The madness of Fergerson

[Turtle]

Are you saying that the testimony of the single "defendant" was so overwhelming that all the other witnesses and physical evidence that went before the grand jury were rendered insignificant?

LOL No, I'm not saying that at all. But thanks for clearing up my wonder. Clearly you think a grand jury proceeding is similar to that of a trial by jury, where evidence from both sides are presented and a verdict is reached. That's not even remotely close to what it is. (It's what this circus of a grand jury turned out to be, though. More on that below.)

Imagine the DA and a few prosecuting attorneys meeting in a room and asking themselves whether or not they have enough evidence, or probable cause, to bring charges (an indictment) against a potential criminal defendant. They don't discuss whether they have enough evidence to win, just whether they have enough evidence to justify a trial. At this meeting there in no defense attorney, no judge. A grand jury proceeding is exactly the same thing, it merely formalizes the process. There are usually no attorneys there except the prosecutor, there is no judge in the room. Witnesses are not even allowed to have legal council in the room. Evidence that isn't even admissible in court, like hearsay, rumor and innuendo, no matter how prejudicial, can be presented to the grand jury. The grand jury is strictly a tool of the prosecution. If the grand jury votes to not indict, the prosecution can still bring charges, anyway, if they think they have a case they can win. The grand jury is often a valuable test run for prosecutors in making the decision in bringing the case to trial. It not only lets them see how strong their case is likely to be, but also how certain jurors are likely to react to different evidence, and how those jurors are likely to vote at trial, not to mention which types of jurors should be accepted and excused from a trial jury.

Because a grand jury is a tool of the prosecution, and the deck is so heavily stacked for the prosecution (the defense doesn't even get to play), that's why it's so easy for the prosecution to get an indictment out of a grand jury. If they want one. If the prosecution doesn't get an indictment, it's because they didn't want one. In this case, they didn't want one, but the prosecutor didn't want to go on record saying he wasn't going to bring the case, as he's already got a reputation of being really soft on prosecuting cops. So, he punted the blame to the grand jury, a tool which he controls and operates.

It was spelled out in excruciating detail that the prosecutor couldn't prove a case against Officer Wilson.

Yep. Unprecedented excruciating detail, because he needed to CYA in unprecedented fashion.

It's amazing to me that so many people buy into this mantra of "white policeman shoots unarmed teenager"; that's total horsecr*p!

Like I've said before, the response to this isn't about Brown, Wilson or Ferguson, nor is it about the mantra of "white policeman shoots unarmed teenager." It's about the mantra of "Yet another African-American dead at the hands of a white cop. And nothing will be done about it. Just watch."

Brown was a 6'4" 282 lbs fleeing felon that verbally threatened and then physically attacked a police officer. Have you ever stood next to someone that size - the size of an average NFL defensive lineman??? This guy was a violent criminal whose judgement was likely impaired by the influence of drugs and an attitude that nobody would mess with him because he was big and black. Turns out that he was just young and stupid - and now dead because of his indoctrination into a culture that glorifies aggressive criminal behavior and promotes racism towards white people. All Brown had to do was say "OK officer", move to the sidewalk and none of this would have happened.

Yes, he was big, and black, therefore scary, scary enough to justify killing him. And that's why people think nothing will be done about it, because nothing ever is. Many people, closet racists in particular, have a great need to zoom in on these incidents and keep them self-contained in a fishbowl, saying things like blacks merely commit more crimes and it's a culture thing. They ignore or refuse to accept that outside the fishbowl there is a systemic disparity in how blacks are treated by law enforcement in this country. They ignore the fact that, while not specifically enumerated in the Constitution, the Constitution screams the right to be left alone, that the Bill of Rights are a tailored to that purpose, and that blacks are not generally afforded that right.

I do wonder if we'll ever get the breakdown of the grand jury vote, as to the vote total, and which way the 9 white and 3 black jurors voted, where a vote of 9 is required to indict. If i had to guess, I'd guess no way. Or at least not any time soon.

