare state brought on our population?
Economics 101= you get more of what you subsidize.
When you subsidize joblessness you get more of it, 1964 80.6% of men over 20 were employed. 2014 67.6% are employed.
When you subsidize single-parent homes you get more of it. 1965 7.7% births belonging to unmarried women, 2014 40%. Note the population in 1965 was 194M and today 331M.

What happened to the fathers.
When you subsidize undesirable behavior you will get more undesirable behavior. The generous welfare system has allowed women in effect to marry the government. And this makes it easy for men to abandon their traditional moral and financial responsibilities.

The welfare state penalizes marriage.
A single mother with 2 children who earn 15K would receive approx 5.2K in food stamps. Now if she marries a man who also earns 15K she loses her food stamps. Section 8 housing subsidy averages around 11K per year, if she is unemployed. If she marries a man earning 20K per year she loses half of her section 8. The government runs over 80 means-tested programs that provide cash, food, housing, medical care, and social services to poor and low-income individuals and each program contains a marriage penalty. Low-income families are usually enrolled in several programs, so marriage penalties from multiple programs add up. And most times far past what the man would bring into the family. The welfare system makes it irrational for low-income couples to marry. And since there is no 'ring on it, it makes it easy for couples to separate when trouble arises.
How badly did the welfare system destabilize the black family? A child being raised in slavery was more likely to be raised under the same roof by his biological mother and father than today.

And here is the kicker. Johnson’s intention was not to lift anyone out of poverty but to give them enough to survive, keep them dependent on the government, in order to get votes.
The point is not that it creates black hardships the point is that it exists. You already admitted that racism exists. I have pointed out how individuals use the system to promote their racist ideals.
I don't doubt that there are individuals who use the system to promote racist ideas. But that is not systemic racism. Test your logic.
If there being racist individuals in a system, and they exploited that system to promote their racist worldview equates to systematic racism.
Then there being homosexual individuals in a system, and they exploited that system to promote their homosexual worldview equates to systemic pro-homosexuality.
Either both make sense or none.

You twisting the discussion from the evidence of systemic racism to evidence of hardship caused by systemic racism. Two different things.
You will still have to show that the evidence of hardship is the direct result of systemic racism.
Lol, a longer prison sentence is the effect of systemic racism but it is not evidence of systemic racism?
No. A longer prison sentence is the effect, you have to prove the cause, = the cause and how it brought about an unjust prison sentence is the evidence. For example, same crime, same points, same judge, same court. Let's say one defendant gets 50% more time than another. Why? In most cases and I would say 99% were pleaded out. When one pleads out one gets a reduced sentence. Now if one wants to go to trial it becomes a roll of the dice for the full amount.
But I got a better idea. If you don't want to do the time, don't do the crime. Why are they in jail- because they committed a crime.
There is no similarity in your analogy....people know exactly who racially profiled them when they are profiled.

The person who is racially profiled by another already has the evidence based on the actions of the one doing the profiling. Cellphone video and audio have worked wonders for people who would not have been believed in those situations.

Your example has nothing to do with systemic racism it has to do with the killing.
Wow. It was a simple logical analysis of your reasoning. It has no impact on your racist narrative.
I don't know that Democrats were not whites, are you for real? You seem to be saying that Democrats were black in 1964
Do you really think that the hardships caused by the GS only happened in 1964? News flash = the hardships continue to this day. And the Democratic party which is had a black president, and now a black vice president, and multiple black members does not own up to their past racist policies and does nothing to correct it.
Both parties are multi-racial. The majority of both parties are whites
Sorry, the nightmare from slavery to Jim Crow to the Great Society was promoted and defended by Democrats, not Republicans.
Here is the difference between you and me. I believe that the one who commits the offense should carry the guilt. Your intention seems to be more geared to placing the guilt on whites. That is racist.
So you believe both parties want control
Read again. There is a difference. Republicans want minimal control. To have a functioning government there has to be some control. The Democrats want total control. Look at the difference by state. California [D} return the mask mandate. Florida refuses to return. Biden [D} says that children under 12 must wear a mask in school. Desantis [R] will penalize any school district that attempts to enforce a mask mandate. Republicans are for freedom and liberty, Democrats are for control.
as opposed to what? Two parents in a home mean one could be looking for a job while the other looks after the kids as oppose to a single parent who has to look after the kids and look for a job. Why are you explaining only to the wife? Both are unemployed one could be looking for a job while the other looks after the kids...in a single parent situation who looks after the kids when the single parent is looking for a job?
You are not making any sense...you want both parents at home while the government supports them?
Such a narrow understanding of the strength of a family unit. Why is it important to keep the family unit together?
For example, children from single-parent homes are:
More than twice as likely to be arrested for a juvenile crime. Twice as likely to be treated for emotional and behavioral problems. Roughly twice as likely to be suspended or expelled from school, and a third more likely to drop out before completing high school. It takes a man to make a man. Mothers cannot make men.

