Classic Trump

[Poz50something]

18 hours ago, topblkmale said:

SHE took pride in locking up black men. 
 

she also decided not to  pursue the death penalty in a 2004 murder case of a cop that was gunned down in a predominantly black neighbourhood in SF. Her stance in a state that's pro-punishment cost her plenty of support from police unions and Sen. Dianne Feinstein. Let's judge her record in totality, and not be like some Bible-thumpers who pick and choose portions that fit their agenda and blithely ignore the parts that prove otherwise. 

Edited August 13 by Poz50something

[Poz50something]

On 8/10/2024 at 10:15 PM, curiousaboutbb said:

 

Everyone has the right to choose to sit at home and not vote in this election. 
n the future the decision may be made for you. 

 

Every time citizens of any country choose, for any reason, not to vote, they do let decisions about government be made for them. It's not that difficult. 

[BruxoCub]

23 hours ago, topblkmale said:

SHE took pride in locking up black men. 
 

It’s worth noting that over 90% of elected prosecutors are white and over 80% are male, which means that people like Kamala Harris, as a Black and Indian American woman, often have to tackle the tougher, less popular tasks just to prove themselves. I’ve faced similar challenges myself in tech, where I’ve had to balance my own values with the demands of my role. Sometimes, it’s not just about making the perfect decisions but about navigating a tough system and eventually finding a way to influence change from within.

[DallasPozzible]

20 hours ago, BlackDude said:

Donald Trump was already in office. And we survived. We’re not afraid of project 2025. 

Maybe you’re missing the point of Project 2025. Trump and his supporters were distressed that they couldn’t accomplish the things they wanted to during his term. They learned that governing is hard. They faced unanticipated obstacles to making wholesale changes to government as we know it. Project 2025 aims to ensure that Trump can make actual changes quickly. 

Vox reported,

Project 2025 is the conservative movement’s detailed and specific plan for what the next Republican president should do with his power, including its preparation to put that plan into action. Basically, it’s an attempt to make the second Trump term way more organized and effective than the first.

Organized by the right-wing think tank the Heritage Foundation and advised by more than 100 conservative groups, Project 2025 has put forth a 922-page list of policy recommendations, going agency by agency in the federal government.

It is not a pie-in-the-sky policy agenda full of bold but empty promises. It is crafted to be a list of things the next president’s appointees really can do, put together by many people who served in top posts under Trump last time and could well do so again. (Project 2025 is also collecting a database of names of conservatives who could take jobs in Trump’s second term.)

[think before following links] https://www.vox.com/politics/360318/project-2025-trump-policies-abortion-divorce

[BootmanLA]

20 hours ago, BlackDude said:

1. Since the Civil Rights Bill, that was passed 60 years ago, the Democrats have done absolutely nothing for Black people. They’ve created a bunch of minority bills that they have allowed everyone to benefit from.

So a bill that helps all minorities, including Blacks, doesn't count if other minorities (LGBT, Hispanic, whatever) also benefit? JFC.

20 hours ago, BlackDude said:

2. The LGBT community has had far more specifically targeted let’s passed for them in the  past few decades, then Black people. That’s just a fact.

Yes. Because the major, heavy lifting for Black people was done DECADES before ANYTHING was done for LGBT people. In fact, while Black people were specifically being protected by civil rights laws, LGBT people were still facing laws that locked them up as felons for simply having sex in private. While Black people were gaining housing protections (under the law; granted, not always enforced adequately), LGBT people were being tossed out on the street if their landlords even suspected they might be gay.

20 hours ago, BlackDude said:

3. There wasn’t a bunch of benevolent white people who decided to get Black people their civil rights. That is a there was a lot of Black people in the streets and doing a lot of other acts that forced the government to give us the equality we were entitled to.

It's true that Black people were at the forefront of the civil rights movement on race issues. But there were a lot of white people helping them, and your either refusal to recognize that or inability to understand history doesn't change the facts. The 10% of the US population that was Black in 1950 did NOT do it entirely on their own, and in fact probably WOULDN'T have been able to do it entirely on their own. It was a coalition of Black people and liberally minded White people that brought about change. For the famous March on Washington in 1963, for instance, about a quarter of the total were White people. Whites were involved in the planning (including Walter Reuther, the UAW president), although yes, it was primarily organized by Black leaders.

But most importantly: White people in Congress also took up the cause. In 1964, the year the Civil Rights Act passed, there were five Black people in Congress out of 535. In 1965, when the Voting Rights Act passed, there were six. Bills do not pass when only supported by five or six members.