 

[Turtle]

You should bone up on the role of a prosecutor and what their duties are.

Why? I'm well acquainted and well versed on the roles, especially that of the prosecutor in a grand jury proceeding. A very good friend of mine is a Commonwealth of Kentucky Attorney, my mother was his legal secretary for 15 years. I've served the standard 4 month term as a grand juror in Kentucky, where like most states, they use the same procedures as in federal grand juries, namely, the grand jurors only hear from law enforcement and sometimes the victims of the crimes, and mostly get to hear and read the police reports, forensic reports, and any other documentation collected by law enforcement during the investigation, including the opinions of the prosecutor and those testifying, which is inadmissible in court. So when I talk about a grand jury, I've got the t-shirt and everything.

I'm well aware of the very different roles of the prosecutor, and the differences between, a grand jury, which doesn't involve a judge, a preliminary hearing which does, and an Affidavit of Probable Cause which is filed with a judge to justify a trial when a grand jury or a preliminary hearing isn't performed.

It's not to willy nilly get an indictment just to have a trial to appease public dissent.

Yes, I'm well aware of that.

There has to be actual evidence and probable cause that a crime was committed.

Yep. I'm well aware of that, too.

It's not the prosecution's job to merely present inculpatory evidence. If it has exculpatory evidence, it must submit it to the court as well. Not doing so is being derelict in their duty as a D.A.(See link below for example of prosecutorial misconduct.)

They don't have to present anything they don't want to to a grand jury. The court isn't in charge of a grand jury, the prosecution is. Until the grand jury hands down an indictment, there isn't even a defendant, yet. Once the grand jury hands down an indictment, charges can then be filed and the case will usually go to trial very quickly, because at that point you no longer need to convince the trial judge that a trial in warranted, as a citizen jury of peers has already made that decision.

An Affidavit of Probable Cause, much like a preliminary hearing, is a very different thing than a grand jury. In a preliminary hearing, which is the most similar to a trial, both sides (with the defense attorney present, and often presenting evidence, but usually just sitting there listening to the evidence from the prosecution so that he'll be able to craft his defense to deal with that evidence) are presented to a judge and then the judge decides if there is probable cause for a trial to proceed. An Affidavit of Probable Cause is similar to the hearing, except it's a sworn statement from the prosecution as to probable cause. In both of these, exculpatory evidence must be presented.

The current prosecutor was elected and reelected to faithfully execute the legal process. Using his experience in determining if there was sufficient evidence to file a charge, he most likely concluded that there wasn't. But just to make absolutely sure, he gave it to a Grand Jury to look at. Looking at all the evidence, they didn't see a crime as well.

That's certainly one way to look at it.

The fact that the officer testified at his own Grand Jury was done at a great legal risk to himself. That was his right to do so.

I like how you state that with such righteous, informed aplomb. Unfortunately, you are incorrect on both counts. Nobody has the right to testify in front of a grand jury, because it's not a trial. Everyone (including police officers and investigators) who testifies or presents evidence in front of a grand jury does so because they were subpoenaed to do so. The prosecutor goes to the court clerk's office and gets a bunch of blank subpoenas. The prosecutor then fills them in, putting in the name of the person being subpoenaed, and telling them what they have to do (testify or produce documents) and when they have to do it. The prosecutor then has someone, usually a police officer, sheriff or federal marshal serve the subpoena on the person.

After you've been served with a subpoena you have three choices, comply with it, go to court and convince a judge why you shouldn't have to, or refuse to comply and be held in contempt. It's civil contempt, not criminal contempt, though, because it wasn't a judge who ordered you to appear, it was a group of citizens who ordered it. If you refuse, the prosecutor, on behalf of the grand jury, will go to a judge and ask him to find you in contempt, and unless you can persuade the judge why he shouldn't, he will, almost every time. You will be locked up until you change you mind and comply, or until the grand jury term ends, whichever comes first. Once the grand jury's term ends, the subpoena is no longer valid and you are no longer in contempt.

I'll get right on that boning. Thanks for the advice.

