Obama indicts all American cops

By 29 Comments 1,581 views

blue flu

The police in the United States find themselves sharing space with Jeremiah Wright under the bus where Barack Obama has thrown them. Every day sees a non-stop litany of lies and canards flowing from the mouths of Barack Obama, Eric Holder and the rest of the race pimps. The Michael Brown shooting? Well, you see, we have all these racist cops.

“In many communities of color [people] have a sense that our laws are not always being enforced uniformly or fairly,”

Eric Holder implied that only black cops can police black neighborhoods:

“Over time, … [the police] should consider the role that increased diversity in law enforcement can play in helping to build trust within communities,” Holder said in a statement released Thursday afternoon.

Of course, that would not guarantee a black cop would have responded in Ferguson on the eventful day but facts are unimportant to liberals. Larry Elder also remarked that if racial composition must rule then Barack Obama should not be President since blacks make up only 13% of the population.

It was the cops who caused the riots, doncha know:

Current and former police chiefs said on Sunday that law enforcement agencies around the nation must not repeat the mistakes that led to riots in Ferguson.

Except it didn’t go that way. Barack Sharpton and Jesse Holder would like you to believe that it was the “militarized” police presence that caused the riots. It wasn’t.

Michael Brown was shot on Saturday, August 9. A candlelight vigil is held the next day, August 10. The same day, Al Sharpton announces that he’s flying in to demand justice and that evening riots break out.

FERGUSON, Mo. – Tensions reached a boiling point Sunday night following an officer involved shooting that left a teenager dead. The violence began after a planned rally and vigil in the wake of the death of 18-year-old Michael Brown.

Brown was the unarmed teenager shot to death by an Ferguson police officer on Saturday afternoon.

Police officers from every jurisdiction in the St. Louis area were called into Ferguson Sunday evening. The strong police presence became necessary after violence and looting were reported in the area. Witnesses say tensions began rising at the intersection of West Florissant and Ferguson around 8:30 p.m. In response Ferguson police called in an extra 60 officers as well as officers from all surrounding jurisdictions.

Officer Brian Schellman with the St. Louis County Police Department says 200 officers were called to the area from at least two dozen departments, but approximately 300 total officers were in the area. Many officers who were not called in responded anyway.

The SWAT teams were not present until AFTER the rioting and looting began. More here and here.

The incompetent Governor Jay Nixon, as we have previously noted, relieved the local police in favor of the Highway Patrol, led by the black Captain Ron Johnson. That worked for about ten minutes before looting and rioting again took place and Nixon called in the National Guard.

Jesse Holder has decided not to let a crisis go to waste and plans on a new set of decrees that restrict the ability of the police to do their sworn duties:

“In the coming days, I will announce updated Justice Department guidance regarding profiling by federal law enforcement. This will institute rigorous new standards — and robust safeguards — to help end racial profiling, once and for all,” Holder said. “This new guidance will codify our commitment to the very highest standards of fair and effective policing.”

Holder has already called for race-based discipline. We can only expect him to call for race-based law enforcement next.

To paraphrase one commenter at Politico this morning

DISPATCHER: One Adam 12, we have a report of a 211 at the Qwik Mart on South Florissant.

RESPONDER: Roger, dispatch. Any word on the suspects?

DISPATCHER: Report of one suspect.

RESPONDER: Do you have a description, Dispatch?

DISPATCH: Uh…..I can’t.

RESPONDER: Er, sorry? Please repeat.

DISPATCH: No can do, Adam 12. New Holder rule. That would be racial profiling. Good luck.

A lesson is sorely needed. A selective case of blue flu is in order, in the communities which despise the police the most- Portland, the St. Louis area, and Amherst, Massachusetts, the home of Hampshire College, which apparently has nothing but racists on its police force.

“No justice, no peace; no racist ass police,” chanted Hampshire College students and members of surrounding colleges as they stormed local Massachusetts stores over the Thanksgiving holiday weekend.

And we’d like a side of minimum wage from you racists while we’re at it.

This regime has declared war on cops. They’re all racists. It’d be wonderful lesson for the whiners to see what life is like without those racist bastards protecting their asses.