And of course lynchings.
Typical race hustling. How many blacks got lynched since 1965? Zero.
Not once did I say I support it. I am just pointing out to you that the reason for your assumed discrimination is actually white profiteering.
Now that we have identified systemic racism at Harvard what are you going to do about it? Or are you only interested in white-on-black racism?
You missed the point ...the black only seems to benefit... Orientals are used the same way they are given scholarships for their technical skills for white profiteering
And here you are justifying it.
I suppose when all white people on the bus agree that black people must sit at the back
This is a typical race hustle move. Attempt to prove that systemic racism exists today by showing events that happened 66 years ago as evidence of today's racism.
BTW "when all white people" is racist.
How is that racist?
Your worldview is racist. You continually blame one race for another race's problems. Why is it always the 'white person'?
When black people say certain rules or regulations make voting difficult for them, white people say it does not make voting difficult you have to accept it. White people make the rules and black people must abide by them...You should ask how many black people had input in the making of the rules that affect their ability to vote?
Am I suppose to take your word for it? Notice this is the third time around and you have yet to show any rule, from any state, that makes voting for blacks difficult. Do you know of any such rule or are you parroting what you hear? BTW I have read Ga and Tx and found no such thing. What I did notice was that voting was made easier and cheating harder. Are you for fair elections or cheating?
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
I don't doubt that there are individuals who use the system to promote racist ideas. But that is not systemic racism. Test your logic.
If there being racist individuals in a system, and they exploited that system to promote their racist worldview equates to systematic racism.
Then there being homosexual individuals in a system, and they exploited that system to promote their homosexual worldview equates to systemic pro-homosexuality.
Either both make sense or none.
Both make sense. Wasn't that what the Europeans did to promote their religious beliefs?
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
Am I suppose to take your word for it? Notice this is the third time around and you have yet to show any rule, from any state, that makes voting for blacks difficult. Do you know of any such rule or are you parroting what you hear? BTW I have read Ga and Tx and found no such thing. What I did notice was that voting was made easier and cheating harder. Are you for fair elections or cheating?
If you read and found none how can I convince you that any rule makes it difficult for blacks to vote? If it does not affect you then you cannot know. How many cases of voter fraud were there in the last GE? Where is the evidence of cheating that the legislators identified and used to make cheating harder? Since you read the rules then the changes must do one of two things or both. (1) Identify areas that cheaters exploited and fix the breach. (2) Identify areas where voting was difficult for individuals and communities and fix those specific difficulties.
Can you point those out?
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
Now that we have identified systemic racism at Harvard what are you going to do about it?
It is not hidden. Your blinders just moved a little. What do you expect me to do about it? I can ask you to tell your peers that now you have identified systemic racism at Harvard maybe they will believe you.
Or are you only interested in white-on-black racism?
Racism is racism identify and call it wherever and whenever you see it. The denial makes it appear as if one is only interested in white on black.
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
No. A longer prison sentence is the effect, you have to prove the cause, = the cause and how it brought about an unjust prison sentence is the evidence. For example, same crime, same points, same judge, same court. Let's say one defendant gets 50% more time than another. Why? In most cases and I would say 99% were pleaded out. When one pleads out one gets a reduced sentence.
Pleas are offered right...
Now if one wants to go to trial it becomes a roll of the dice for the full amount.
Why would a prosecutor offer a plea when he believes the judge and the jury are on his side?
But I got a better idea. If you don't want to do the time, don't do the crime.
I agree with you
Why are they in jail- because they committed a crime.
Yep... but why does one get more time than the other...the system. A plea bargain does not make one person less guilty than another, does it?
 