20 hours ago, BlackDude said:

4. The Civil Rights Act was just that: civil rights. A lot of people were OK with it because it did not require (white) society to give up anything except some social real estate at the edges of society. Sure you can sit at the lunch counter, but asking for a loan so you could own your own lunch counter was out of the question.

Granted. But the laws that later passed outlawing discrimination in banking, etc.? Also passed because of White support. There have never been enough Black people in power anywhere beyond some local city/county governments to effect ANY change without the support of like-minded White people.

20 hours ago, BlackDude said:

5. Again, politics is the distribution of resources. Just because you did some for 60 years ago doesn’t mean we have to continue sacrificing our voice in perpetuity.

Then think about it this way: Black people will never have the numbers in this country to be able to get everything they deserve without support from other groups. You want our support? We want yours. And we gave you ours first, decades ago and FOR decades, when Black leadership was perfectly content to force gay people (including their own Black gay and lesbian brothers and sisters) into the closet or into prison.

20 hours ago, BlackDude said:

6. No one would tell a Jewish rabbi that because we fought in World War II decades ago that they aren’t allowed to ask for anything for their vote think of every everyone else when they vote.

Well, for starters, Jews are far more inclined to support other liberal causes in addition to fighting antisemitism. I'd point out that Reform Judaism (by far the largest portion of Jews in this country, compared with Orthodox and Conservative groups) were almost uniformly supportive of LGBT rights, while Black ministers were some of the loudest opponents of decriminalizing gay sex and legalizing same-sex marriage - and their congregations voted heavily against both.

And nobody's saying groups can't ask for things for their vote. What's problematic is saying you won't vote for the candidate likely to be even marginally better for you (and MARKEDLY better for the country as a whole) if you don't get exactly what you want in return.

20 hours ago, BlackDude said:

7. Donald Trump was already in office. And we survived. We’re not afraid of project 2025. 

In his first administration he was surrounded by people that the traditional, ACTUALLY conservative Republicans forced on him, keeping his worst instincts in check and barring some of the nutcases from serving in his administration. And they blocked his gutting of civil service, which would have let him install tens of thousands of Trump-thinking people in formerly career positions. P2025 is partly a reaction to that, with a plan to bulldoze through those protections. A second Trump term is going to be a thousand times worse than the first, especially now that he has a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court that has sharply increased the powers of the presidency. If you think P2025 is just about another four years of what we had before, you're delusional.

20 hours ago, BlackDude said:

8. This is a new breed of black voters. We are no longer gonna let legislation that was passed in the civil rights era to be used to finger wag to guilt us into voting for the Democrats in perpetuity. That was not a favor. It was a right that was entitled to us as citizens of this country.

A. Nobody's saying you should be guilted into anything for eternity. I'm asking that you think strategically, and vote for the person who has a shot at keeping the much, much worse person away. 

Consider discrimination: Rarely, anymore, do businesses say "No Blacks hired" because that's illegal, and nobody has a policy that bars Blacks from management roles. But places do discriminate nonetheless, and it's frequently caught by considering "disparate impact" - this place has never had a Black employee in 20 years of operation and having had 600 people, over time, filling 60 roles within the company. Or a company has Black employees but no Black has ever been hired as a supervisor or manager, even though 80% of the rank-and-file line workers are Black.

This Supreme Court is one step away from ruling that this kind of "disparate impact" judgment doesn't suffice to prove discrimination - only direct evidence in the form of someone's statement or written policy counts. And not just for employment, but for business discrimination (including lending), housing, redistricting voters, etc.

They're also one step away from saying you can't consider race AT ALL in any government or business decision, the way they've already ruled you can't consider race in higher education admissions. Meanwhile, given that race is (mostly) readily apparent from a visual persual, people will be empowered to discriminate against Blacks with zero pushback because you won't be able to prove anything amiss: disparate impact won't be enough.

B. Of course civil rights and voting rights were rights that you had from the beginning. But they weren't recognized or enforced until those laws were passed (and again, with the help of a fucking LOT of White people). A right that's not recognized or enforced is a right not worth the breath it takes to mention it.

[BootmanLA]

6 hours ago, tallslenderguy said:

i think it's sad that it's come to this, but i'd vote for just about anyone to keep Trump and certain (not all) of his zealot supporters out of such an influential power position. i'm just as concerned about some of the people Trump brings with him as i am about him. i can easily imagine pushing through agenda that is harmful to me as an individual, and i think harmful to us as a society. 

THIS. The people Trump brings with him - the Stephen Millers of the world - will be so much worse for everyone, but ESPECIALLY Black men and women, that I can't understand why keeping Trump out of power isn't the number one priority, EVEN IF Black issues are the voter's primary concern.

Look at the relatively tiny handful of Black people in Trump's inner circle.

