What could black conservatives do to earn therespectof black America

[DEAD7]

for the last time, i dont affiliate with any political party

Fair enough, but for what it worth, I never resort to name calling or personal attacks. That's childish IMHO.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

was just a question, i havent disagreed with anything posted thus far in this thread.

Strange question given the timing, post you quoted and general context

You dont actually care about conservatism... you are just a troll. Which is fine, but at least be good at it. When nikkas who dont get emotional actually get to the root of your bullshyt you back down, and you throw shots with vague language to try and fake an air of impartiality. Youre not fooling anybody.

"Conservatism" is indefensible because its philosophies are rooted in racism and those who claim to practice it really don't. U should come up with your own ideology and follow that, instead of hiding behind conservatism

 

[DEAD7]

Strange question given the timing, post you quoted and general context

You dont actually care about conservatism... you are just a troll. Which is fine, but at least be good at it. When nikkas who dont get emotional actually get to the root of your bullshyt you back down, and you throw shots with vague language to try and fake an air of impartiality. Youre not fooling anybody.

"Conservatism" is indefensible because its philosophies are rooted in racism and those who claim to practice it really don't. U should come up with your own ideology and follow that, instead of hiding behind conservatism

I dont subscribe to your vision of conservatism, which makes it impossible for me to defend it.


I'm not even disagreeing with you niqqas!
In fact I agree with liberals on damn near every social issue!




Must be carry over from my free market fanaticism.

 

[The Real]

In fact I agree with liberals on damn near every social issue!

I believe this, but I think you give people a skewed impression, since you never discuss any of those social issues in the many relevant threads on those subjects. You're never part of any of the debates about race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, or what have you. If you only post contrarian stuff on economics or political philosophy, it leads people to think you are either a hard Right dude or a troll.

 

[DEAD7]

I believe this, but I think you give people a skewed impression, since you never discuss any of those social issues in the many relevant threads on those subjects. You're never part of any of the debates about race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, or what have you. If you only post contrarian stuff on economics or political philosophy, it leads people to think you are either a hard Right dude or a troll.

TBH I'm not that interested in issues that we all agree on

I mean what is the truly to gain from patting each other on the back or reinforcing what we already believe to be true?
I'd rather debate and have a notion/theory of mine proven wrong and corrected.

I enter every thread hoping to not only disagree, but to be the dumbest guy in the room(if you will). That means there is an opportunity to learn something.

besides the religious threads are where the real trolling goes on IMHO.

 

[The Real]

TBH I'm not that interested in issues that we all agree on

I mean what is the truly to gain from patting each other on the back or reinforcing what we already believe to be true?
I'd rather debate and have a notion/theory of mine proven wrong and corrected.

I enter every thread hoping to not only disagree, but to be the dumbest guy in the room(if you will). That means there is an opportunity to learn something.

besides the religious threads are where the real trolling goes on IMHO.

Sure, I can understand that, but tbh, on things like women's issues or homosexuality, there are always lots of clash here. It's definitely not an echo chamber.

 

[bigDeeOT]

so you endorse stalking teenagers that walk to the store at night.

There had been multiple robberies in the area. All described as young black males. I think five robberies by young black males. You would have been on the look out too.

But that's not even the point. It doesn't matter if zimmerman was stalking trayvon martin. Even if zimmerman was stalking him for no good reason. At the end of the day, if trayvon martin threw the first punch, zimmerman can rightfully claim he shot him in selfdefense. And you can't say he threw the first punch because he was startled because we already know they were having a peaceful conversation seconds before they got into a scuffle.

 

[The Real]

There had been multiple robberies in the area. All described as young black males. I think five robberies by young black males. You would have been on the look out too.

But that's not even the point. It doesn't matter if zimmerman was stalking trayvon martin. Even if zimmerman was stalking him for no good reason. At the end of the day, if trayvon martin threw the first punch, zimmerman can rightfully claim he shot him in selfdefense. And you can't say he threw the first punch because he was startled because we already know they were having a peaceful conversation seconds before they got into a scuffle.

That's not how self-defense works. You have to prove your life was in danger. If someone punches me in the face, shooting them back would not count as self-defense if my life wasn't in danger. It would still be a crime on my part.

 

[bigDeeOT]

That's not how self-defense works. You have to prove your life was in danger. If someone punches me in the face, shooting them back would not count as self-defense if my life wasn't in danger. It would still be a crime on my part.

Trayvon martin was on top of zimmerman wailing on his head. We know this because that's what the forensic evidence shows. The forensic evidence showed that because there was a can of tea in trayvon's hoodie, if he was bent over like zimmerman claimed he was, then the can of tea would pull the hoodie farther away from his chest than if trayvon was laying flat on the ground.

