Vagitron Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 First of re-tard I'm not religious in the least. Second off you don't even know what quote you're talking about, read my respose in another thread, third you don't ever let anyone take your platform. Pussy. Spineless. weak. They didn't take Carson's mic did they? Or trump. Or hillary. They found the weakest most spineless candidate they could and took his. Classic bully technique and he folded like the bitch he is. Carson isn't going to make it out of the primary and there is zero reason politically to throw them off your stage. He tried to get the mic peacfully and they didn't cooperate so he addressed it at a later rally. You know dick about politics if you think getting militant with a social rights group is a strong play. Carson probably didn't allow them in the vicinity. Sanders isn't that kind of candidate and that's a large part of his appeal. If you aren't a thumper but support Carson you are even dumber than I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 He has no chance. I'll make a monetary bet with you that he gets destroyed by hillary in the primary. Just a small one. $20 say. But be man enough to pay up when he loses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Oh there's things I agree with sanders on. But I, in no way, will ever vote for anyone that says the shit I started this thread on. Â I feel the same way, I agree on frankly a lot with him in terms of his assessments.....it's just I don't think his ideas on how to remedy those problems are necessarily the right call at this point in time. Sanders would have been great for us in the 90's and early 2000's perhaps. The problem with his ideas is that the majority of them should have been acted on 20 or more years ago when we did have the money for them. And the entire economy would be better off today, we would be generating more capital because more people would be involved in actually growing the economy and not just mindless labor like a lot people want most of us to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 I outlined, in detail, for eds why I support carson. You can read it or you can suck a dick for all I care. And you can also take that "thumper" shit and shove it right back up your fat pimpled ass. YOU are the worst sort of person. An arrogant piece of shit that treats anyone who doesn't believe whatever you believe like crap. No one likes a person like you. No one. And though I often disagree with the crew here and argue with them incessantly I almost never have to stoop to calling them names and being a general douchebag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagitron Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 I outlined, in detail, for eds why I support carson. You can read it or you can suck a dick for all I care. And you can also take that "thumper" shit and shove it right back up your fat pimpled ass. YOU are the worst sort of person. An arrogant piece of shit that treats anyone who doesn't believe whatever you believe like crap. No one likes a person like you. No one. And though I often disagree with the crew here and argue with them incessantly I almost never have to stoop to calling them names and being a general douchebag. All you do is name call. Gtfo. I also don't disagree with everyone just the idiots that can't see both sides of an argument. You and cal run around this joint unchecked and when people get tird of banging their head against the wall they back off and let you spew unchecked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Yeah? Prove it. Go ahead and find where I've personally talked ugly to anyone who's not an arrogant troll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 I notice his pie in the sky issues site says nothing about the second amendment. I just wonder what his policies are regarding that. Oh wait, no need to say it Bernard. I know. I know why you're not putting it on your page as well because it would lose you an awful lot of votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Perpetrated by Extremists We are far from eradicating racism in this country. In June, nine of our fellow Americans were murdered while praying in a historic church because of the color of their skin. This violence fills us with outrage, disgust, and a deep, deep sadness. Today in America, if you are black, you can be killed for getting a pack of Skittles during a basketball game. These hateful acts of violence amount to acts of terror. They are perpetrated by extremists who want to intimidate and terrorize black and brown people in this country. Addressing Physical Violence It is an outrage that in these early years of the 21st century we are seeing intolerable acts of violence being perpetuated by police, and racist terrorism by white supremacists. - Bernie Sanders  http://libertyviral.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Screen-Shot-2014-11-25-at-12.30.37-PM - reality Reality according to LibertyViral? Here's the interesting thing... if you read the report on which the graphic was supposedly based, it does not address racially motivated crime. It breaks down victims according to race, but not their assailant(s). Data is for population 12 and older. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf  A little experiment... Whites are 67.9% of the population. Blacks are 11.9%. So if a white walks outside and randomly selects a target to "victimize" he will chose a black: 11.9/(67.9+11.9) = 11.9/79.8 = 0.149 or 14.9% of the time. Similarly if a black walks out he will chose a white: 67.9/(67.9+11.9) = 67.9/79.8 = 0.851 or 85.1% of the time. So it appears that based solely upon population a black is 85.1/14.9 = 5.7 times more likely to victimize a white.  Let's check the ratio in the slide... 320,082/62,593 = 5.11 times Hmmm... so blacks victimize whites at a rate lower than random chance would dictate.  To be honest I expected the ratios to be identical... I was guessing the rates were used to generate the numbers. But the result is less supportive than the case Cysko and the folks at Liberyviral were trying to make. Oops...   If you want real data on racially motivated crime, here you go...  Read it and then talk to me about Bernie... and his gun stance has been pro hunting... except when it come to hunting people with assault rifles and extended clips.  Racial bias In 2010, law enforcement agencies reported that 3,725 single-bias hate crime offenses were racially motivated. Of these offenses: ◾69.8 percent were motivated by anti-black bias. ◾18.2 percent stemmed from anti-white bias. ◾5.7 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group). ◾5.1 percent resulted from anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias. ◾1.2 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native bias. (Based on Table 1.) https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagitron Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Reality according to LibertyViral? Here's the interesting thing... if you read the report on which the graphic was supposedly based, it does not address racially motivated crime. It breaks down victims according to race, but not their assailant(s). Data is for population 12 and older. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf  A little experiment... Whites are 67.9% of the population. Blacks are 11.9%. So if a white walks outside and randomly selects a target to "victimize" he will chose a black: 11.9/(67.9+11.9) = 11.9/79.8 = 0.149 or 14.9% of the time. Similarly if a black walks out he will chose a white: 67.9/(67.9+11.9) = 67.9/79.8 = 0.851 or 85.1% of the time. So it appears that based solely upon population a black is 85.1/14.9 = 5.7 times more likely to victimize a white.  Let's check the ratio in the slide... 320,082/62,593 = 5.11 times Hmmm... so blacks victimize whites at a rate lower than random chance would dictate.  To be honest I expected the ratios to be identical... I was guessing the rates were used to generate the numbers. But the result is less supportive than the case Cysko and the folks at Liberyviral were trying to make. Oops...   If you want real data on racially motivated crime, here you go...  Read it and then talk to me about Bernie... and his gun stance has been pro hunting... except when it come to hunting people with assault rifles and extended clips.  Racial bias In 2010, law enforcement agencies reported that 3,725 single-bias hate crime offenses were racially motivated. Of these offenses: ◾69.8 percent were motivated by anti-black bias. ◾18.2 percent stemmed from anti-white bias. ◾5.7 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group). ◾5.1 percent resulted from anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias. ◾1.2 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native bias. (Based on Table 1.) https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses I knew I liked you tour despite our sports fandom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 I knew I liked you tour despite our sports fandom. lol... like I like Kennywood even though it is in greater Pittsburgh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Â No the numbers are right. You can attack the source but they didn't make the numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 And the number of people actually prosecuted for a hate crime isn't really telling. If a mob of black people attack a white person (and it happens all the time. Google it, if you like) rarely is anyone charged with a hate crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Walter will be happy to google it for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 oh, here we go, from a stinkin pukesburg fan no less....  Vag wants any reasonable, non-liberal opinion "checked"  what a sissy ************************ Amazon.com: Vagisil Screening Kit, 2-Count Package ... www.amazon.com › ... › Yeast Infection Treatments Amazon.com, Inc. Vagisil Screening Kit is for women with symptoms of unusual discharge, unpleasant odor, itching or burning. The purpose of the kit is to help women decide if ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Technically the disparity in population also means that you're more likely to commit a crime against a white person because there are more of them.  