 

[Ragman]

Prior to the mid-sixties, blacks owned businesses, banks, stores. They took pride in their neighborhoods, families. Taught their children respect. Their fathers taught their sons how to be men. Money stayed in the neighborhoods. Blacks lifted up blacks; and in a lot of cases, so did whites.

What has changed? .

What changed? The idea of "urban renewal". Imo, of course.

Look up Paradise Valley and Black Bottom neighborhoods of Detroit to see what changed.

 

[layoutshooter]

What changed? The idea of "urban renewal". Imo, of course.

Look up Paradise Valley and Black Bottom neighborhoods of Detroit to see what changed.

"Urban renewal" and our current "welfare systems". All of these programs are forms of government suppression of the People. People do best when they are left alone by government to be responsible for their own lives. Government does not no best. The less government is involved in our lives, the more likely it is that we will succeed.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

The mentality of rioters is the same as that of someone who punches a wall in rage - if they thought about it, they'd know they're just hurting themselves, but anger doesn't promote rational thought, and rage demands an outlet.
There's a lot of things that changed in the 70's, and they changed for everyone, but blacks got the worst of it. In a nutshell, the financially fortunate started finding ways to increase profit, and keeping more of it. When there was no serious pushback, they got bolder, and took more, demanding higher productivity from workers, reducing benefits, consolidating & merging to eliminate jobs, and outsourcing them all together, until we reached the point we are at now. Not enough middle class jobs to support the middle class, while the upper and lower classes keep getting bigger.
While they were doing that, middle class whites [who'd had decent paying jobs for decades] moved to suburbia, where black people were not welcome. [If they could find anyone to write a mortgage loan, which is doubtful]. Concentrated in the inner city, with lower wages & property values, their schools and homes deteriorated. Black owned businesses struggled to get loans, and went out of business.
Black people knew the FBI was trying to dig up 'dirt' on MLK and everyone associated with him, the KKK could run wild and no one would lift a finger to stop them [because there were law enforcement superiors under those hoods], and all the Civil Rights Acts did was drive the racism underground. Their schools didn't get good materials, or enough of them - how could they motivate their kids to work hard for a better life? They still wouldn't be able to buy a home in suburbia, or be promoted on merit, because white people didn't want them to succeed.
It's really tough to understand the feeling of "why bother"? that comes with being pushed and held down for so long it seems normal, but it's tougher to overcome it. That's why people give up looking for a job: humans can take just so much rejection before they opt out.
Black people saw whites getting decent jobs, buying homes in suburbia, sending their kids to college - all things they would never accomplish, because if they could do as well as white folks, then how could white folks justify the racism they cherished [secretly]?
Emancipation and integration forced whites to behave [in public] as if black people are their equals, but it didn't force them to change their minds. The only thing that could do that is seeing black people do as well as white people - but they'd have to start out equal, and it's white people who have the power to ensure they don't.

But ultimately, the thing that destroyed the family was the Great Society... ie, welfare. The role of men became sperm-donor, since he was not allowed to be in the home. Fathers were kicked out, and replaced by the government check. Men and women were left to fend for themselves... women raising as many kids as she could, since welfare paid by the kid; and men just standing around doing nothing. The kids suffered most, since, a lot of the time, they were there out of laziness to get birth control, or to boost government money.

Generation after generation of this left the children with no one to teach them right from wrong, for the most part. Their schools were filled with teachers who came from the same situation, so it became a vicious circle. Good teachers refused to go into the inter cities; and can you blame them? Mismanagement at all levels, kids who don't want to learn, parents who don't give a crap, co-workers who have given up long ago. It's sickening. Been there, done that. with my kids. One semester has set them back more than a year, I figured.

Look at the government in black neighborhoods. Corruption by people who come from the same ghettos they lead. Easy pickins, since most were on the take. The citizens elect people like Coleman Young, Marion Berry, Kwami Kilpatrick, because 'they coo.' They don't understand, or don't care, that these people are destroying their cities, and selling their futures. They, and their police thugs, shake down what's left of the black businessman. That, along with the crime in the cities, very few blacks see any reason to stay in business; and who could blame them? And with their lack of an educational system teaching them essential basics, most of the new generations couldn't if they wanted to.

