I guess it's ok being he is half a brother. :rolleyes:
How low can he go?
Pretty classless as usual, but he's allowed. He considers himself "black."
I'll bet he will regret saying it. It's on tape now, in the public domain forever.
The halfbreed saying nigger?
Hilarious.
Which side said nigger, his white, or black half?
Quote from: Solar on June 23, 2015, 04:29:27 AM
Which side said nigger, his white, or black half?
Left out a part didn't you? He's part something else yet to be determined for sure. :unsure:
http://reason.com/archives/2002/12/18/dixiecrats-triumphant
Quote from: kit saginaw on June 22, 2015, 08:08:17 PM
I'll bet he will regret saying it. It's on tape now, in the public domain forever.
I can see some TV spots using the word to punctuate other clips of other Dems being the racist trash they are. God knows there are enough to go around.
Maybe the GOP can remind folks how progressive Woodrow Wilson was the real racist in the White House, and that Dems openly supported "Birth of a Nation" and all that film entailed. Or how Dems opposed Civil Rights legislation.
Here ya go, history fans. What happens when left-wing academic-crazies become President.
http://reason.com/archives/2002/12/18/dixiecrats-triumphant
Quote from: keyboarder on June 23, 2015, 04:55:36 AM
Left out a part didn't you? He's part something else yet to be determined for sure. :unsure:
Ass Hole is not a race. :biggrin:
A black family I knew used the N word towards black people they didn't like.
Why should he regret it. He has absolutely no historical connection to the N-word. His mother was white, his father Kenyan. though he is forever taking advantage of it, Obama has absolutely no connection to the black American experience. He was raised in Indonesia and highly multiracial Hawaii; yet he continually acts as if he were a victim of the Jim Crow South. Solid bullshit, from the top of his empty head, to the tips of his toes!
Quote from: mdgiles on June 23, 2015, 09:11:05 AM
Why should he regret it. He has absolutely no historical connection to the N-word. His mother was white, his father Kenyan. though he is forever taking advantage of it, Obama has absolutely no connection to the black American experience. He was raised in Indonesia and highly multiracial Hawaii; yet he continually acts as if he were a victim of the Jim Crow South. Solid bullshit, from the top of his empty head, to the tips of his toes!
:thumbsup:
I'm watching a real class act unfold right before my eye's.
Quote from: mdgiles on June 23, 2015, 09:11:05 AM
Why should he regret it. He has absolutely no historical connection to the N-word. His mother was white, his father Kenyan. though he is forever taking advantage of it, Obama has absolutely no connection to the black American experience. He was raised in Indonesia and highly multiracial Hawaii; yet he continually acts as if he were a victim of the Jim Crow South. Solid bullshit, from the top of his empty head, to the tips of his toes!
Excellent post!!! :thumbsup:
Quote from: mdgiles on June 23, 2015, 09:11:05 AM
Why should he regret it. He has absolutely no historical connection to the N-word. His mother was white, his father Kenyan. though he is forever taking advantage of it, Obama has absolutely no connection to the black American experience. He was raised in Indonesia and highly multiracial Hawaii; yet he continually acts as if he were a victim of the Jim Crow South. Solid bullshit, from the top of his empty head, to the tips of his toes!
Thank you, my thoughts exactly. Even the way he phrased it, with zero emotion. That is because he has no connection to the word or the way it is used.
Interesting side note here.
A while back I saw the Mel Brooks' classic "Blazing Saddles" on AMC. They did not edit the "N" word. However, they did edit the "F" word. (Not the "F" word you are thinking of, the six letter "F" word!)
Such language is beneath the dignity of any President but then this guy is not a real President he's a sock puppet.
Quote from: walkstall on June 22, 2015, 06:48:48 PM
I guess it's ok being he is half a brother. :rolleyes:
How low can he go?
Number one, free speech exists to protect speech, especially when it's hateful speech like using the N-word, or the
Westboro baptist cultists for example.