It’d also be great if Obama and his henchmen would stop lying.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

29 Responses to “Obama indicts all American cops”

  1. 2

    Scott+in+Oklahoma

    I wouldn’t blame anyone in law enforcement for walking away from it at this point; in fact I know a few that are talking about early retirement, others just bailing out.
    The net result of all this is gonna be bad. The cities and towns will have to lower their standards in order to fill racial quotas the government will jam up their asses; hard working, intelligent, good intentioned people who previously might have considered law enforcement as a good career choice will no doubt look elsewhere after reviewing the risks involved not just personally but professionally (nobody likes to work for an agency that won’t back you up). As this hiring trend rolls on, we will get more and more of exactly the type of cop we really don’t want, and often fear, the one with the agenda of getting over, of power tripping, of taking and not doing the right thing regardless of who is looking. We have seen this happen before, the late 70’s and early 80’s in Miami Florida, New Orleans and other places, we’re headed there again. Glad I am out of that game.

  2. 3

    Nanny

    The boyfriend of Michael Brown’s mom (the guy who has been a gang leader of Missouri’s Blood gang) is being investigated for his part as the inciter to the riot, looting and arson.
    Seems being peaceful doesn’t run in that household.
    On another note, one of the early false witnesses who claimed Brown was shot while in surrender mode was caught on video looting a store then she admitted she was in there and was the person who tried to put out a small fire in it by pouring milk on it. (also caught on video.)
    Obama’s divisive antics cannot be ended too soon.

  3. 4

    retire05

    @Scott+in+Oklahoma:

    I don’t know why anyone would want to be a LEO in this environment. Even cops who are themselves a minority are catching hell. Black cops, who work black neighborhoods, are being called sell outs, Uncle Toms, Oreos, et al.

    This whole thing is NOT a cop problem. It is a cultural problem in the black community.

  4. 6

    Bill

    “In the coming days, I will announce updated Justice Department guidance regarding profiling by federal law enforcement.

    Well, now I am totally confused. Did Officer Wilson profile Michael Brown, causing him to dive into his squad car, beat him in the face and try to get his service weapon and kill him? Did profiling play any part in this tragedy? Maybe if you slop a little grease on these things, they will stick better when you throw them against the wall, Eric.

    Not only should the police selectively succumb to an epidemic, they should announce a week in advance when they will all be under the weather. I hear there is something going around in Sharpton’s neighborhood. Also, around Obama’s Chicago home. Areas like that always have some kind of bug going around.

    It’s a good time to have a CHL, folks.

  5. 7

    Nanny

    And, just as in every mass shooting case where a nut goes crazy, none of the laws now on the books nor any proposed ”fixes,” would have made a bit of difference.
    Funny how liberals always think they can legislate away evil.
    As if they say, ”If we just had enough laws, folks, we’d be like perfect.”
    But flawed people’s flawed laws enforced in flawed ways cannot create utopia.

  6. 8

    Tom

    @Nanny:

    And, just as in every mass shooting case where a nut goes crazy, none of the laws now on the books nor any proposed ”fixes,” would have made a bit of difference.
    Funny how liberals always think they can legislate away evil.
    As if they say, ”If we just had enough laws, folks, we’d be like perfect.”
    But flawed people’s flawed laws enforced in flawed ways cannot create utopia.

    I believe you’re wrong, Nan. The laws we choose to adopt can acutally have quite an impact on shootings, whether by civilians or the police. Last year, the British police fired their weapons a total of three times. I’m sure you’re aware that’s less shots than Officer Wilson fired in his encounter with Micheal Brown.
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2014/08/armed-police

    Last year, in total, British police officers actually fired their weapons three times. The number of people fatally shot was zero. In 2012 the figure was just one. Even after adjusting for the smaller size of Britain’s population, British citizens are around 100 times less likely to be shot by a police officer than Americans. Between 2010 and 2014 the police force of one small American city, Albuquerque in New Mexico, shot and killed 23 civilians; seven times more than the number of Brits killed by all of England and Wales’s 43 forces during the same period.