The inner cities are just full of despair, Cheri. Yes, the white man, drove them down this road, and let them off on the way to suburbia; but blacks with skill or high intelligence also flee black neighborhoods. Can you blame them? Ultimately, it's on the blacks to right their own ship. They must police their own, and raise their own the right way, and use government as a way out, rather than a way of life.

Denounce the hip hop culture, and stand up to the thugs and druggies. Riot on THEM. Do like the song says, and teach your children well. Demand excellence from your government and schools - which whites aren't doing enough of as well. Breed a new generation of FATHERS and MOTHERS... not just x-box players and baby factories. Learn how to present yourselves for a real job, by dressing right, grooming right, and learning how to speak. IMPROVE UPON YOURSELVES, by starting with your kids. Within two generations, they could have so much of what they want and deserve... the right things, like a nice house, pension, and pride in their accomplishments; not hair weave, cool rims, video games, and violence.

I see accomplishments, starting with their own cities. Detroit elected a white mayor, against the wishes of the black power structure of the city, who is a proven business leader. He's working with the emergency manager. People and businesses are bringing money back to the city. People are buying real estate, on the hopes that the city turns around. I'm thinking that will give some hope to the people who live there now. I want this to work for blacks. I want to see them succeed in things all other races take for granted in this country. No one else is going to do it for them, and government money is not the answer. And they need to do it despite the people who don't want them to.

 

[muttly]

Why? I'm well acquainted and well versed on the roles, especially that of the prosecutor in a grand jury proceeding. A very good friend of mine is a Commonwealth of Kentucky Attorney, my mother was his legal secretary for 15 years. I've served the standard 4 month term as a grand juror in Kentucky, where like most states, they use the same procedures as in federal grand juries, namely, the grand jurors only hear from law enforcement and sometimes the victims of the crimes, and mostly get to hear and read the police reports, forensic reports, and any other documentation collected by law enforcement during the investigation, including the opinions of the prosecutor and those testifying, which is inadmissible in court. So when I talk about a grand jury, I've got the t-shirt and everything.

I'm well aware of the very different roles of the prosecutor, and the differences between, a grand jury, which doesn't involve a judge, a preliminary hearing which does, and an Affidavit of Probable Cause which is filed with a judge to justify a trial when a grand jury or a preliminary hearing isn't performed.

Yes, I'm well aware of that.

Yep. I'm well aware of that, too.

They don't have to present anything they don't want to to a grand jury. The court isn't in charge of a grand jury, the prosecution is. Until the grand jury hands down an indictment, there isn't even a defendant, yet. Once the grand jury hands down an indictment, charges can then be filed and the case will usually go to trial very quickly, because at that point you no longer need to convince the trial judge that a trial in warranted, as a citizen jury of peers has already made that decision.

An Affidavit of Probable Cause, much like a preliminary hearing, is a very different thing than a grand jury. In a preliminary hearing, which is the most similar to a trial, both sides (with the defense attorney present, and often presenting evidence, but usually just sitting there listening to the evidence from the prosecution so that he'll be able to craft his defense to deal with that evidence) are presented to a judge and then the judge decides if there is probable cause for a trial to proceed. An Affidavit of Probable Cause is similar to the hearing, except it's a sworn statement from the prosecution as to probable cause. In both of these, exculpatory evidence must be presented.

That's certainly one way to look at it.

I like how you state that with such righteous, informed aplomb. Unfortunately, you are incorrect on both counts. Nobody has the right to testify in front of a grand jury, because it's not a trial. Everyone (including police officers and investigators) who testifies or presents evidence in front of a grand jury does so because they were subpoenaed to do so. The prosecutor goes to the court clerk's office and gets a bunch of blank subpoenas. The prosecutor then fills them in, putting in the name of the person being subpoenaed, and telling them what they have to do (testify or produce documents) and when they have to do it. The prosecutor then has someone, usually a police officer, sheriff or federal marshal serve the subpoena on the person.