Number Two, Obama is not half a brother. His mother is white/caucasian.
That means Obama's mitochondrial
DNA is caucasian as well, which means that technically, genetically he's as white as they come. In fact I'd say he's as white as I myself am, but I"m half
Cherokee, Smokey Mountain band, so he's not even as "white" as I am. LOL But yeah, if it's ok for him to use that word, then far as I am concerned, while it is a hateful term, it's just as A-0k for one of us to use that word too then.
If it's not ok for us, then it's not ok for him either. That said, the fact he would use that word, and is totally unapologetic for doing so.
Also is yet, another example, like that of Cambridge, Ferguson, and Baltimore of the absolute racism of this President.
Racism which given who his "pastor" of twenty years was, and given the so called "black liberation theology" of James
Cone which Obama sat listening too Wright preach for over twenty years. It shouldn't surprise anyone at all, that Obama is as racist, and racially devisive as it gets. In fact he's every bit as racist as Jim Crow laws, and the KKK of the Democrat party southerners was/are/is.
I like it! Obama goes all Dolemite!
Quote from: daidalos on June 23, 2015, 06:48:28 PM
It shouldn't surprise anyone at all, that Obama is as racist, and racially divisive as it gets. In fact he's every bit as racist as Jim Crow laws, and the KKK of the Democrat party southerners was/are/is.
Ain't it funny, how time slips away.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/429207.Murder_In_Brentwood
Directing your attention to the readers' comments.
Mark Fuhrman was "set up"? As I recall the Simpson team used his own words against him.
Quote from: mdgiles on June 24, 2015, 07:03:12 AM
Mark Fuhrman was "set up". As I recall the Simpson team used his own words against him.
With the high dollar attorneys it is all about creating a "gotcha" moment.
Ditzy jurists are easy prey.
Quote from: kroz on June 24, 2015, 07:07:21 AM
With the high dollar attorneys it is all about creating a "gotcha" moment.
Ditzy jurists are easy prey.
"High dollar attorneys"? Is that when the defendant gets to use at least half the resources the state is using to convict them? There is something wrong with people who resent the fact that the defendant has a good attorney. And having served on a few juries, including one for attempted murder, I've found that the "dizzy jurists" are the ones who accept whatever the prosecution says without thinking about it.
Quote from: mdgiles on June 24, 2015, 07:31:41 AM
"High dollar attorneys"? Is that when the defendant gets to use at least half the resources the state is using to convict them? There is something wrong with people who resent the fact that the defendant has a good attorney. And having served on a few juries, including one for attempted murder, I've found that the "dizzy jurists" are the ones who accept whatever the prosecution says without thinking about it.
A "good attorney" should seek after truth not manipulation to get his client off the hook.
I realize that an attorney is suppose to help their clients. However, it is wrong for an attorney to help free someone he knows is guilty.
We have lost sight of the real purpose of legal justice when we resort to manipulation to get our way.
Unfortunately "truth" is not the goal.
Leftists resent the public defenders, saying they aren't getting the resources that the prosecutors are (or won't devote the energies to getting someone off). They complain if a rich guy gets off (and Simpson wasn't exactly broke). But they didn't complain when he got let off, and Johnny Cockroach became the go-to shyster of the stars.
Quote from: kroz on June 24, 2015, 07:40:40 AM
A "good attorney" should seek after truth not manipulation to get his client off the hook.
I realize that an attorney is suppose to help their clients. However, it is wrong for an attorney to help free someone he knows is guilty.
We have lost sight of the real purpose of legal justice when we resort to manipulation to get our way.
Unfortunately "truth" is not the goal.
A good attorney refutes whatever evidence the prosecution brings. Contrary to what some people like to believe, they did that - often with the assistance of the LAPD/LADA office. Also one of the duties of the defense attorney is to destroy the credibility of the prosecution witnesses - which they did with Fuhrman using his own words. As for truth being the object, what irritates you about the Simpson trial is that it didn't have the outcome you desired.