    The explanation for this gap is simple. In Britain, guns are rare. Only specialist firearms officers carry them; and criminals rarely have access to them. The last time a British police officer was killed by a firearm on duty was in 2012, in a brutal case in Manchester. The annual number of murders by shooting is typically less than 50. Police shootings are enormously controversial. The shooting of Mark Duggan, a known gangster, which in 2011 started riots across London, led to a fiercely debated inquest. Last month, a police officer was charged with murder over a shooting in 2005. The reputation of the Metropolitan Police’s armed officers is still barely recovering from the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, an innocent Brazilian, in the wake of the 7/7 terrorist bombings in London.

    In America, by contrast, it is hardly surprising that cops resort to their weapons more frequently. In 2013, 30 cops were shot and killed—just a fraction of the 9,000 or so murders using guns that happen each year. Add to that a hyper-militarised police culture and a deep history of racial strife and you have the reason why so many civilians are shot by police officers. Unless America can either reduce its colossal gun ownership rates or fix its deep social problems, shootings of civilians by police—justified or not—seem sure to continue.

    The Right wants to pretend that this is a “black thing”, but if you look at the facts, it’s actually a gun thing. We have chosen to live in a violent society with a gun culture that has zero tolerance for any attempts to decrease the dangers posed to police by the millions of guns in America. Your statement that gun safety cannot be legislated is clearly belied by the fact it has been legislated in almost every industrialized country in the world, with easily measured results. I don’t blame anyone for not wanting to be a police officer because it’s an incredibly dangerous job and the American people have done nothing to mitigate that danger. Thousands of shootings and shooting deaths are two of the prices we pay for the right of easy access to firearms. You can debate the merits of that choice, but it is a choice and it has measurable consequences.

  7. 9

    Bill

    @Nanny: They don’t try to legislate away any problem. They are simply not letting any crisis go to waste and using them as excuses to erode more personal liberties.

  8. 11

    retire05

    Like the Economist, Tom seems to like to spin and twist actual facts. His link states:

    The explanation for this gap is simple. In Britain, guns are rare. Only specialist firearms officers carry them; and criminals rarely have access to them. The last time a British police officer was killed by a firearm on duty was in 2012, in a brutal case in Manchester. The annual number of murders by shooting is typically less than 50.

    But what it doesn’t talk about is the fact that gun crime is rapidly on the rise in Great Britain. Although the British like to claim the high ground, where Bobbies traditionally did not carry weapons, that ground seems to be eroding under their feet. The last report coming out of Great Britain that I can find reads:

    “The latest Government figures show that the total number of firearm offences in England and Wales has increased from 5,209 in 1998/99 to 9,865 last year – a rise of 89 per cent.

    In some parts of the country, the number of offences has increased more than five-fold.

    In eighteen police areas, gun crime at least doubled.

    The statistic will fuel fears that the police are struggling to contain gang-related violence, in which the carrying of a firearm has become increasingly common place.

    Last week, police in London revealed they had begun carrying out armed patrols on some streets.

    The move means officers armed with sub-machine guns are engaged in routine policing for the first time.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1223193/Culture-violence-Gun-crime-goes-89-decade.html#ixzz3Kt7y9Wdu

    The Economist, which Tom uses as fact, also said:

    In America, by contrast, it is hardly surprising that cops resort to their weapons more frequently. In 2013, 30 cops were shot and killed—just a fraction of the 9,000 or so murders using guns that happen each year.

    9.000 or so? The Economist is too stupid to check the FBI website and get actual numbers? So let’s see what the FBI actually says: of the 8,454 murders committed using fire arm in the U.S. in 2013, of those murders, 3005 were white victims and 2,491 were black. Of those white murders, 2,509 were committed by other whites, and 409 were committed by blacks. On the other side of the coin, of the 2,491 murders of blacks, 189 were committed by whites and 2,491 were committed by other blacks. To put it in clear terms, blacks are killing blacks and over twice as many whites were killed by blacks as were blacks killed by whites.

    Now to the recent narrative that cops are killing blacks with impunity; in 2012, police killed 123 blacks but killed two and a half times more whites with the number of whites being killed by the police at 326.

    Toms says:

    The Right wants to pretend that this is a “black thing”, but if you look at the facts, it’s actually a gun thing. We have chosen to live in a violent society with a gun culture that has zero tolerance for any attempts to decrease the dangers posed to police by the millions of guns in America.