Herman Cain - a multimillionaire businessman and former presidential candidate (Mr. 9-9-9) whose ONLY interest with the Trump administration was how much he could get in millionaire tax breaks. Trump ended up killing Cain by giving him Covid-19 at a White House function.

Ben Carson - acclaimed neurosurgeon famed for being the first to separate conjoined twins who shared cognitive function. Nobody mentions that although both survived, both were brain-damaged, one ended up in a vegetative state, and both ended up as wards of the state. He performed the surgery four more times. In two cases, both twins died. In the third, one twin died with the other left permanently blind. In the fourth, the twins apparently survived with little neurological impairment, but not much has been followed up on with them. Yet he's hailed as a genius and was put in charge of HUD. Were his priorities making sure housing was less of a problem for Black people? Making sure housing was more readily available to people caring for others with profound disabilities? Don't be ridiculous.

What he actually did was leave most of the top positions unfilled, so there was no direction given from the top; he scaled back enforcement of housing discrimination laws to benefit landlords; he actually removed "free from discrimination" from the HUD mission statement. He supported massive cuts to his agency's budget, he called poverty "a state of mind", and publicly demonstrated he didn't know what "REO" (real estate owned) meant in the housing finance world, thinking the speaker said "OREO" as in mixed-race families. 

Oh, and he spent $31,000 for a dining room table and set of chairs for his office.

Who else? Diamond and Silk, those grifters par excellence from a grifter family who never actually did anything of consequence, much like the various Kardashians.

Say what you will about Democrats, but Black people (and now, LGBT people, and women, and other ethnic groups) always have a seat at the table.

[stillbreedin]

the maga foks are just every where. if you post a positive message about the democrats, etc. they are right there to try and shoot you down. on multiple platforms. the truth however is not what they are about.  trump is going to lose this election. thea arc of the campaign has left him and his syncophants behind.  there is no way they can turn this around b/c they are facing an opponant or opponants they have never seen the likes of b4. if both of them have any gray matter left, they will put out of the debates--assuming shady vance as agreed to debate gov. walz.  trump will be overpowered by kamala.  he has lost every debate he has been in in '16 and '20; in the former case sec. clinton correctly predicted much of what has come to pass; in '20 biden calmly did something i saw obama do in 08 at one point, when asked about an attack made by an opponant. withoiut a word, he simple took a hand and brushed his shoulder to indicate what he thought. and that is what the dems need to do. the sad maga folks can keep posting here and there, but they seem not so understand what they need to do win this election; and i am ain't gonna tell 'em.

[BlackDude]

8 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

So a bill that helps all minorities, including Blacks, doesn't count if other minorities (LGBT, Hispanic, whatever) also benefit? JFC.

Yes. Because the major, heavy lifting for Black people was done DECADES before ANYTHING was done for LGBT people. In fact, while Black people were specifically being protected by civil rights laws, LGBT people were still facing laws that locked them up as felons for simply having sex in private. While Black people were gaining housing protections (under the law; granted, not always enforced adequately), LGBT people were being tossed out on the street if their landlords even suspected they might be gay.

Then think about it this way: Black people will never have the numbers in this country to be able to get everything they deserve without support from other groups. You want our support? We want yours. And we gave you ours first, decades ago and FOR decades, when Black leadership was perfectly content to force gay people (including their own Black gay and lesbian brothers and sisters) into the closet or into prison.

1. I don’t it’s fair for you to bring that point up, because if you do, we can talk about all the racism in the LGBT community, including what some LGBT leaders were doing to the back community. But that’s going well off topic. This is not a battle between the LGBT community and the Black community.

2. Many black voters have decided that we haven’t gotten anything in the last 60 years and it’s time we start getting something,  just like every other group. 

3. Again, just because the Civil Rights as passed in the 60s doesn’t mean we owe  a debt of gratitude and perpetuity. It was the right thing to do in 200 years too late and required the U.S. give up nothing. as someone once said if you stick a knife in my back 9 inches, and pull it out 6 inches, that’s not progress. If you pull the knife out all the way I’ve still been sta**ed”
 

My point is that It is also my right as an American citizen to demand something for my vote just like every other group.

Edited August 14 by BlackDude

[SFCumdog]

On 8/12/2024 at 1:58 PM, topblkmale said:

SHE took pride in locking up black men. 
 

Shouldn't the real question be though, were the people that she put behind bars guilty of the crimes they were charged with? 

[stillbreedin]

On 8/1/2024 at 11:43 AM, Poz50something said:

[think before following links] [think before following links] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_J._Harris  

her father was jamaican.