Quote from: quiller on June 24, 2015, 08:04:25 AM
Leftists resent the public defenders, saying they aren't getting the resources that the prosecutors are (or won't devote the energies to getting someone off). They complain if a rich guy gets off (and Simpson wasn't exactly broke). But they didn't complain when he got let off, and Johnny Cockroach became the go-to shyster of the stars.
Actually Kardashian was the go to shyster for the stars; but he wanted to make a deal with the prosecution and Simpson wanted to be defended so he was demoted and Cochrane brought in. What many people forget - or don't know - is that Cochrane used to work for the LADA office, specifically he handle allegations brought against police officers. So he knew every officer in the department who was the least bit shady, so he had had run ins with Fuhrman before, and it didn't take much for him to realize that Fuhrman was a racist, and simply look for the evidence.
Uh huh. Pitch "racist cop" to a jury already inclined to let off that feetball hero, no matter what, because O.J. lived in Brentwood, not Watts. I wonder what he paid the evidence-locker people to shrink that glove before the trial. As you say, he knew every crooked cop on the force!
I'm not a liberal, but I do resent the "jurists" we have today. Because like it or not, there are all kinds of cops out there, who really shouldn't be cops. They are because they're on a power trip, and feel a narcissistic need to lord over their fellow citizens. This is why we have cops that do things like arrest someone for "rioting" because the person was waiting on a cab to leave McD's for example. Illegality, and "manipulation" of the legal system, refusal to uphold and enforce what the laws actually state, is wrong anyway one looks at it. And that "problem" has led to lots, and lots of innocent folks being imprisoned. Like this guy...which the State refuses to compensate, after imprisoning him wrongfully for most of his life.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/22/ex-prosecutor-apologizes-wrongfully-convicted-man/25183319/
Quote from: quiller on June 24, 2015, 08:26:40 AM
Uh huh. Pitch "racist cop" to a jury already inclined to let off that feetball hero, no matter what, because O.J. lived in Brentwood, not Watts. I wonder what he paid the evidence-locker people to shrink that glove before the trial. As you say, he knew every crooked cop on the force!
And maybe people also forget the lie detector test that O.J. was taking for Attorney Dershowitz (I think) and Cochrane shut it down immediately when he saw what was happening. O.J. wanted the test because he thought he was smart enough to pass it.
Cochrane obviously knew he wasn't.... and shut it down. Dershowitz was no longer on the case!
My point is that "truth" was irrelevant to the defense team.
Quote from: quiller on June 24, 2015, 08:26:40 AM
Uh huh. Pitch "racist cop" to a jury already inclined to let off that feetball hero, no matter what, because O.J. lived in Brentwood, not Watts. I wonder what he paid the evidence-locker people to shrink that glove before the trial. As you say, he knew every crooked cop on the force!
He didn't pay them anything, like most football players he has really large hands. You see football players fling a ball halfway down a field, catch it one handed, or carry it tucked under an arm with one hand, and you don't realize the obvious. You don't realize how big they are until you see them talking to some normal sized reporter on the sidelines. What I find fascinating is that we've seen corruption scandals, evidence fixing scandals and outright murder by the police, and still there are people out there that demand we accept anything they say as gospel truth. Now that's insane!
You can bet your sweet bippie that the cops are protecting themselves after being accused of BS. They are the law so get over it.
Quote from: quiller on June 24, 2015, 08:26:40 AM
Uh huh. Pitch "racist cop" to a jury already inclined to let off that feetball hero, no matter what, because O.J. lived in Brentwood, not Watts. I wonder what he paid the evidence-locker people to shrink that glove before the trial. As you say, he knew every crooked cop on the force!