Give me a random 100 Americans, and I assault one at random, they're probably white.   I would also distinguish between regular and race based crime.  You'd also want White on White and Black on Black numbers  Finally I would want to see the distribution along income lines as well.   Not saying your point is or isn't correct, just looking at the statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 http://cdn.acidcow.com/pics/20150623/crime_statistics_01.jpg  No the numbers are right. You can attack the source but they didn't make the numbers. Their math and yours is in error... they are double adjusting for population.  5 squared = 25...   Learn to question that with which you agree at least half as much as you do that with which you disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 And of course, from armed robbery 101, it's usually a good idea to select your victim from people more likely to be employed therefore more likely to have cash and a decent car. (also less chance of having been in prison meaning less propensity toward violent resistance. ) Â WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Attack the source of the info but blame the victims for the problem. Liberalism is fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Tour you run your numbers if you like and then attempt to tell me why it's NOT a problem that blacks attack whites at 5x or 10x or 12.5x the rate of the opposite. Deny and subvert. The REAL problem of course is the KKK which barely exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Deny and subvert. Deny and subvert. Deny and subvert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 On another I'm scared of everybody's foreign policy except for Paul, Sanders, and.... Trump. Â Â "We're going to impose a no fly zone. They will be shot down if they violate it more than once. Strengthen the sixth fleet better than ever. Build up missile defenses under Putin's nose. We won't talk to Putin. He'll know we're serious" Â No, he'll do the same. We're already basically in a proxy war with Russia. If we start doing these things, Putin will not "quit because we're serious" he'll build up their own defenses - we'll have another cuban missile crisis and cold war, if we start shooting down Russian planes we'll have WW3. Â Jeb!? has the same foreign policy people as his brother and father, they love war. Everything he says I'd consider the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Reality according to LibertyViral? Here's the interesting thing... if you read the report on which the graphic was supposedly based, it does not address racially motivated crime. It breaks down victims according to race, but not their assailant(s). Data is for population 12 and older. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf  A little experiment... Whites are 67.9% of the population. Blacks are 11.9%. So if a white walks outside and randomly selects a target to "victimize" he will chose a black: 11.9/(67.9+11.9) = 11.9/79.8 = 0.149 or 14.9% of the time. Similarly if a black walks out he will chose a white: 67.9/(67.9+11.9) = 67.9/79.8 = 0.851 or 85.1% of the time. So it appears that based solely upon population a black is 85.1/14.9 = 5.7 times more likely to victimize a white.  Let's check the ratio in the slide... 320,082/62,593 = 5.11 times Hmmm... so blacks victimize whites at a rate lower than random chance would dictate.  To be honest I expected the ratios to be identical... I was guessing the rates were used to generate the numbers. But the result is less supportive than the case Cysko and the folks at Liberyviral were trying to make. Oops...   If you want real data on racially motivated crime, here you go...  Read it and then talk to me about Bernie... and his gun stance has been pro hunting... except when it come to hunting people with assault rifles and extended clips.  Racial bias In 2010, law enforcement agencies reported that 3,725 single-bias hate crime offenses were racially motivated. Of these offenses: ◾69.8 percent were motivated by anti-black bias. ◾18.2 percent stemmed from anti-white bias. ◾5.7 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group). ◾5.1 percent resulted from anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias. ◾1.2 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native bias. (Based on Table 1.) https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses  Stuart  To begin with...  So if a white walks outside and randomly selects a target to "victimize" he will chose a black:  Is this an assumption? I honestly tried looking for that in your link but couldn't find it.  Speaking of which...  "Polar Bear Hunting" ..when blacks randomly chose a white person to beat to beat the fuck out of. http://conservativetribune.com/polar-bear-hunting-game/  "The knockout game...similar to polar bear hunting. http://nypost.com/2013/11/23/i-was-in-shock-they-were-all-laughing-knockout-game-victim-speaks-out/  Secondly, this one made be chuckle  ◾18.2 percent stemmed from anti-white bias.  