Search the Community

Dropped off some paperwork at the DMV for our fleet guy last week. Pulled in right behind a brand new Dodge Journey that had an expired temp tag registered to a 1998 Honda. Black guy on the phone sitting in the driver's seat. Might as well have not seen it at all. I'm a half year from getting vested. ***** that. Sure hope that car didn't get into any accidents later on because it definitely wasn't inspected or insured. *Posted from a church parking lot with lots of shade

Lot of simps in this thread. Shameful. As soon as this manipulative shrew managed to get one of her eggs fused with one of his sperm this man was in a no-win scenario. The law doesn’t favor him. The criminal justice system doesn’t favor him. The family court system doesn’t favor him. He probably had to put up with escalating abuse for years before a cop would ever consider seeing him as a victim (look up the Duluth model). Luckily he was able to get himself bloodied up in a non-life threatening manner and apparently there’s some video evidence too. Could he have stopped this sort of ***** way back when? Maybe. But the reality is the system is so twisted now that if he flexes an ounce of “self-respect” as its mentioned upthread there are lines and lines of simps, “counselors,” judges, and cops all trained to label him an abuser and enable her further manipulation of him by holding custody of his kid over his head. This man needs compassion, not a bunch of black pill platitudes.

I don't vote, and if I did I wouldn't vote for traitors. That said, the fact that Republicans are so snowblind they can't see what's right in front of them is why they're going to lose the White House this November. What exactly do you think is "winning" about this strategy? Do you think "never Hillary" voters give a ***** about whether Joe is a racist or not? Or black people, for that matter? Is pushing for a 2% increase in black Trump voters really the way to win this election? Let's be honest about it: Joe is right, black folks vote as a solid block. Black folks are why Prop 8 got passed in California and 90+% of them reliably vote blue every four years. Trying to win over a few of them is NOT how Trump can retain the WH in 2020. It just isn't. The only thing about this election that's more feeble than Joe Biden is the RNC's strategy to keep him out of Washington.

That’s exactly what they’re telling you. It’s called ethnonarcissism. If black supremacism was as verboten as white supremacism on the internet there would be no black people on twitter.

Somewhat related: there's a poll out there conducted by gallup and, later, the AP that has asked black folks how well they think they're treated in their communities relative to white folks sporadically over the last 60 years. The percentage of black folks who think they're treated just as well as whites in their communities was lower in 2018 than it was in 1963. For those of you that are mathematically challenged, 1963 was one year BEFORE the civil rights act was passed. Objectively speaking, this cannot be a reflection of reality as it actually is.

This is only a "racist cops" problem if race was actually the cause of this. But there's a compelling reason to believe it isn't. Rob briefly referenced this but there's good reason to believe that differences in police use of force by race is better explained by differences in crime rate by race. See table 12 (PDF warning!) https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf The NCVS excludes homicide since you can't exactly survey homicide victims. But the Justice Department's 2011 report is striking. See table 1 (PDF warning, again) https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf Not to mention that 38% of police officers that are feloniously killed are killed by black people. https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018/tables/table-42.xls If you accept the very reasonable premise that deadly force is most likely to be used by police when an officer either responds to a call involving violent crime or is, him/herself, the victim of a violent crime, then this becomes a very different discussion.

Indeed. 90% of interracial violence between blacks and whites is black on white.

Of the 1000 people killed by police officers every year, an extremely small fraction of those are unjustified. Daunte Wright is one of about five black men who get killed without justification by a police officer per year. Basically the odds of being struck by lightning. It's impossible to "do better" in this regard. It's down to the level of a freakish act of nature. And yet it's the core justification for overturning the way our criminal justice system works. The "progressive" movement isn't one of science or facts - it's one of emotional manipulation. Which is why it's working. When local police are abolished or defunded, they won't be replaced by social workers. This is a bait and switch. Local police will be replaced by national goon squads that bully normal people over what we would consider trivial stuff. This is what the progressive movement actually wants, because local police and sheriff's departments are some of the last institutions that wield violence outside of the national regime's control. The regime doesn't actually want to prevent police shootings, they want to employ them against their chosen targets.

Black is the other popular finish.

I laughed pretty good at me as a golf coach. The situation is somewhat reversed, but it still applies. I don't deny that adverse life circumstances can affect standardized test scores. I deny the idea that these factors affect all people in the same, measurable way. We can throw statistics around all we want but growing up poor and going to a high school with no AP curriculum doesn't bring the same amount of "adversity" to each person, just like being ugly or pretty doesn't affect everyone the same way. Kids of the same age can grow up next door to each other, each in a four person family that includes a single mom who is chronically unemployed, and not experience the same amount of "adversity." Yet according to the chart in the article they would receive the same "adversity score." The other issue with this is that it's really just a preening virtue signal from College Board. Colleges can ignore it if they want, they can use it if they want, but at the end of the day it has no effect on your actual combined SAT score (similar to the writing portion they added some time ago), just like it won't have any effect on your ability to do well in college. Colleges also already have ways of capturing this information in their application process (like they capture writing ability with the admissions essay). College Board doesn't care if a poor black child gets into Harvard, they care about their image in our hyper-PC culture. If they cared that much, they'd give away their SAT prep books by the dozens at "undermatching" high schools. One's math and reading scores on the SAT and one's ability to do well at university both come down to three things, in my estimation: brain power, willingness to prepare/put in the work, and quality of previous education. Exactly one of these is up to the student. Sucks to suck, life isn't fair; but adversity, measurable or not, doesn't prepare you for the academic rigor of higher education, and it certainly doesn't prepare you to pay off the massive debt that comes after you flunk out.