 

[Tampacumdump626]

I could care less what color the candidate is and I don’t care what party affiliation they are! I just want whoever best qualified to do the job and Harris is nowhere near qualified! The woman was named the border czar and look how that ended up! Hell she admitted she’s never even visited the border! And yesterday she said in an interview that North Korea was our biggest and strongest Allie!! 
I don’t want the next 4 years to be sleepy Joe part 2!! 
 

[hntnhole]

10 minutes ago, Tampacumdump626 said:

I just want whoever best qualified to do the job and Harris is nowhere near qualified!

Then presumably, since there is only Harris and Trump running, you believe that he's better qualified than she is?  We've recently experienced 4 years worth of his failures, limitations, lack of abilities, with a constant drumbleat of filth oozing out of his mouth, and whenever it's open.    

The wanna-be "man" cannot manage to run his own life competently, and we have a mountain of proof that he certainly can't run the country competently.  

Harris has been at the President's elbow, helping formulate one of the most successful Presidencies in modern history.  Maybe you don't care for Progressive policies, which you're entitled to.  The above quote is, however, just plain silly, and particularly so with no facts to base it upon.  

I am comfortable making the prediction that the next 4 years (a/o January) - the first Harris Administration - will be far, far and away more productive for everyone than the former President's 4 years of lies, self-centeredness, lack of achievements, incompetence, crimes and foul behavior did.  

I look forward to your "downvote".

[Tampacumdump626]

Well I have a little education for you about your sweet Kamala as I am educated and can present facts that you will deny even with proof because you are in denial.

-In 2020 presidential election she dropped out 1st with only 3% dead last.
-She has stated she wants to defund the police and get rid of cops.
-She wants to get rid of ICE.
-She sat back and helped cover up sleepy Joe’s cognitive decline for several years putting our country at risk.
-She enticed riot violence in Minnesota and said they are not going to stop and when the criminals were jailed she raised funds for Bail of criminals to be set free.
-She has a failed border policy and did nothing to prevent to this day illegal border crossing when in the beginning of the current term was made the border Czar and allowed our country to be invaded by ILLEGAL crossers from all over the world by the millions including criminals, child rapist, terrorist, and murders amongst all the other illegals and our citizens and children have been murdered as a result. There is no denying this fact that her and Joe have American blood on their hands. 
-She will not support one of our closest allies Israel in the Middle East which plays a vital role in keeping terrorist organizations activity at a lower threat level. Appalling to all the Jews in the United States including myself @ 33% of my blood runs Jewish. 
 -She wants illegals crossing the border that are criminals crossing because it’s against the law to be decriminalized and provide these criminals with lodging better than what our veterans have, free health care, debit cards with cash access, etc which Americans are paying for.
 -She wants universal health care without United States legal citizens having a choice as well as a universal income and tax citizens 70-80% in order to accomodate. As she stated equity over equality so regardless of one’s merit or accomplishments in life she believes that citizens hard work won’t matter and the accomplishments they have worked hard for should not make them better earners.
 -There has been a 20% inflation increase since her and Joe have been in office.
 -Interest rates have been so high people can’t afford to buy homes or cars.
 -She is on board with the disastrous Bidenomics she praises. No one is doing better as a result and their wages can’t keep up. 
 -She stated that our citizens between 18-24 are stupid on national television during an interview. 
 -She has a failed economic record putting more US citizens in jeopardy of losing their homes, cars, and have a hard time putting food on the table and the vastness of homelessness has skyrocketed while putting illegals in some really nice hotels which I seen first hand in NYC.
 -Major auto manufacturers have lost 1.1 Billion in their required EV business hurting US companies and their workforce.
I can list probably another 100 failures but I won’t be wasting anymore time educating you because your blinders won’t let you see past everything that has been happening around you the last few years. Good Day! 

Edited August 14 by Tampacumdump626

[Poz50something]

1 minute ago, stillbreedin said:

her father was jamaican.

 

1. He's still alive -

2. you do realise, don't you, that for the purposes of counting, ie, the census, the government counts Jamaicans as black if they identify themselves as black. Not African American, but black. This is the crux of the matter. People have questioned her black identity. 

[BlackDude]

9 hours ago, SFCumdog said:

Shouldn't the real question be though, were the people that she put behind bars guilty of the crimes they were charged with? 

[think before following links] https://prospect.org/justice/how-kamala-harris-fought-to-keep-nonviolent-prisoners-locked-up/
 

[think before following links] https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2020/10/17/924766186/the-story-behind-kamala-harriss-truancy-program

[think before following links] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/crime-lab-scandal-rocked-kamala-harriss-term-as-san-francisco-district-attorney/2019/03/06/825df094-392b-11e9-a06c-3ec8ed509d15_story.html