Didn't you know blacks cannot be charged with hate crimes? Only 18.2 percent because blacks perps are given a pass....this is merely bottled up anger which stems from the years of bigotry and oppression suffered at the hands of whitey.  Were the two blacks that killed the Australian baseball player in 2013 "for fun" as he was jogging down the street ever charged with a hate crime?  The best Jessie Jackson could offer was to say "this is frowned upon".  Frowned upon? Yeah, fucking frowned upon. The same tone the libfuck mainstream media takes. Reverse the colors and behold the outrage...and charges of a hate crime.  Were the two blacks that killed the white baby in a stroller charged with a hate crime?   Sometime I wish some black thug beats the white guilt out of apologists like you.  These people learn at an early age. "Possible" black on white hate crime? The person filming this, possibly a single mamma certainly should be charged with a hate crime.  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Tour you run your numbers if you like and then attempt to tell me why it's NOT a problem that blacks attack whites at 5x or 10x or 12.5x the rate of the opposite. Deny and subvert. The REAL problem of course is the KKK which barely exists. Deny and subvert. Deny and subvert. Deny and subvert. Wash rinse and repeat. Wash rinse and repeat. Wash rinse and repeat. Â I laid it all out for you. If you chose not to see it, I can't help you. Â 1. Stuart To begin with... So if a white walks outside and randomly selects a target to "victimize" he will chose a black: 2. Is this an assumption?I honestly tried looking for that in your link but couldn't find it. Â Speaking of which... 3. "Polar Bear Hunting" ..when blacks randomly chose a white person to beat to beat the fuck out of. http://conservativetribune.com/polar-bear-hunting-game/ "The knockout game...similar to polar bear hunting. http://nypost.com/2013/11/23/i-was-in-shock-they-were-all-laughing-knockout-game-victim-speaks-out/ Â Secondly, this one made be chuckle 4. â—¾18.2 percent stemmed from anti-white bias. Didn't you know blacks cannot be charged with hate crimes? Only 18.2 percent because blacks perps are given a pass....this is merely bottled up anger which stems from the years of bigotry and oppression suffered at the hands of whitey. Â 5. Sometime I wish some black thug beats the white guilt out of apologists like you. Â 1. WTF is "Stuart"? Â 2. Not an assumption, a hypothetical... one which went on to prove that black on white victimization crime is at worst population proportional. Â 3. I'm sure there are real examples of Polar Bear and Knockout attacks. Does not make it prevalent. Does not change the overall statistics. Only two sucker punches I've ever personally witnessed were white on white. Â 4. Since the report, a Hate Crime Report, included the 18.2% figure, then it is clear that black on white hate crime is a real thing to the FBI. You cannot argue that "it is only 18.2%" and then black hate crimes do not exist. Â 5. Thanks for the thought. Not sure where I apologized for anything, but thanks for the thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Can you admit that one is blown way way way way way out of proportion and the other, much greater rate of violence, is almost never mentioned with racial implications IF you even hear about it at all or does your white guilt not allow for that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 No.. and nothing to do with guilt. It has to do with statistical probability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 No. It has to so with racism and aggression nothing more. You can try to explain it away all you want. You can also produce a bunch of stats that prove josh mccown is a top ten quarterback but the browns still suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted November 12, 2015 Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 https://youtu.be/yTKSjc8PEGE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted November 12, 2015 Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=black+on+black+and+white+crime&fr=ush-mailn_02&fr2=p%3Aml%2Cm%3Asb&hspart=att&hsimp=yhs-att_001&type=sbc_dsl   https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=black+on+black+and+white+crime&fr=ush-mailn_02&fr2=p%3Aml%2Cm%3Asb&hspart=att&hsimp=yhs-att_001&type=sbc_dsl  https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=black+on+black+and+white+crime&fr=ush-mailn_02&fr2=p%3Aml%2Cm%3Asb&hspart=att&hsimp=yhs-att_001&type=sbc_dsl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted November 12, 2015 Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 Tour you run your numbers if you like and then attempt to tell me why it's NOT a problem that blacks attack whites at 5x or 10x or 12.5x the rate of the opposite. Deny and subvert. The REAL problem of course is the KKK which barely exists. There are more white people to attack for starters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.