    Take a look at the numbers provided by the FBI. Blacks being murdered IS a “black thing” which is proven just by the numbers. And it is cultural; the same culture that saw three black teens and a teen Hispanic bludgeon to death a Bosnian immigrant with hammers in St. Louis recently. It is the same culture that caused the deaths of Channon Christian and Christoper Newsom. It is the same culture that caused the death of a Vietnamese refugee in St. Louis by black teens playing the “knock out” game, which also happened in St. Louis.

    Tom has no excuse for not knowing these statistics. It is simply that he is another “hate whitey” radical that wants to blame whites for the denigration of the black community where kids who are smart and study in order to get out of the ghetto created by Democrats is labeled “acting white.” He wants to ignore black rap that glorifies gang activity and degrades women by calling them “hoes”.

    Whites are not going into black neighborhoods and dealing drugs. Whites are not going into black neighborhoods and killing small children in drive by shootings.

  9. 12

    Bobachek

    Perhaps for the next 60 days the police need to stop responding to calls from the neighborhoods that are filled with cop haters and see how that works out for them.
    When somebody is breaking into their home they can call the local gang bangers and see how quickly they respond.

  10. 13

    Tom

    @retire05:

    The latest Government figures show that the total number of firearm offences in England and Wales has increased from 5,209 in 1998/99 to 9,865 last year – a rise of 89 per cent.

    The point of this statement is … what? It doesn’t dispute any of the facts I’ve provided. Is your point that things are getting worse in England and that’s a good thing?

    What is a firearm offense in England and Wales? Can one walk into a Starbucks with an AR-15 in England like in many places in America? Apples and oranges. And even with infinitely more permissive firearm laws in the US the number of US offenses still dwarfs offenses in England. Again, what is your point?

    To put it in clear terms, blacks are killing blacks and over twice as many whites were killed by blacks as were blacks killed by whites.

    That’s “clear”? No, what’s clear is that murder tends to be a crime of proximity and opportunity, which is proven out by the fact that most black are murdered by blacks and most whites are murdered by whites.

    By the way, what the hell does this have to do with the fact that British police only fired their weapons three times last year? Is this senile babbling related in any way?

    Take a look at the numbers provided by the FBI. Blacks being murdered IS a “black thing” which is proven just by the numbers.

    Only if the vast majority of whites being murdered by whites is a “white thing”.

    And it is cultural….the denigration of the black community ….the ghetto …. black rap…. gang activity…. “hoes”….black neighborhoods….dealing drugs….drive by shootings.

    Annnnd more racist babbling. Thank you for your response to my post. Or I should say, thank you for ignoring or being intellectually unable to grasp the point of my post, but feeling compelled to respond anyway with more of your tired, canned racism. Very enlightening.

  11. 14

    Bill

    @Tom:

    The Right wants to pretend that this is a “black thing”, but if you look at the facts, it’s actually a gun thing. We have chosen to live in a violent society with a gun culture that has zero tolerance for any attempts to decrease the dangers posed to police by the millions of guns in America.

    If it is a “gun thing”, then why, at a time when more guns are legally owned by more Americans than ever before, is violent crime and violent crime with guns decreasing? Take the murders that occur in depressed, poverty stricken, left wing enclaves out of the statistics and the level of violence improves even more. If it is not a “black thing”, how is four blacks killing a white couple with claw hammers for being white explained? Guns? What is the explanation for blacks beating a white woman to steal her phone? What causes a gang of blacks to kill a white military veteran for his wallet? Is it a gun thing when a black man beheads a white woman? What causes blacks to kill a white Australian kid because they didn’t have anything else to do?

    Americans are different from other people. Perhaps we are inherently more violent and perhaps that can be bred out over time (as racism is, despite the best efforts of people like Sharpton, Holder and Obama), but our human nature cannot be compared to the human nature of other nations. For, while we many be more prone to violence, we are also more productive, more generous, more courageous and more industrious.

    Guns are not the problem. Thinking one has the right to take what someone else has earned is.

    The point of this statement is … what? It doesn’t dispute any of the facts I’ve provided. Is your point that things are getting worse in England and that’s a good thing?

    The point of that would be that, just as more guns does not necessarily mean more crime (less, in fact), fewer or no guns does not necessarily mean less crime (it means a disarmed public).

