At first blush, it looks like few people know which side The Constitution is on.

Again this comes down to toeing the party line. The right picks and chooses the parts that they agree with, and so does the left. Me, I'm on neither side of the line, when it comes to voting, all you can do is hold your nose and vote for the one you think can do the least harm to the world.

 

So because she was black she is wrong?

She actually looked a shade of reddish brown to me. The story bubbled up from the slime because of her skin color, gender and total stupidity around children. The odds of it making any news traction if she was a male white nut job is close to zero in the current BLM news spin.

She was claiming she was being lead poisoned, and in the end, she was right ~

 

in the end, she was right ~

(Chuckle) It's been nearly 60 years since my grandfather told me, "The cemeteries are full of people that were right."
He wasn't talking about jumping up and down stupid in front of the police, but the advice is still wise.

 

Finding a party and candidate on the side of the Constitution may be a challenge,

That's interesting. "the less overtly feral" of the two. I've been wondering which of them is less likely to blow up the world. The Washington Post says the, "vulgar Neanderthal" is less likely because nobody trusts him. Can Congress still reign in the President?

ps, I still don't know whether reading The Constitution makes me right, left, or terrorist.

 

Finding a party and candidate on the side of the Constitution may be a challenge...

Supposedly, there is one:

http://www.constitutionparty.com/

(Ed. note: I know nothing about this party. I just heard of them in passing.)

 

Justice is best served cold.

http://bluelivesmatter.blue/new-black-panthers-leader-robbed-calls-police/

Those people aren't stupid. They are against the police only because they are protected by police. If you let them live in the cesspool of their own making, they cry like a baby.

 

If you want to compare your thoughts on the issues with the five candidates, visit this website.

 

Blah Blah. Listen/Read this.

 

Blah Blah. Listen/Read this.

Yes. These are the kind of upstanding individuals that should be better integrated into civil society. Diversity, for it's own sake, makes everything oh so much better.

 

Yes. These are the kind of upstanding individuals that should be better integrated into civil society. Diversity, for it's own sake, makes everything oh so much better.

Nah the gun mentality has them already beat.

 

Yes. These are the kind of upstanding individuals that should be better integrated into civil society. Diversity, for it's own sake, makes everything oh so much better.

I, for once, can read through your sarcasm. And find that very much to my chagrin, I have to agree with you. Diversity is not, and should not, be a valid governmental goal for its own sake. Diversity should be accepted and/or embraced by the individual only if he/she wishes it, and not be imposed by a paternalistic state. I do agree with a government that fights discrimination in all of its forms, but not in one that shoves inept individuals down our throats simply because they belong to a minority.

Don't get me wrong, I love to meet and talk and be friends with different people of different races and colors and nationalities and schools of thought. But I also think that those individuals should earn their position in society if they want to improve their way of life, and not simply demand special treatment because of their minority status.

Hell, I should know, I belong to a minority.

 

Hell, I should know, I belong to a minority.

So do I. A minority of 1.

 

Hell, I should know, I belong to a minority.

Under the right metric, I'm a minority. That includes wages, race, ethnic, age, gender.

 

I said earlier in the thread that in today's society, anyone demanding equality, as MLK did, would be called a racist. Here is an example of that: http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=7920

In its current form, the USA is one of the most openly racist society I have seen.

 

When you give people power, over other people. It gets ugly. Republicans=guilty,Democrats=guilty,Liberals=Guilty...

To hell with anyone which wants to be in charge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

 

Just watched "Jack Reacher" the other night, and a quote reminded me of this thread:

There are three things cops never do. They don't vote Democrat, they don't drive Cadillacs, and they never use personal vehicles.

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...hed-torched-after-police-kill-suspect-n630236

Violence and protests erupted in Milwaukee overnight after a man was fatally shot by police during a foot chase.

Police said the victim, 23, was armed with a handgun and shot dead by an officer after fleeing a traffic stop on Milwaukee's north side Saturday afternoon.

Hours later angry crowds took to the streets, smashing a police car and setting fire to another. One officer was injured by a flying brick; a gas station and auto-parts store were set alight. Police said gunshots were heard.
...
Police said the man shot had a "lengthy arrest record" and was carrying a semiautomatic handgun reported stolen in a burglary in Waukesha in March.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/call-for-calm-milwaukee-violent-protests-police-shooting/

MILWAUKEE - Simmering anger over the fatal shooting of a man by police erupted in violence on Milwaukee's north side, with protesters skirmishing with officers over several hours and setting fire to at least four businesses in an outburst the mayor says was fed by social media.

The violent protests appear to be part of the tension between minority communities and police officers that has boiled over in recent months.

The police shoot an armed career criminal doing crime and then you riot?

 

According to your first link:
The suspect was both running away and shot in the chest.
The police say the man was armed.
The LEO had a body camera, but only the police know where the video is.
Looks like it's going to be another long, "investigation".

Immediately following the shooting residents gathered and began to ask police for answers. As the video below shows, however, they were met with silence and riot gear.
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/sheriff-protesters-natl-guard-amid-protests/

 

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-08-14-17-37-31

 

According to your first link:
The suspect was both running away and shot in the chest.
The police say the man was armed.
The LEO had a body camera, but only the police know where the video is.
Looks like it's going to be another long, "investigation".

Immediately following the shooting residents gathered and began to ask police for answers. As the video below shows, however, they were met with silence and riot gear.
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/sheriff-protesters-natl-guard-amid-protests/

Authorities almost never release anything immediately following any incident -- and that's not all that unreasonable. Perhaps the police (and others) need to find out what the answers are and so aren't in a position to give anyone immediately following the event. How many times have we seen information given out early on turn out to be wrong and then take on a life of its own?