After you've been served with a subpoena you have three choices, comply with it, go to court and convince a judge why you shouldn't have to, or refuse to comply and be held in contempt. It's civil contempt, not criminal contempt, though, because it wasn't a judge who ordered you to appear, it was a group of citizens who ordered it. If you refuse, the prosecutor, on behalf of the grand jury, will go to a judge and ask him to find you in contempt, and unless you can persuade the judge why he shouldn't, he will, almost every time. You will be locked up until you change you mind and comply, or until the grand jury term ends, whichever comes first. Once the grand jury's term ends, the subpoena is no longer valid and you are no longer in contempt.

I'll get right on that boning. Thanks for the advice.

You said the Grand Jury isn't a trial. I do recall you saying previously that it was. Sounds like you're changing your tune.
Regarding officer Wilson's testimony, I was referring to the fact that he didn't just plead the fifth. He actually gave testimony, again at great risk to him . That's why lawyers generally advise potential defendants to take the fifth.

 

[davekc]

I don't think racism is as big as many make it out to be. If it was, we wouldn't have a black president who had many white voters. Blacks can succeed outside of sports as we see it all the time. Some decide to make and some don't. And that was a good point that blacks that do succeed, leave the areas that are in turmoil. The "war on poverty" was a huge waste. Tons of money spent and nothing really changed. The ones that want out, will get out. It isn't a race item, it is a motivational item.
We see it first hand. We have a black gentleman that has driven for us for years. Started with some limited experience (two years with another fleet owner that went under) and has become quite accomplished over time. Has a new house, new boat, new pickup all since he has been with us. So, it can be done in expediting and other professions.
The difference? He doesn't buy into all this "victim" mentality.

 

[Turtle]

You said the Grand Jury isn't a trial. I do recall you saying previously that it was. Sounds like you're changing your tune.

Wow, that's your response to all that? I'm sure you do recall me saying that a grand jury is a trial, since you've been so spot-on with everything you've said thus far in this thread. But, no. I've never said that a grand jury is a trial, certainly not in the same sense of an adversarial jury trial with a judge.

 

[muttly]

I don't think racism is as big as many make it out to be. If it was, we wouldn't have a black president who had many white voters. Blacks can succeed outside of sports as we see it all the time. Some decide to make and some don't. And that was a good point that blacks that do succeed, leave the areas that are in turmoil. The "war on poverty" was a huge waste. Tons of money spent and nothing really changed. The ones that want out, will get out. It isn't a race item, it is a motivational item.
We see it first hand. We have a black gentleman that has driven for us for years. Started with some limited experience (two years with another fleet owner that went under) and has become quite accomplished over time. Has a new house, new boat, new pickup all since he has been with us. So, it can be done in expediting and other professions.
The difference? He doesn't buy into all this "victim" mentality.

Racism isn't as big as it is made out to be. It's mostly magnified by the media and the race pimps by intensely covering any white on black crime and make it into a racial incident, regardless if the facts say otherwise. It exacerbates whatever problems there are regarding race and is diabolical .

 

[Turtle]

I don't think racism is as big as many make it out to be. If it was, we wouldn't have a black president who had many white voters. Blacks can succeed outside of sports as we see it all the time. Some decide to make and some don't. And that was a good point that blacks that do succeed, leave the areas that are in turmoil. The "war on poverty" was a huge waste. Tons of money spent and nothing really changed. The ones that want out, will get out. It isn't a race item, it is a motivational item.
We see it first hand. We have a black gentleman that has driven for us for years. Started with some limited experience (two years with another fleet owner that went under) and has become quite accomplished over time. Has a new house, new boat, new pickup all since he has been with us. So, it can be done in expediting and other professions.
The difference? He doesn't buy into all this "victim" mentality.