IOW, a jury with mainly black members would never find a black sports hero guilty. Of course the obverse of that would be that a white jury would always find a black sports hero guilty. Or were you too silly to realize exactly what you were saying. Of course black juries send black people to jail all the time; but if they don't send them to jail in high profile cases - even with slipshod evidence - then something must be "wrong".
Quote from: mdgiles on June 24, 2015, 01:03:12 PM
IOW, a jury with mainly black members would never find a black sports hero guilty. Of course the obverse of that would be that a white jury would always find a black sports hero guilty. Or were you too silly to realize exactly what you were saying. Of course black juries send black people to jail all the time; but if they don't send them to jail in high profile cases - even with slipshod evidence - then something must be "wrong".
Nicole's blood spatters all over O.J.'s socks was slipshod evidence?
Quote from: kroz on June 24, 2015, 08:41:06 AM
And maybe people also forget the lie detector test that O.J. was taking for Attorney Dershowitz (I think) and Cochrane shut it down immediately when he saw what was happening. O.J. wanted the test because he thought he was smart enough to pass it.
Cochrane obviously knew he wasn't.... and shut it down. Dershowitz was no longer on the case!
My point is that "truth" was irrelevant to the defense team.
Oj took the test, not realizing that the mention of the woman he had be married toad had children by would OF COURSE cause an emotional reaction, which is what lie detectors purport to detect; and why they aren't allowed into court as evidence. Only a psychopath wouldn't have a reaction to the brutal death of someone they once were close to. You people are so desperate to find him guilty, you are willing to believe anything no matter how ridiculous. BTW, ANY attorney will stop any questioning of his client by the police. http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=never+answer+the+police&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=FA84B3FAD2000F47781DFA84B3FAD2000F47781D
Quote from: darroll on June 24, 2015, 11:36:36 AM
You can bet your sweet bippie that the cops are protecting themselves after being accused of BS. They are the law so get over it.
They are not THE law. They are there to uphold the law. You forget that we now live in the era of the cell phone camera. So now we can actually catch photos of police misbehavior. Because no matter how often we see that misbehavior, there are still stupid fucks out there who believe that the police are above reproach.
If I was a cop and someone told me that I was not the law,
I would bust his/their head.
Quote from: darroll on June 24, 2015, 04:28:08 PM
If I was a cop and someone told me that I was not the law,
I would bust his/their head.
Why??
Obama is the main reason the racial divide is as bad as it is.
Quote from: mdgiles on June 24, 2015, 01:18:04 PM
They are not THE law. They are there to uphold the law. You forget that we now live in the era of the cell phone camera. So now we can actually catch photos of police misbehavior. Because no matter how often we see that misbehavior, there are still stupid fucks out there who believe that the police are above reproach.
Maybe in the old west, when the only law was the sheriff, but today?
God knows, I wish this was the old west, where govt was something Easterners had to contend with.
Quote from: darroll on June 24, 2015, 04:28:08 PM
If I was a cop and someone told me that I was not the law,
I would bust his/their head.
Which would pretty much prove that person's point.
:rolleyes:
Unfortuanately, there are far too many cops (and judges) who think exactly the same way you do.
Quote from: walkstall on June 24, 2015, 04:32:37 PM
Why??
Let show a little respect for our law enforcement people. They are the only law we have. If your nice to them (most) they will return the favor. That little cop that gave me a ticket threw the book at me... And I was nice... But we need the law.
If a cop is not the law, Is he\she a plumber?
Quote from: darroll on June 25, 2015, 10:53:22 AM
Let show a little respect for our law enforcement people. They are the only law we have. If your nice to them (most) they will return the favor. That little cop that gave me a ticket threw the book at me... And I was nice... But we need the law.
If a cop is not the law, Is he\she a plumber?
Just because someone said I was not the law does not give me the right to bust their heads. You use force when needed. Being nice does not always get you off the hook.
Quote from: kroz on June 24, 2015, 01:11:42 PM
Nicole's blood spatters all over O.J.'s socks was slipshod evidence?