Towerwatchman

Active member
Both make sense. Wasn't that what the Europeans did to promote their religious beliefs?
Irrelevant.
Now if both make sense.
If there being racist individuals in a system, and they exploited that system to promote their racist worldview equates to systematic racism.
Then there being homosexual individuals in a system, and they exploited that system to promote their homosexual worldview equates to systemic pro-homosexuality.
Then
There being black entertainers in the entertainment business who exploit the entertainment system to promote their racist view of whites, by presenting them as buffoons and clowns with no intervention by said black entertainment is evidence of black systemic racism towards whites.
If you read and found none how can I convince you that any rule makes it difficult for blacks to vote? If it does not affect you then you cannot know. How many cases of voter fraud were there in the last GE? Where is the evidence of cheating that the legislators identified and used to make cheating harder? Since you read the rules then the changes must do one of two things or both. (1) Identify areas that cheaters exploited and fix the breach. (2) Identify areas where voting was difficult for individuals and communities and fix those specific difficulties.
Can you point those out?
Nice try, but no cigar. You made the accusation that the new voter laws disenfranchise blacks. You have to do your homework and present the laws or rules. Why is this the fourth time around? Hard to find something that does not exist. May I suggest you check and double-check what you parrot before you post. Credibility is something hard to get and easy to lose.
 

Towerwatchman

Active member
It is not hidden. Your blinders just moved a little. What do you expect me to do about it? I can ask you to tell your peers that now you have identified systemic racism at Harvard maybe they will believe you. Racism is racism identify and call it wherever and whenever you see it. The denial makes it appear as if one is only interested in white on black.
Are you not an activist against racism? Or is your MO to point fingers and yell 'RACIST'. Is racism against Asians in favor of Blacks going to be part of your anti-racist ministry? Or
Pleas are offered right...

Why would a prosecutor offer a plea when he believes the judge and the jury are on his side?
50% of something is better than 100% of nothing. 50% of a sentence is better than 100% of an acquittal. Noting in life is guaranteed. Most prosecutors will allow prisoners to plea out to lighten the load on an overburdened judicial system.
I agree with you

Yep... but why does one get more time than the other...the system. A plea bargain does not make one person less guilty than another, does it?
True a plea bargain does not make one person less guilty than another. But it does show that the one who took the plea bargain is smarter than the one who chose a trial. The one who chose the trial made a free will choice to do so. If this is the case one has to realize that the prosecution is offering less time to make the case go away. There is an old saying. 'Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."

 

Newbirth

Well-known member
Irrelevant.
you brought it up....
Now if both make sense.
If there being racist individuals in a system, and they exploited that system to promote their racist worldview equates to systematic racism.
Then there being homosexual individuals in a system, and they exploited that system to promote their homosexual worldview equates to systemic pro-homosexuality.
Then
There being black entertainers in the entertainment business who exploit the entertainment system to promote their racist view of whites, by presenting them as buffoons and clowns with no intervention by said black entertainment is evidence of black systemic racism towards whites.
The entertainment system does not run the country, it is not a branch of government, It does not make rules that you must live by. That is a strawman argument. I would say however if black people promote racism using entertainment it is racism. Just nor systemic racism.
Nice try, but no cigar. You made the accusation that the new voter laws disenfranchise blacks.
It is the view of some lawmakers, to say I accuse the new voter laws makes no sense...If anything it would be those who wrote the law that are being accused. They need to show how and where people cheated and how their new laws would stop people from cheating...They are accusing the American people of cheating. You should be asking them for evidence of this. That is like taking your car to the mechanic for a tune-up and he wants you to change your windscreen that is perfect. He must give a valid reason for the change...The lawmakers must give a valid reason for the changes they make...If they say they are changing a rule because of cheating. They must show who cheated when they cheated and how they cheated. Also, they must show how the new rule would stop the cheating they identified.
You have to do your homework and present the laws or rules.
I don't have to present anything...The lawmakers said they are making rules because of massive voter fraud... It is only fair they show the massive fraud and how the changes they made would stop the fraud...
Why is this the fourth time around? Hard to find something that does not exist.
you won't find anything if you are not looking... The lawmakers claimed they found fraud, they should show the evidence of fraud and show how the new rules would stop that fraud. You don't change a windshield when you get a flat tire.
May I suggest you check and double-check what you parrot before you post. Credibility is something hard to get and easy to lose.
You just lost all yours...You are not showing any evidence of voter fraud that would necessitate new rules to stop said voter fraud.
 

Towerwatchman

Active member
you brought it up....

The entertainment system does not run the country, it is not a branch of government, It does not make rules that you must live by. That is a strawman argument. I would say however if black people promote racism using entertainment it is racism. Just nor systemic racism.