Well if you're going to claim it's Ian Fleming's character then no, Bond can't be black. And yeah can you imagine a 6'3" 250lb black dude trying to be inconspicuous in, say, St. Petersburg? Reminds me of that old joke about the CIA agent in Moscow: A CIA agent is arrested in Moscow and charged with spying. The agent is fluent in Russian and has had years of specialized training on how to blend in with the Russian people. he's the perfect sleeper agent. Down in the darkest dungeons beneath Kremlin the Russian Secret Service (FSS) begin their interrogation. "We know you are American, spy Pig. Admit it!" "How can you say that? I speak Russian like a Muscovite, I am Russian." "You are lying, Spy Pig. We know you are a Yankee dog. Admit it" The Agent pulls a copy of Pushkin from his jacket pocket and begins to read aloud. Within minutes the guards are weeping with joy at how beautifully the poetry is read. "You see, only a Russian can read Pushkin like this", said the agent. "You lie, Spy Pig, I know you are an American, confess". The agent calls one the of the guards to play Kalinka on his balalaika. The agent leaps on to the table a dances a Russian folk dance whilst singing. The guards clap and cheer having seldom seen such a perfect performance. "You see no one can sing the most loved song in Russia like this if you are not a Russian." "You lie Yankee snail pig. I know you are an American". The agent calls of 6 bottles of Siberian vodka and over the next hour drinks them all finally smashing his glass on the table. "No one drinks vodka like a Russian and I am a Russian" Impressed the FSS agent claps his hands slowly. "You are good Yankee Pig poo, very good, but I know you are not Russian and now you die". The CIA agent slumps in his seat knowing he is defeated. "Tell me one thing, how did you know? I am highly trained can speak, read Pushkin, sing and dance and drink like a Russian. My cover was perfect. How did you know I am an American?" "It was easy Yankee man, we have no Blacks in Russia" The Bond films started going downhill once the USSR was no longer a thing.

What is causing Fields to drop down draft charts and why is it racism? https://web.archive.org/web/20210426170952if_/https://theundefeated.com/features/justin-fields-and-the-double-standard-of-black-quarterback-prospects-nfl-draft/

Stephen A is out for views and clicks, just like the rest of them. Which is demonstrated by TO calling Kellerman more black than Stephen A on national TV

What’s interesting is that the media is more concerned with a member of the royal family (which had a black person in it before) possibly being racist than a member of the royal family definitely being a pedophile. But I suppose that’s a feature, not a bug.

Just like leftists (black and tranny worship), “conservatives” have their own purity test in the US.

Blacks don’t have a right or claim on those folks’ resources. There is no “right” to share a city with Whites. The first quarter of this year Baton Rouge tracked a homicide rate of 68 per 100,000 adjusted for a full year. Much higher than most banana republics and third world nations run by street gangs. Would you want the children of these maniacs in the same halls and classrooms as your kids?

Meanwhile there are multi million dollar nonprofits set up just to get blacks off of death row on technicalities. They know they're guilty but they do it anyway. This guy was stopped by highwaymen and exercised his self-defense rights long held to be unassailable by every common law nation on the planet.

See this thread is hilarious because billstime itself would be clutching its pearls if any of these "people" (especially the blacks that conveniently have no photos in the posts) were publicly hanged for their crimes, meanwhile every single opponent of immigration I personally know would be glad to tie the noose.

Would now be the time to make the requisite joke of you becoming acquainted with said criminals during your law school classes? The largest, and most visible, Asian street gangs are Chinese and typically operate with the blessing, if not as a direct extension of, the ChiCom government. Though ABZ, which is mixed SEAsians, has been pushing into more northeast territory. From what I understand there are some small Korean and Hmong gangs on the west coast. The statistics on this are pretty stark and tend to surprise people because interracial violence, in general, tends to be hidden from view (except in the case where a black guy is killed by or near a white police officer). But yes, pointing out the disparities there, I've been told, is racist. Subtle woke more correct moment, I suppose.

I don’t mind black people. I think they have a right to their ancestral home. Which is more than you can say for whites.

White leftists almost invariably have the same view on the blacks as scumbags have on their pit bulls: beloved pets who never do anything wrong unless provoked by a “systemic” narrative that cuts against them. White “conservatives” have a similar view but just express it in different ways, like the constant demonization of “white women” as the reason why Biden was elected. It is demonstrably false but it’s the only regime-approved way to attack the left’s rainbow coalition.