You mean the socks the LAPD's own film show them to be nowhere near where they were supposedly found? IOW we should accept that oddly placed evidence isn't odd in some other way? How about that blood being on the inside of socks but not on the outside when Simpson's leg was supposedly in them? Did the blood go through his leg? and it goes on and on like that.
Quote from: Solar on June 24, 2015, 05:13:57 PM
Maybe in the old west, when the only law was the sheriff, but today?
God knows, I wish this was the old west, where govt was something Easterners had to contend with.
You mean the old West where they lynched people because of their reputation? Or where cattle barons hired gunmen to murder homesteaders. As for being free of gov't, in the Old West people lived in the very arms of the government. From the land the government gave them, to the army that drove the Native Americans off of it - and killed them if they came back, to the subsidized railroads which brought people out to settle the land.
Quote from: mdgiles on June 25, 2015, 01:29:35 PM
You mean the old West where they lynched people because of their reputation? Or where cattle barons hired gunmen to murder homesteaders. As for being free of gov't, in the Old West people lived in the very arms of the government. From the land the government gave them, to the army that drove the Native Americans off of it - and killed them if they came back, to the subsidized railroads which brought people out to settle the land.
Yep, that's the one. Regardless of the ass holes that existed during that time, you were still free of govt far more than you are today.
Screw the cities and towns, I'd have been in the outback trapping and hunting for a living. FREE!
Quote from: darroll on June 24, 2015, 11:36:36 AM
You can bet your sweet bippie that the cops are protecting themselves after being accused of BS. They are the law so get over it.
And that'st he problem. A fundamental misunderstanding of the role of police. Contrary to your statement no, the cops are NOT THE LAW. The people of the United States, are. It is the people who hold the political power in the U.S., and it is the people who create the laws, as the sovereigns in this nation. The cops are the people we pay, to enforce those laws.
So get over it, and stop affording a position to police, they never have, and never were intended to hold in our nation.
Cops arn't the law?
He stole my chickens, call the law.
The cops comes out and has the guy return the chickens and cart his butt to jail.
I don't get the comment.
Quote from: darroll on June 27, 2015, 11:15:06 AM
Cops arn't the law?
He stole my chickens, call the law.
The cops comes out and has the guy return the chickens and cart his butt to jail.
I don't get the comment.
Now just WHO made that law in your area. Cops
enforce the laws, just like some judges. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
They don't make the laws unless they are on the supreme court like they do now. Need I say more. :tounge:
The state, county, cities make the laws.
It's still up to the cop to decide what law was broken.
The cop could of made the guy give back the guys chickens
and just got his butt chewed.
I still would not question a cops authority as he will de-horn you quickly.
I don't regret saying it either.....in appropriate circumstances mind you!
Quote from: Montanamike on June 27, 2015, 03:57:32 PM
I don't regret saying it either.....in appropriate circumstances mind you!
There are whites and there are white trash, there are blacks and there are black trash. My father took me out in the woodshed after saying the N word as a very young kid. The woodshed was always full of knowledge too live by. The woodshed was not always a bad place for knowledge as some words he would not use in front of mom, he was just that way. You should not go back to the woodshed for the same thing. :ohmy:
Quote from: Montanamike on June 27, 2015, 03:57:32 PM
I don't regret saying it either.....in appropriate circumstances mind you!
There is never an appropriate circumstance, and if blacks themselves ever stop using it, a little self-respect might follow.
I hope this is not too controversial a thing to say, but the problems are compounded by misdirected leadership on both sides. Extreme black leadership -- and make no mistake, this is what we have -- is convinced the way to raise the black is to tear down the white. Conservative black leadership takes the opposite position, as does conservative white. To further complicate the issue, leftist whites have discovered lucrative careers based on exploiting the racial divide, aggravating it.