  12. 15

    Nanny

    @Bill: Terrific point.
    We left CA without realizing how used to gun violence we had become.
    There were ”drive-by shootings,” in our own community.
    There were lots of gang bangers with guns and shots heard in the night many nights.

    We moved to Utah where about 50% of the population has concealed carry licenses and anyone can openly carry.
    Over 80% of the adult population have at least one gun in their home.
    But crime is pretty rare.
    And hearing a gun go off has not happened in the whole time we’ve been here.

  13. 16

    retire05

    @Tom:

    You are a lame debater.

    Yes, the US has more gun related crimes than the UK. We also have four times the population. Duh! And no, British cops are not shooting people in great numbers. Obviously you have never been to Great Britain or you would know that most British cops (Bobbies) are not armed to begin with.

    But your Economist article was as disingenuous as you are because it did not discuss the major cause of death among black men; other black men. It was giving limited facts to promote an agenda. And maybe you would like to give an example of anyone walking into Starbucks with a legally owned AR-15 shooting anybody. Apples and oranges, indeed

    White people are not parenting black children. White teachers are not teaching black kids in black schools. Whites are not dealing drugs in black communities and whites are not going into black neighborhoods committing drive-by shootings killing black children. And in everyone of those major cities where there is a high black crime rate, they are run by Democrat city officials, Democrat school board members, etc. Ignore that all you want, but that, too, is pure statistics. But three black teens and a Hispanic teen went into a solidly white neighborhood in St. Louis and beat a Bosnian immigrant to death with hammers. Where is your comment on that?

    And it is cultural….the denigration of the black community ….the ghetto …. black rap…. gang activity…. “hoes”….black neighborhoods….dealing drugs….drive by shootings.

    Annnnd more racist babbling. Thank you for your response to my post. Or I should say, thank you for ignoring or being intellectually unable to grasp the point of my post, but feeling compelled to respond anyway with more of your tired, canned racism. Very enlightening.

    Do you think it goes unnoticed that when you have no response to facts, you resort to your old, tired and lame canards by calling people you don’t even know “racist?” That card is so dog eared that it is of no use anymore.

    But thank for showing that you remain the joke you always have been.

  14. 17

    Tom

    @Bill:

    If it is not a “black thing”, how is four blacks killing a white couple with claw hammers for being white explained? Guns? What is the explanation for blacks beating a white woman to steal her phone? What causes a gang of blacks to kill a white military veteran for his wallet? Is it a gun thing when a black man beheads a white woman? What causes blacks to kill a white Australian kid because they didn’t have anything else to do?

    Are we going to go through all 14,000 murders that occurred last year, or only the one’s you’ve cherry picked to make your point? The crime statistics don’t support your theory. The vast majority of white victims of violence are victimized at the hands of other whites.

    The point of that would be that, just as more guns does not necessarily mean more crime (less, in fact), fewer or no guns does not necessarily mean less crime (it means a disarmed public).

    My comment addressed the police shooting of civilians and what precipitates the high instance in America versus other industrialized nations. Are you seriously stating that the number of police shootings in the United States vs. England has no connection to the incredible disparity of number of firearms? Please explain then why English cops only fired their guns three times last year. I would like to hear your theory on that.

    You want to pretend that having over 300 million non-military firearms in America has no impact on violence, on the safety of police officers and civilians, that’s your choice. Try to argue that using facts. And by the way, I have taken no position on gun laws in this discussion. I’m just trying to establish the obvious consequences of making this an unfettered right. If people could drive without needing a drivers licence, and they could drive cars that weren’t regulated by the Federal Government, would roads we more or less safe? It’s not worth it for me to try and have a rational debate with a zealot who doesn’t understand obvious cause and effect. Is that you, Bill?

  15. 18

    Tom

    @retire05:

    Yes, the US has more gun related crimes than the UK. We also have four times the population. Duh!

    Are you incapable of correcting for population? Just multiply the UK stats by six and tell me how that works out for you.

    nd no, British cops are not shooting people in great numbers. Obviously you have never been to Great Britain or you would know that most British cops (Bobbies) are not armed to begin with.

    I wonder if that has anything to do with British criminals not having easy access to guns?