In many ways racism is worse than many people make it out to be. It's certainly not as bad as the days of yore, up through the 50s with the Jim Crow laws. But there's always a backlash (those ever popular unintended consequences) when something is forced on people that they don't want, especially if it's unnatural and unwanted, like forced integration. People cannot be forced to Kumbaya. Hawk hit on it with The Great Society.

President Johnson set a new social course called The Great Society, which was the plan to eliminate poverty and racism through an integrated and sweeping program of reform that ranged from education to agriculture to health to urban problems. Policies such as affirmative action arose from these reforms, discrimination against minorities and women in the marketplace gradually became illegal. But as with every problem the government throws money at, the more they throw at it the more of a problem it becomes.

Sure, decades ago the issues of race needed shaking up hard. But the measures taken to shake it up (liberal feel-good stuff) have been a major cause in the deterioration of race relations. On a human, cultural level, if left to happen naturally, any honest look at it would have resulted in improvement. We know that because it happens all the time one-on-one, where you get to know someone of the other race and you come away with, "They're not so bad." And on a legal level, removing the Jim Crow segregation laws and other references to race needed to happen. But the feel-good urge was just too strong to resist. Instead of simply removing references to race, many laws and policies actually used race as a filter to define the treatment an individual would receive not only by government but also in the private sector.

What that did was, it literally institutionalized racial bias on a federal and local level.

For example, most but not all public schools use the same "Definition of Racism" conveniently handed down to them by the feel-goody goodness of the federal government. The core definition of racism is...

"The systematic subordination of members of targeted racial groups who have relatively little social power in the United States (Blacks, Latino/as, Native Americans, and Asians), by the members of the agent racial group who have relatively more social power (Whites). The subordination is supported by the actions of individuals, cultural norms and values, and the institutional structures and practices of society."

Take a close look at that. By definition, it is impossible to commit an act of racism against a white person. Also, and even more troubling (or certainly should be), the definition converts racism from an act into a pattern of attitudes - where thoughts and ideas, and not actions, become the target of control.

But wait, there's more! Sub-categories of racism are also defined. 'Cultural Racism' is, in part, "...those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and Whiteness… Examples of these norms include defining white skin tones as nude or flesh colored, having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology…"

And 'Active Racism' includes advocating "protection of 'the rights' of members of the agent group [whites]."

By these definitions, standing up for individual rights such as freedom of speech, especially if the individual is white, is racist. Individualism becomes the new racism, because the oppressed subordinate groups with the lesser social power become more important than the individual. And it's an institutional racial bias ingrained into all phases of government and the legal system. Not only does that guarantee a backlash, it engenders and even promotes a sense of entitlement within included races (blacks, Indians, Latinos, Asians) and a deep resentment within the excluded ones (whites). We can see those resentments demonstrated in this very thread. And what's so insidiously sad is, those resentments are perfectly understandable, because they're a normal reaction.

Such policies create more racial tension instead of less. So while the racism of today is very different than the racism of yesterday, because it's now institutionalized it is more widespread and more deeply ingrained in our daily lives and thought patterns. Unintended consequences run amok.

 

[davekc]

With a good portion of it promoted by the media. I'm not sure in my mind whether it is worse, but it certainly is different than years past. So many angles to look at.

 

[muttly]

Wow, that's your response to all that? I'm sure you do recall me saying that a grand jury is a trial, since you've been so spot-on with everything you've said thus far in this thread. But, no. I've never said that a grand jury is a trial, certainly not in the same sense of an adversarial jury trial with a judge.

You got that right, spot on.
Grand Jury is a trial--Turtle

#lackofconsequences#36

 

[Pilgrim]

With a good portion of it promoted by the media. I'm not sure in my mind whether it is worse, but it certainly is different than years past. So many angles to look at.

One angle to consider is the rampant black racism and entitlement mentality that exists today thanks to race mongers and poverty pimps like Jessie, Al, Obama et al. Barack Hussein Obama has turned out to be the most divisive POTUS in history, using class and racial warfare as a means to assemble a base of voters that blindly follow him and his pied piper - the mainstream media. However, it appears the voters are beginning to see the light.