From there, the bullet leaves a different pattern as it rips through the hoodie depending on whether the hoodie was close or far away from the skin. This was the leading forensic bullet analysis in the world so you can't really dispute it.

Edit: And just to be clear. If you're getting wailed on like that you can safely assume your life is in danger.

 

[bigDeeOT]

there's so much tripe in that post it's hard to know where to start. first off in the south (you know the part of the country with the highest population of blacks) almost every single one of these states has a white republican governor. so why aren't those republican governors doing more to prove they are better for blacks???

Well two things now.
1. You got to look at how the political game is played. There's no reason for republicans to "prove they are better for blacks" because blacks haven't done anything for them. When you want things done in politics, you gotta give something yourself. And here, that means the vote. Blacks vote 93%+ for democrats in every major election and its been that way for a long time.

If blacs organized themselves and asked what could the republicans do for them, I guarantee you they would come back with substantial answers to benefit blacks. Now you may not like those answers because they would go against the philosophy you're accustomed to, but they WILL bring something to the table if they believe you will vote for them. Why would they do this? Because the world revolves around money. Getting into office means more money for a lot of people. So if taking care of blacks is going to get them office, you can be damn sure they're gonna do it, even if they are in fact racist.

But this will only happen if we organize. The general consensus right now is that republicans are racists towards blacks. The republicans know how blacks feel about them so they see how futile it would be to reach out to them. They're not gonna do shyt unless blacks show they are willing to listen.

Look at what the gays did for barack obama. At first he wasn't talking about gay marriage, but then they organized and he started to support them. Same for women and same for hispanics. Now what is barack obama doing for black people? Absolutely nothing because he doesn't give a damn about black people and he laughs his ass off every night because he knows he will get the black vote no matter what he does.

2. As I said, look up the mayor for these cities. It's a democrat. What are they doing for these poor blacks? Absolutely nothing.

many of the issues you brought up blacks suffering from, these are economic and social issues and we know where the gop stands on economic and social issues....bootstraps aka sink or swim.

I could go up to a homeless person and say here let me fish for you, OR, I can teach you how to fish and if you don't wanna learn well then sink or swim. What do you think makes more sense?

Let me ask you this. If giving handouts is the way to go, then why have blacks been on the decline ever since the advent of the great society? If that's such a good strategy, why is it not working anywhere? Violence has gone up. Half of all murderers in this country are black. Out of wedlock birthrate is 70%. Kids dropping out of highschool left and right. All due to broken families and people are subsidized to have a broken family under the welfare state.

what is the white republican party saying? they know they're not going to get many black votes so why make an effort to address their issues in the gop platform anyway. they're not anti-black, but they're indifferent or don't care about issues that affect us.

And that's my whole point. If we actually organized and showed we were willing to support the republican party they would certainly sit down at the table with us. Right now, they won't sit down with us because every black person is convinced republicans are racists.

bullsh1t. in the south, local and state representatives are held accountable for addressing and fighting for issues that impact the black community. they have had some level of success as well.

If they're held accountable how come every city with a high population of blacks in such a bad condition. The democrats run every single one of these black cities and you can't even name ONE that can be held to a standard of what others should look up to.

 

[bigDeeOT]

You smear the poor, but you trade in lazy, worthless thinking, for any sort of worthwhile analytic on our socio-economic American system, and ways to improve. Perfect GOP mind. You fancy yourself as so much better than poor people you ridicule, but you're not much smarter or talented than many on a lower economic strata. You're just luckier. Your contributions here prove it again and again.

Where did I smear the poor?

When I said "You're so caught up on policy to help the poor, you subsidize people's poor decision making."I was not being insensitive to the poor. What I mean is that these liberal policies subsidize people making decisions that lead to them perpetually being poor. Welfare needs to be reformed. We need to formulate ways to get people on track to a stable life. This means creating jobs and showing people the value in education.

As a country we funnel our tax coffers into the military industrial complex to the point where our budget dwarfs all other nations COMBINED. As a country, we cant have a rational conversation on shaving a sliver of that money pit off, and investing more into our communities because of the dehumanized essentialism monkeys like you project on the people who are born with the least and have to deal with the most. Any study worth a sht will tell you that STIMULATION begets success...not deprivation.

You're gonna have to dumb this down for me. I don't understand what you're talking about. It sounds like you're saying we need to throw more money at people?

What is so patently absurd about all of this is that republican big shots, and big business, dont even mean what they suggest. They dont want to end great societal programs. Ending those programs would cause anarchy --- we dont have enough jobs to go around as is, so what happens if we introduce millions of desperate people into the workforce? Spiking crime, and having people dying in the streets of starvation would not be good for the marketplace, and our standing among world leaders my friend. The GOP being a subsidiary of corporate america understands this. Providing the poor with basic sustenance keeps things stable, and the engine moving.

Ok. I would argue for welfare reform, not shutting it down anyway.