It is the view of some lawmakers, to say I accuse the new voter laws makes no sense...If anything it would be those who wrote the law that are being accused. They need to show how and where people cheated and how their new laws would stop people from cheating...They are accusing the American people of cheating. You should be asking them for evidence of this. That is like taking your car to the mechanic for a tune-up and he wants you to change your windscreen that is perfect. He must give a valid reason for the change...The lawmakers must give a valid reason for the changes they make...If they say they are changing a rule because of cheating. They must show who cheated when they cheated and how they cheated. Also, they must show how the new rule would stop the cheating they identified.

I don't have to present anything...The lawmakers said they are making rules because of massive voter fraud... It is only fair they show the massive fraud and how the changes they made would stop the fraud...

you won't find anything if you are not looking... The lawmakers claimed they found fraud, they should show the evidence of fraud and show how the new rules would stop that fraud. You don't change a windshield when you get a flat tire.

You just lost all yours...You are not showing any evidence of voter fraud that would necessitate new rules to stop said voter
Systemic racism exists when either an organization or a government agency promotes ,supports ,defends, or does not correct its own members who practice racism. The black entertainment industry is systemically racist against whites. The industry presents whites as clowns and no one in the black industry from upper management to any entertainer. ever apologized or reprimanded anyone for this.
New voting rules. You brought up the topic as being unjust. All you have to do is show one. As of now and I believe this is the fifth request and you are not able to produce one. Don't worry you are in very good company every Democrat that accused States of disenfranchising blacks with new voter laws or rules was unable to do the same. As to cheating
no more vote of harvesting,
everyone has to show identification or a social security number,
no unsolicited ballots will be mailed out, observers from both sides will be present while the count is being done.

By the way the state of Delaware has stricter laws, less voting hours, less voting days ,then the states that passed the new laws and rules, but the Democrats don't seem to care about Delaware. Wonder why? Because Deleware votes Democrat
 

LifeIn

Well-known member
Systemic racism exists when either an organization or a government agency promotes ,supports ,defends, or does not correct its own members who practice racism.
This is too narrow a definition. Actually systemic racism exists whenever there is an aspect of the system of society that shows a racial bias.
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
Are you not an activist against racism? Or is your MO to point fingers and yell 'RACIST'. Is racism against Asians in favor of Blacks going to be part of your anti-racist ministry? Or
I am not in favor of any racism.
50% of something is better than 100% of nothing. 50% of a sentence is better than 100% of an acquittal.
What does that have to do with justice? If I did not commit the crime I am accused of how is anything better than my freedom.
Noting in life is guaranteed.
Sickness and death are.
Most prosecutors will allow prisoners to plea out to lighten the load on an overburdened judicial system.
Lol, that is funny...It takes away the burden of proof on their part.
True a plea bargain does not make one person less guilty than another. But it does show that the one who took the plea bargain is smarter than the one who chose a trial.
I suppose that would only be in the case where they are both guilty.
The one who chose the trial made a free will choice to do so.
Maybe he is not guilty and assumes the system is a fair system.
If this is the case one has to realize that the prosecution is offering less time to make the case go away.
If one is guilty then it is a bargain.
There is an old saying. 'Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."
I don't see this as a game...an innocent man went to jail for 39 years because he believed the system was just. Taking a plea is an admission of guilt. After 39 years he was found to be not guilty.
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
Systemic racism exists when either an organization or a government agency promotes ,supports ,defends, or does not correct its own members who practice racism.
So you are saying there is systemic racism in schools, in the public service in Hollywood, actually everywhere in America.
The black entertainment industry is systemically racist against whites.
According to your premise, that is also the norm in the white entertainment industry and every other industry in America. You seem to be saying is that America is a racist country
The industry presents whites as clowns
There are other ethnically controlled industries in America that present other ethnic groups as such and worse...
and no one in the black industry from upper management to any entertainer. ever apologized or reprimanded anyone for this.
To this day people who supported and promoted slavery are counted as heroes.
New voting rules. You brought up the topic as being unjust. All you have to do is show one.
I showed you why it is...You cannot show the cheating that is responsible for the new rules...
As of now and I believe this is the fifth request and you are not able to produce one.
I just gave you one... The lawmakers are saying there was massive voter fraud. That is the reason for the new rules...Where is the evidence of voter fraud and how do the new rules stop the fraud.
Don't worry you are in very good company every Democrat that accused States of disenfranchising blacks with new voter laws or rules was unable to do the same.
Because the republicans cannot show the fraud they claim is the reason for the new rules...
As to cheating
no more vote of harvesting,
Where is the evidence of harvesting...if it is there and illegal, then people should be in jail for it...
everyone has to show identification or a social security number,
Is it possible to be registered without them?
no unsolicited ballots will be mailed out,
everyone has the right to vote...
observers from both sides will be present while the count is being done.
that already exist
By the way the state of Delaware has stricter laws, less voting hours, less voting days ,then the states that passed the new laws and rules, but the Democrats don't seem to care about Delaware. Wonder why? Because Deleware votes Democrat
Put up the numbers...
 