 

[Pilgrim]

Racism isn't as big as it is made out to be. It's mostly magnified by the media and the race pimps by intensely covering any white on black crime and make it into a racial incident, regardless if the facts say otherwise. It exacerbates whatever problems there are regarding race and is diabolical .

In a lot of instances it's not racism - it's discrimination, which most all of us experience in some form or fashion. People of all ages, races, sizes, religions, levels of intellect, etc are discriminated against at one time or another. This is a reality of life in spite of the utopia the PC nazis would have us living in. Consider the fact there has never been a POTUS with blonde hair; this is an outrage, considering the percentage of blondes that make up the population of this country.
Redheads would also have reason to protest this kind of discrimination, although there has been one elected to the nation's highest office (Andrew Jackson). Being a blonde myself (with a bit of gray mixed in), I'm insulted and outraged, and calling for riots in the streets on behalf of all fair-haired men and women everywhere.

 

[Turtle]

With a good portion of it promoted by the media. I'm not sure in my mind whether it is worse, but it certainly is different than years past. So many angles to look at.

Because it's institutionalized (by liberals), and so deeply ingrained, of course the media is going to report it (they're mostly liberals). But the media is a symptom, not the cause. If it was natural instead of institutionalized, it would be a minor issue at most. Because it's institutionalized, coded into the laws and social policies, all of the subordinate groups become instant classes of victims, and the natural sense of entitlement of being victimized becomes the driving issue, which what with human nature being what it is, whites are going to naturally resent. So it shouldn't come as a shock that when the opportunity for resentment payback presents itself (cops targeting blacks and blacks being treated more harshly by cops and the justice system) that it's gonna happen on the same wide scale as the institutional bias and sense of entitlement. And because the mechanism of institutionalized racial bias was put in place by the political left, something that isn't political at all (race) has become a partisan political issue. Everything conservatives want to do to eliminate the causes of systemic, institutionalizes racism gets met with the race card, because everything that needs to be done to end it means taking away from the already oppressed subordinate entitlement group.

 

[cheri1122]

But ultimately, the thing that destroyed the family was the Great Society... ie, welfare. The role of men became sperm-donor, since he was not allowed to be in the home. Fathers were kicked out, and replaced by the government check. Men and women were left to fend for themselves... women raising as many kids as she could, since welfare paid by the kid; and men just standing around doing nothing. The kids suffered most, since, a lot of the time, they were there out of laziness to get birth control, or to boost government money.

Generation after generation of this left the children with no one to teach them right from wrong, for the most part. Their schools were filled with teachers who came from the same situation, so it became a vicious circle. Good teachers refused to go into the inter cities; and can you blame them? Mismanagement at all levels, kids who don't want to learn, parents who don't give a crap, co-workers who have given up long ago. It's sickening. Been there, done that. with my kids. One semester has set them back more than a year, I figured.

Look at the government in black neighborhoods. Corruption by people who come from the same ghettos they lead. Easy pickins, since most were on the take. The citizens elect people like Coleman Young, Marion Berry, Kwami Kilpatrick, because 'they coo.' They don't understand, or don't care, that these people are destroying their cities, and selling their futures. They, and their police thugs, shake down what's left of the black businessman. That, along with the crime in the cities, very few blacks see any reason to stay in business; and who could blame them? And with their lack of an educational system teaching them essential basics, most of the new generations couldn't if they wanted to.

The inner cities are just full of despair, Cheri. Yes, the white man, drove them down this road, and let them off on the way to suburbia; but blacks with skill or high intelligence also flee black neighborhoods. Can you blame them? Ultimately, it's on the blacks to right their own ship. They must police their own, and raise their own the right way, and use government as a way out, rather than a way of life.