    And can I just graciously say, you truly are the opposite of a lame debater. You’re quite generous in fact. It’s almost like you step in every cow pile in the range on purpose.

    Do you think it goes unnoticed that when you have no response to facts, you resort to your old, tired and lame canards by calling people you don’t even know “racist?

    Racist cliches aren’t “facts”. But they are racist.

  16. 19

    retire05

    @Tom:

    nd no, British cops are not shooting people in great numbers. Obviously you have never been to Great Britain or you would know that most British cops (Bobbies) are not armed to begin with.

    I wonder if that has anything to do with British criminals not having easy access to guns?

    “The latest Government figures show that the total number of firearm offences in England and Wales has increased from 5,209 in 1998/99 to 9,865 last year – a rise of 89 per cent.”

    An offense is a criminal act, dimwit. Obviously, criminals ARE getting access to firearms in England and Wales or there would not have been 9,865 OFFENCES (criminal acts) in 2009, the last year Great Britain reported on it. And not being shot by a British cop has a lot to do with the fact that many Bobbies are not armed. Period. But I realize that someone like you wouldn’t know about other nations because you don’t seem to have the intellect to be able to get out of your own county.

    And can I just graciously say, you truly are the opposite of a lame debater. You’re quite generous in fact. It’s almost like you step in every cow pile in the range on purpose.

    ROTFLMAO. That is the best you can come up with, Mr. White Person Hater?

    Come back when you can debate, with any credibility, that you think fire arm regulation has decreased the amount of gun related crimes in Great Britain, because I’m sure you think you are smarter than the Brits that report it is.

    Again, Tom, are you a black man, or just a self loathing white man?

  17. 20

    Tom

    @retire

    Come back when you can debate, with any credibility, that you think fire arm regulation has decreased the amount of gun related crimes in Great Britain,

    Interesting, considering I never made that claim. Dishonesty or confusion? Always tough to tell with you.

  18. 21

    retire05

    @Tom:

    Then what was your point in referencing Great Britain? Your reference is one that anti-2nd Amendment radicals (like yourself) usually use when trying to argue against our right to KEEP and BEAR arms. Was that not the general concept you were trying to impart?

    I suspect you are so used to spreading your own manure to those who are also on the left that you get no resistance to your faux facts.

    And I’m still waiting for you to tell us if you are a black man, or just a self loathing white guy. I guess by refusing to answer that you are ashamed of who you are. Don’t be ashamed of your skin tone, Tom. Be ashamed that you are a brain damaged liberal.

  19. 22

    Bill

    @Tom: But, Tom… do any of the heinous, vicious crimes I cited involve guns? You on the left only cry about gun crimes and, apparently, only when committed by white people. Observe the case of Eric Garner; why is there no violent protest over that no-indictment? Because there is no media hype stirring up the ignorant masses. Why no media interest?

    No gun.

    Now, there probably will be violence; already Al, Eric and Barack (the Moe, Larry and Curley of racism) are busy getting the crowd stirred up, but if police violence against innocent blacks, why do all these concerned citizens need prompting to riot and loot? Obama has already instructed to “keep the pressure on”; what’s the hold up?

    No gun.

  20. 23

    Tom

    @retire05:

    And I’m still waiting for you to tell us if you are a black man, or just a self loathing white guy.

    What does my race have to do with my objective opinion? Oh, I see, you’re white and you think it’s possible I’m betraying “the team” because I don’t always side against black people in every discussion and brutally wholesale criticize them as a race like you do. You are a hoot. Your entire mindset is a curious antique to me, a sad remnant of a far gone world.

  21. 24

    Nanny

    Legalizing some ”petty” crimes might be the answer.
    Possession of pot is no longer a crime, and many arrests are not being made anymore because of it.
    But in NY, just DAYS before Eric Garner’s death, the city’s highest-ranking uniformed cop, Philip Banks, issued an order to crack down on loosie sales, made by tough new penalties in January 2014.
    Add to that, New York Mayor DeBlasio wanted to make large sodas illegal, too!
    Seems this guy had been arrested for ”loosie” sales over 10 times!
    So, round up the usual suspects.

    And what did Eric Garner say when police surrounded him THIS TIME?