Towerwatchman

Active member
I am not in favor of any racism.
Let's be more specific. You write that you are not in favor of any racism but you only point out racism against blacks. Everything you cited supported the victimization of blacks. When you only care about racism against one specific sub-population and do not equally champion another subpopulation victimization, you are favoring one subpopulation over another. That is racism.
What does that have to do with justice? If I did not commit the crime I am accused of how is anything better than my freedom.
Wrote it wrong.
50% of the maximum sentence is better than 100% of that maximum sentence.
And your answer is another red herring. We were not discussing the innocence of the accused but the sentencing. You state that some are unjustly sentenced because they received more time than another person with the same circumstances. The video that you cited somehow conveniently neglected to mention that the differences have to do with plea bargaining.

Lol, that is funny...It takes away the burden of proof on their part.
You don't have a clue, do you? When prosecutors allow a prisoner to plea out, they do not have to prove the prisoner guilty. The prisoner pleads guilty in front of a judge and takes the agreed-upon sentence.
I suppose that would only be in the case where they are both guilty.
Maybe he is not guilty and assumes the system is a fair system.
If one is guilty then it is a bargain.
I have to ask, are we done with the unjust sentencing facade, and now moving on the system as a whole is rigged against minorities facade?
I don't see this as a game...an innocent man went to jail for 39 years because he believed the system was just. Taking a plea is an admission of guilt. After 39 years he was found to be not guilty.
Try to recognize types of language and when spoken=
speech. "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes." is hyperbole. As to the above = really??? Did that happen??? Someone who knew he was innocent thought 39+ years was a bargain and took the plea deal [39+years] because he thought the judicial system was being just to him.

That is the epitome of "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."
So you are saying there is systemic racism in schools, in the public service in Hollywood, actually everywhere in America.
How could you come to such a conclusion?

Let's try this again.
Systemic racism exists when either an organization or a government agency promotes, supports, defends, or does not correct its own members who practice racism.
According to your premise, that is also the norm in the white entertainment industry and every other industry in America. You seem to be saying is that America is a racist country
Actually, it is the norm in the black culture. We see black divisive racism all the time. Why is it the "black national anthem"? Could have used another adjective vs 'black'. And if tomorrow someone comes up with the white national anthem, and it is played at NBA games, will the black community call that racist? Black entertainment identifying or calling whites as 'white boy', 'white man', 'cracker', but when it comes to blacks everyone has to walk on eggshells. "Afro American", "People of Color". Affirmative action= two individuals with the same qualifications, one black one white. The black gets the job based on the color of his skin. Over the summer BLM burned looted and murdered during 250+ 'peaceful protests', of the arrested [mostly black] the majority had their charges dropped, even though they burned and looted business. At the capital on Jan 6, whites entered the capital, broke some windows and doors to get in. Not one painting, one statue was defiled, no graffiti, no burning or looting,[ with the exception of Pelosi's office]. They are still in jail.
To this day people who supported and promoted slavery are counted as heroes.
And who are they?
  • According to the 1860 census, 99 percent of slave owners were Democrats.
  • The fugitive slave laws were proposed by Democratic Northern Legislature, signed by Democratic Governors, and enforced by Democratic jurisdictions.
  • The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were opposed by Democrats.
  • The black codes were enforced by Democrats.
  • The KKK was the strong arm of the Democratic Party.
  • Every Jim Crow law was introduced by the Democratic Legislature, signed by Democratic Governors, and enforced by Democratic jurisdictions.
  • Every Confederate statue that the Democratic Party wants to disappear is of Democrats.
Funny how the party that committed the sins is now championing the ones they sinned against. Instead of taking responsibility for their sins, they point the finger at the United States. Similar to a child that knows he is guilty and notices that his only out is to blame everyone else.

And who are today's Democratic heroes? Obama =black president, Harris = black vice president. =Corry Booker = US Senator, and many, many more.