Denounce the hip hop culture, and stand up to the thugs and druggies. Riot on THEM. Do like the song says, and teach your children well. Demand excellence from your government and schools - which whites aren't doing enough of as well. Breed a new generation of FATHERS and MOTHERS... not just x-box players and baby factories. Learn how to present yourselves for a real job, by dressing right, grooming right, and learning how to speak. IMPROVE UPON YOURSELVES, by starting with your kids. Within two generations, they could have so much of what they want and deserve... the right things, like a nice house, pension, and pride in their accomplishments; not hair weave, cool rims, video games, and violence.

I see accomplishments, starting with their own cities. Detroit elected a white mayor, against the wishes of the black power structure of the city, who is a proven business leader. He's working with the emergency manager. People and businesses are bringing money back to the city. People are buying real estate, on the hopes that the city turns around. I'm thinking that will give some hope to the people who live there now. I want this to work for blacks. I want to see them succeed in things all other races take for granted in this country. No one else is going to do it for them, and government money is not the answer. And they need to do it despite the people who don't want them to.

Can you please explain why "men became sperm donors...kicked out"? Is it because they couldn't get a job? [Long before that became a problem for white people.]

Beginning in the 1980’s, the private sector began an effort that continues to this day to reduce the proportion of the cost of selling goods and services attributed to labor. This takes many forms, including limiting wage growth, outsourcing, union busting, sending jobs overseas, transferring jobs to right-to-work states, increasing the ratio of part-time to full-time employees, not translating workplace productivity gains into wage increases, shifting more health care costs to employees, ending defined benefit pensions, reducing employer contributions to defined contribution pensions and switching to once-a-year, lump sum contributions, classifying employees as independent contractors to avoid paying benefits and workingman’s compensation contributions, increasing the number of unpaid internships, hiring new workers through temp agencies, requiring employees to sign non-compete agreements, and layoffs, not only during recessions, but also after mergers and acquisitions. Non-cyclical layoffs have become a permanent feature of the new economy.

Economic marginalization of ordinary working Americans in the private sector is once again a core organizing principle of American conservatism.

That explains why so many people need welfare, and until that changes, more and more people will become poor, [as they have for decades], and then what?
It's easy to say "They have to take care of their problems themselves", but it's easy to say "Just do it", and both are meaningless in today's world.
A decent life requires a decent JOB, and we don't have enough of them to take care of half of us. Guess which half loses?

 

[Tennesseahawk]

Men became sperm donors because the women, in the past, could not get welfare if there were men in the house.

As far as the blacks having to take care of their problem, I'm saying it's not a problem that'll get solved by whites saying, "Ok, blacks, you have to do this." Blacks have to take the lead on their own situations, and it starts with personal responsibility. It also starts with the whole of their communities getting rid of the thug culture. For anyone to change, they have to WANT to change. All I'm getting at is that they have to want it. And they don't, right now... but it's getting more vocal. This isn't a dirty little hush hush secret anymore. Whites are starting to call the blacks out on their taboo crap. This is from earlier this month...

 

[Moot]

Its refreshing to see someone break from what is considered "politically correct" and speak the truth, even if it isn't what some want to hear.

 

[cheri1122]

As far as 'thug culture', I totally agree - but on the welfare issue, your thinking is out of date. If black men had decent paying jobs, women would have much preferred them to government 'assistance', but since they didn't, [even when anyone could get a job, they had poor education & transportation issues, so they seldom kept a job if they got one] somebody had to see the kids got fed. Both federal & states have enacted numerous reforms, so no one collects welfare for life, and what they do get is hardly generous. [Unlike corporate welfare, which no one seems to get upset over.]
You say whites aren't telling them they have to do something, but then you list what they have to do. 'Personal responsibility' is the mantra of those who have no clue what life is like for really poor people. No car [or unreliable POS], budget cuts slashed busing outside downtown, jobs are out in exurbia. No babysitter, [or unreliable], can't afford daycare. How can they be responsible?
I deplore the whole 'thug life' thing too, it's counterproductive, misogynist, and the music sucks. I can understand how it evolved, though, after generations of being treated as 'less than'. I just disagree that blacks can remedy it without outside help - and bringing their schools up to par would be a good start.

 

[mrgoodtude]

This is one entertaining thread.. Jus Sayin