It manifests in whiners and wise-crackers like the Rev, and psychopaths such as Louis. The behavior we see in the cities is nothing more complicated than pillaging. The blacks and the politicians who exploit them are possessed to take more territory. Once the territory has been taken, do they work to create a prosperous black community? No. They just create another no-go zone. They are locked into a mindset that must change before real progress will be possible.
Quote from: darroll on June 27, 2015, 03:01:22 PM
The state, county, cities make the laws.
It's still up to the cop to decide what law was broken.
The cop could of made the guy give back the guys chickens
and just got his butt chewed.
I still would not question a cops authority as he will de-horn you quickly.
You are forgetting something... It is called the presumption of innocence. Unless the cop actually saw the law being broken he can only act in accordance with a legal warrant, or an official complaint. Even then, all suspects are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
If the cop forces the guy to give you the chickens, he might actually be involving himself in a criminal act! (After all, you might have lied about the guy stealing your chickens!)
That is why we have a court system!
a white person uses it everyone freaks out about it, a black person uses it everybody freaks out about it. lets say we all man up and not give a shit about a word and get back to work.
Quote from: darroll on June 27, 2015, 03:01:22 PM
The state, county, cities make the laws.
It's still up to the cop to decide what law was broken.
The cop could of made the guy give back the guys chickens
and just got his butt chewed.
I still would not question a cops authority as he will de-horn you quickly.
I agree, as exlaw enforcement, the officer is literally, judge, jury and hangman.
He makes the initial decision on how the incident is percieved by the judge and potential jury, all by how the report is written, or he can simply ignore the law and decide on the merits of the facts at hand, and tell them to get a life and get over it and quit acting like idiots.
I have predetermined the final outcome based on how, and what I wrote in my report.
Even when the evidence weighed poorly against the accused, sometimes the officer is privy to past circumstances that would never be seen in court, so as an officer of the "LAW" my opinion carries far more weight as the final arbiter.
Yes, the officer is the "LAW".
Quote from: Solar on July 02, 2015, 10:26:32 AM
I agree, as exlaw enforcement, the officer is literally, judge, jury and hangman.
He makes the initial decision on how the incident is percieved by the judge and potential jury, all by how the report is written, or he can simply ignore the law and decide on the merits of the facts at hand, and tell them to get a life and get over it and quit acting like idiots.
I have predetermined the final outcome based on how, and what I wrote in my report.
Even when the evidence weighed poorly against the accused, sometimes the officer is privy to past circumstances that would never be seen in court, so as an officer of the "LAW" my opinion carries far more weight as the final arbiter.
Yes, the officer is the "LAW".
Not criticizing you personally as you had to work in the system as it exists, not as it was meant to be.
But, I"m pretty sure that is not what our founders had in mind. I know they were extremely fearful of a Federal police force.
Quote from: Darth Fife on July 02, 2015, 10:30:43 AM
Not criticizing you personally as you had to work in the system as it exists, not as it was meant to be.
But, I"m pretty sure that is not what our founders had in mind. I know they were extremely fearful of a Federal police force.
Actually it's exactly what they had in mind.
Liberty is only as free as the law enforced.
Many times I would have denied justice, tax payers hard earned money as well as caused loss of freedom of the true victim, had I followed the letter of the law.
I preferred to take the human approach when dealing with a black and white law.
EG. stupid cop syndrome/govt robot. Man races to hospital with dying wife.
Wife dies regardless, cop sites man for speeding on an empty freeway. Was justice really served?
Hell no, and that's not what the law was designed for, but that's how it's written, and only an idiot automaton would enforce it in that case.
Here's another example of not following the letter of the law. My hat is off to this DA.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fstory%2Fnews%2Fnation%2F2015%2F06%2F19%2Fda-seeks-drop-mercy-killing-murder-charge-nevada%2F29019813%2F&ei=rXeVVdTfCYTnoATnkrfgAg&usg=AFQjCNF0S4ev--bPGkXCdHUeS3nB7I6Mwg&bvm=bv.96952980,d.cGU