No, they have simply racial resented their way to prosperity. They scapegoat blacks, and squeeze the poor, but their ultimate goal has been extracting the wealth from the middle class, and keeping U.S economic gains moving vertically. All economic measures of income and wealth distribution since the Reagan Revolution has shown that business has been good w/ respect to robbing American labor from its productivity. That is the complete extent of their policy and social initiatives. Thanks for your continued slavery on the republican plantation!

I've only just recently within the past year started entertaining ideas from republican philosophy so I'm definitely not a slave to them.

 

[The Real]

Trayvon martin was on top of zimmerman wailing on his head. We know this because that's what the forensic evidence shows. The forensic evidence showed that because there was a can of tea in trayvon's hoodie, if he was bent over like zimmerman claimed he was, then the can of tea would pull the hoodie farther away from his chest than if trayvon was laying flat on the ground.

From there, the bullet leaves a different pattern as it rips through the hoodie depending on whether the hoodie was close or far away from the skin. This was the leading forensic bullet analysis in the world so you can't really dispute it.

Edit: And just to be clear. If you're getting wailed on like that you can safely assume your life is in danger.

Yes, but danger is defined differently than just actual, immediate danger in law. Otherwise, I could just run up to you, provoke you deliberately, then shoot you when you respond, and call it self-defense, which would essentially license free anarchy and murder. There's a commitment to diffusion and escape built in to the legal definition of self-defense. Zimmerman did not meet that commitment.

 

[bigDeeOT]

Yes, but danger is defined differently than just actual, immediate danger in law. Otherwise, I could just run up to you, provoke you deliberately, then shoot you when you respond, and call it self-defense, which would essentially license free anarchy and murder. There's a commitment to diffusion and escape built in to the legal definition of self-defense. Zimmerman did not meet that commitment.

How can zimmerman diffuse or escape when trayvon was on top of him?

 

[The Real]

How can zimmerman diffuse or escape when trayvon was on top of him?

Again, you're talking about immediate danger. The commitment to diffusing or escaping necessarily involves a judgment of what led to the situation of immediate danger. Hypothetically: if I run up to you, spit on you, insult you, issue verbal threats, then start pushing you around, then we start fighting, regardless of who threw the first punch, and instead of running or trying to fall back or diffuse the situation, I purposefully escalate the situation to the point where you've got me on the ground and are on top of me, punching me repeatedly, then I shoot you, that is not legally an issue of self-defense, because I had many chances to diffuse or escape before things got to that point, and I did not take them.

So the question of the legitimacy of Zimmerman's "self-defense" centers on his behavior prior to that moment when he could allegedly no longer escape without shooting.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Or maybe its because if you're a black conservative you necessarily have the brass to form your own opinion instead of acquiescing to the group think mentality of other blacks. And yes, that does take a lot of brass because when you're black and have views that don't go along with popular opinion, you're ostracized and labeled a sellout.

Notice the strong rhetoric here
"which clashed violently with the constituency of black americans, and the opinions of the nation."

You try very hard to emphasize the importance of popular opinion. That's what the modern day negroe does. He can't engage in any intellectual debate like during the trayvon martin fiasco. It was as simple as this. If you go against the popular opinion of all black people, you're either a racist or a sell out. It's a very easy way to evade having to actually address an issue.

Nothing about that observation was brilliant. Its just what you negroes want to hear time and time again to fit your narrative of victimhood.

This is a pretty knee-jerk diatribe that's off-base by a mile. What NBW was referring to, was this thread...http://www.thecoli.com/threads/why-...nservative-in-the-media-pro-zimmerman.155336/

The observation was that these black "conservatives" all followed the pro-Zimmerman right wing script, and there's nothing inherently conservative about doing so in terms of ideology, thus it reinforces the claim that political "conservatism" for the past 50 or so years has been steeped in anti-black sentiment and narratives.

They were uniformly pro-Zimmerman, but they weren't just simply making the legal case that the evidence didn't warrant a conviction. They were often spouting the right wing narrative of demonizing Trayvon Martin, and expressed far more outrage about the reaction of Obama, the NAACP, Al Sharpton, etc. and black people in general than they were the fact that we have a legal system that allows a 17 year black kid to get profiled, stalked and killed with no penance for the perpetrator. What part of conservatism is that?

It's funny that you're talking about these guys not acquiescing to groupthink, when that's exactly what the did, just not the groupthink you're referring to. This monolithic black conservative reaction to the Trayvon situation is a perfect example of how political conservatism is intertwined with racial resentment toward blacks (and others). But you were too eager to dress down the lack of intellectual capacity of "the modern day negro" to step back and see that.

And get the fukk out of here with this shyt about it taking "brass" to be a black conservative. It doesn't take anything to be a paid shill nourishing white male angst with a black face.