I just gave you one... The lawmakers are saying there was massive voter fraud. That is the reason for the new rules...Where is the evidence of voter fraud and how do the new rules stop the fraud.
Sixth time. I did not ask you for their reasoning but the rules or the laws. Since this is the sixth request we can conclude that you found none. Again don't worry, no one has found one either.
Because the republicans cannot show the fraud they claim is the reason for the new rules...

Where is the evidence of harvesting...if it is there and illegal, then people should be in jail for it...

Is it possible to be registered without them?

everyone has the right to vote...

that already exist

Put up the numbers...
As to cheating
no more vote of harvesting,
everyone has to show identification or a social security number,
no unsolicited ballots will be mailed out, observers from both sides will be present while the count is being done.

Laws are not only passed because X has happened. Laws are passed also when it is noticed that the occurrence of X is reasonable, and laws and rules are passed to prevent X from happening. The legislature of those states does not need proof of X, just proof that it is reasonable that X will happen. So the presence of 'numbers' is not necessary to justify the laws or rules.

With that written are you against stopping voter harvesting, voting without identification, counting votes without opposing parties present.
Or blanketing communities with mailed ballots, similar to junk mail, and anyone who receives it can vote for any candidate on the ballot without the intended voter's knowledge or approval?
Now if you are in support of any of the negatives, post your reasoning.
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
Let's be more specific. You write that you are not in favor of any racism but you only point out racism against blacks.
There is nothing wrong with that. Unless you are saying that it is racist to point out racism against blacks.
Everything you cited supported the victimization of blacks.
That would be your misunderstanding...You support the victimization against blacks ant think it is racist to point out racism against blacks
When you only care about racism against one specific sub-population and do not equally champion another subpopulation victimization, you are favoring one subpopulation over another. That is racism.
You seem to be saying that it is racist to point out racism against blacks if I don't point out racism against another group.
Wrote it wrong.
50% of the maximum sentence is better than 100% of that maximum sentence.
Even if one is not guilty?
And your answer is another red herring. We were not discussing the innocence of the accused but the sentencing.
How is that a red herring when a person's innocence is in question? You seem to be saying it is ok to sentence an innocent prtson.
You state that some are unjustly sentenced because they received more time than another person with the same circumstances.
That would be unjust, wouldn't it?
The video that you cited somehow conveniently neglected to mention that the differences have to do with plea bargaining.
You are not making sense...what could one offer the justice system for a lesser sentence? Were both persons offered a plea? Accepting a plea bargain is an admission of guilt. You seem to be saying if a person admits to a crime he gets less time, one might take it if the counter was death. If he pleads not guilty then he gets more time or death even if he is not guilty but found guilty.
You don't have a clue, do you? When prosecutors allow a prisoner to plea out, they do not have to prove the prisoner guilty. The prisoner pleads guilty in front of a judge and takes the agreed-upon sentence.
He pleads guilty because he is guilty and they believe him. If he is not guilty why should he plead guilty? Unless he backed in a corner in a life or death situation.
I have to ask, are we done with the unjust sentencing facade, and now moving on the system as a whole is rigged against minorities facade?
You tell me, I see a guilty person getting less prison time for admitting to a crime and a not guilty person the possibility of more prison time for not committing a crime because he does not accept a plea.
Try to recognize types of language and when spoken=
speech. "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes." is hyperbole. As to the above = really??? Did that happen??? Someone who knew he was innocent thought 39+ years was a bargain and took the plea deal [39+years] because he thought the judicial system was being just to him.
I suppose the other side of the coin was death. He chose life.
That is the epitome of "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."
That is your view. For him it was not a game, it was life or death, he chose to live.
How could you come to such a conclusion?
You said...Systemic racism exists when either an organization or a government agency promotes ,supports ,defends, or does not correct its own members who practice racism.
Many members of those organization promote, supports and defend racism and are not corrected until after they are caught.
Let's try this again.
Systemic racism exists when either an organization or a government agency promotes, supports, defends, or does not correct its own members who practice racism.
Are you saying it is not systemic racism when either an organization or a government agency members practice racism and are not caught to be corrected?
Actually, it is the norm in the black culture. We see black divisive racism all the time. Why is it the "black national anthem"?
because the other is the white national anthem. Or did blacks have input in it?
Could have used another adjective vs 'black'.
Why? to please you?
And if tomorrow someone comes up with the white national anthem, and it is played at NBA games, will the black community call that racist?
I don't know, but that would mean you will have two white national anthems.
 
Top