Someone recently responded to a reply I posted in the thread about Murderin' Marcellus, expressing disbelief and consternation at the notion that the concept of "anti-racism" is essentially a set of lies. While I am unsurprised that this particular board member embraces the aforementioned concept, I thought it would be useful for those who might find themselves aligned with conservative values of various stripes to understand what is actually meant by the term, and why opposing it is good and right. Whenever we critically approach what leftists claim is obvious or reasonable (when in fact it is neither), it is important to understand how the term was generated (that is, its genealogy, so to speak) and how it has been framed. Conservatives are generally bad at recognizing leftist framing and have readily adopted quite a bit of leftist language into their talking points, which concedes at least some portion of the leftist worldview. For a primer on framing, you can go here, but the tl;dr is that certain concepts or words have been designed through their construction and/or through priming to elicit an emotional response. In this case, you have been primed to believe that "racism" is wrong and evil (in fact, you may have heard that it's America's first and greatest sin). Therefore, you have been primed to believe that anything that is against racism must be right and good. The naming of the leftist concepts discussed below as "anti-racism" (aka "against racism") is thus a frame job designed to elicit positive emotions before you even know what the term actually means. To demolish the leftist frame and address the ideas hiding underneath them, you must trace the idea back to its source, consider the source, and consider whether adopting the idea has resulted in our country, or your life, being better or worse as a result. "Anti-" is just a prefix, so we first should examine the genealogy of the term "racism" and how it entered western consciousness, then focus on how once the people were thoroughly primed to recoil at even the mention of "racism," "anti-racist" was adopted by leftist agitators as a frame for their ideas that you would unwittingly accept simply because it's anti- that emotion you felt at the mention of "racism." The term "racism" is much younger than you probably think. First instance of the term in English is from the early 20th century, but both the common usage and modern understanding of racism began in the 1930s with the translation from German of Magnus Hirschfeld's book titled Racism. First, considering the source: Magnus Hirschfeld was a 19th/20th century jewish "sexologist" who (in)famously founded the "Institute of Sexual Research" in Weimar-era Berlin. This so-called institute facilitated the first "sex change" surgeries in Europe and helped drive the depravity of Weimar Berlin. For those not in the know Luigi Barzini describes that time like this: In short, like every other "pioneer" of modern gender or sexual theory, Hirschfeld is tied through his own words and works to some combination of genital mutilation and/or pedophilia. How many ideas of his should we really be adopting? It is worth noting further that though Hirschfeld's work was essentially the genesis of the modern understanding of the term "racism," its usage is fairly small until, big surprise here, the mid-1960s, when known communist agitators who worked tirelessly to begin the transformation of the United States from a proper nation to a failed state experienced their highest concentration of major successes (you can see the ngram here). Then came the add-ons: now there's structural racism, institutional racism, internalized racism, etc. all of which consist almost entirely (at first in academic circles, now in the mainstream) of circularly reasoned blood libel against Whites. In fact, research shows that Whites in America have the lowest in-group preference of any racial group. White animus toward a racial group simply as a result of their race as a problem, if it ever actually was a problem, fizzled out long ago. Black animus towards Whites, on the other hand, is quite a different story, as the interracial murder stats tell us year after year. Which brings us back to "anti-racism." Wikipedia will attempt to tell you that the roots of it go back to the 17th Century, though that is impossible given that words have meanings and the term "racism" hadn't even been invented yet. Mainstream sources will also gloss over the direct statements of those who actually theorize around anti-racism, instead priming you to believe that it simply is the reasonable response to the made-up sins of the various racisms. The term anti-racist was actually coined by the Black Panther Party (Leninist by admission) during the aforementioned 1960s, whose stated demands included that zero black people should ever be held responsible for crimes they may commit. Anti-racism for Whites includes the idea that Whites "must acknowledge and understand their privilege" (blood libel) and recognize that our entire society is, in fact, "White supremacist." It also includes the idea that any system, test, or other objective measure that has unequal racial outcomes (that is, that blacks do poorly in) is by definition racist (evil!!!). Therefore anytime Whites do well, it's due to racism, it's Whitey's fault, etc. meanwhile black underperformance can never be the fault of blacks (remember, crime stats are racist, IQ tests are racist, the SATs are racist, etc.). The system that "anti-racists" wish to design is one in which Whites have no authority, but all of the responsibility. Which is a succinct definition of slavery. Is this what we should want for our children? In other words, stop calling leftists "the real racists." Instead you should reject, categorically, terms imported by communists that your ancestors did just fine without. And laugh at them when they call you names invented their intellectual heroes (sodomites who liked to chop off genitals and ***** little boys).

Oklahoma parole board members include: Mental health counselor Episcopal (that is, apostate from Christianity) "Bishop" Criminal defense attorney Social worker lol, lmao The lefty worship of black murderers would be funny if it wasn't civilizational suicide.

Heritage black Americans should receive the same treatment and benefits as heritage whites under the law. That figure includes zero Haitians.

I can’t really speak to Trump’s genealogy, but ethnic Germans can be seen as cousins of sorts to the ethnic Americans in general. They assimilate just fine and have intermarried quite a lot with the old American stock. Again, ignorance of the history of the early laws of this country with respect to immigration especially is no friend. I’ve spoken to the heritage black Americans already in this very thread. If you can’t be bothered to read just say so and have done with it.