    “Every time you see me you want to arrest me, I’m tired of this, this stops today…I didn’t do nothing…I’m minding my business, officer…”

    Hmm…..
    Then what did he do?
    He started waving his arms around so he could not be cuffed.

    His pre-existing conditions are what killed him, along with his resistance of police trying to arrest him for a penalty-type crime.
    Garner did not die of asphyxiation.
    There was no damage to Garner’s windpipe or neck bones.
    If it was true that this man couldn’t walk a block without taking a rest afterward, why on earth did he pick a fight with police?
    Maybe because that 1st cop was so tiny.

  22. 25

    retire05

    @Tom:

    What does my race have to do with my objective opinion?

    A lot of people see life through the prism of their skin tone, i.e. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Barack Obama, and it appears, you. If that is not the case with you, then correct the impression you impart.

    Oh, I see, you’re white and you think it’s possible I’m betraying “the team” because I don’t always side against black people in every discussion and brutally wholesale criticize them as a race like you do.

    And you know my racial heritage how? Because you assume that if I don’t suffer from some form of white guilt and don’t buy into the whole “but, but……… slavery” meme that I must be white?

    You are a hoot. Your entire mindset is a curious antique to me, a sad remnant of a far gone world.

    I’m glad you find my humorous. As to my mindset, it is reality. After 150 years since abolition, blacks are, generally speaking, losing ground. Quest for an education? Rejected. In tact families with both parents raising children? Rejected. Learning how to speak English? Rejected. Personal responsibility? Rejected. Slavery didn’t destroy the modern black community. Democrats who passed LBJs Great Society did. And any black person who speaks out about the destruction of the black community, as a whole, is ridiculed and labeled an “Uncle Tom” or “Aunt Jemimah” by the CBC, NAACP or other black groups.

    But then, how do you keep blacks on Uncle Sam’s plantation once they realize that getting an education, not doing drugs, not having children out of wedlock is their ticket out of the government controlled ghettos? As long as the black community continues to produce street thugs, those that escape the abortionist’s scalpel, they will always be slaves to the government. And they can thank the black Democrats that perpetrate that continued disaster.

    Black America needs true leaders. Leaders like Dr. King, not poverty pimps like Al Sharpton who has created more racial friction than any other person in America, well, except for that criminal, Louis Farrakhan who should be in jail. Al gets rich and blacks continue to destroy their own under his guiding hand.

  23. 26

    Nanny

    Obama touts respect for the ”rule of law” which would negate all demonstrations against all Grand Jury decisions.
    But then he doesn’t enforce his words with actions.
    So, his under-the-bus ex-constituency (black Americans) join anarchists, Occupiers, commies and radical Islamists to oppose lawful Grand jury decisions.
    I wonder why Obama goads these activities on?
    Is he angling for some consequence down the road?

  24. 27

    retire05

    @Nanny:

    Is he angling for some consequence down the road?

    Of course. The Democrats already have a lock on the black vote (thanks to FDR, who was a segregationist) but not on the Hispanic vote, although Hispanics, who support big government, tend to vote Democrat.

    So the game plan becomes obvious; throw unemployed blacks under the bus assuming they will continue to vote Democrat and have the AG continue to oppose Voter I.D. laws. How else do you get all those newly minted, via E.O., “residents” on the voter registration rolls.

    Under educated blacks, as well as Hispanics, used to be able to count on entry level jobs in the trades. They could work their way up from helper, to apprentice to journeyman where they made a decent salary and could support their families. Those jobs have now been taken by illegals who are willing to work for a lot less while they live 5-10 to an apartment and send a good portion of their earnings back to their home land.

    Obama’s EO on illegals is not lost on some black Americans who realize it will make it harder for young or under educated blacks to find jobs. It doesn’t matter if our economy gets better to those who are being cut out of the job market. Remember what LBJ said when he signed the ERA. The same philosophy applies now to Hispanics with Obama’s EO guaranteeing that Hispanics will vote Democrat for generations.

    Blacks should not be marching on Ferguson City Hall or in Times Square. They should be marching on the White House that just threw them under the political bus.

  25. 29

    Bill

    @Rich+Wheeler: To be more specific, all kept in poverty by liberal social engineering policies tend to vote for their meal ticket. Hispanics who achieve independence from the government yoke are more split.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *