Woke Spurs Coach Gregg Popovich at it Again Likens Second Amendment to ‘Myth’

[ambchang]

Daboum ignoring suicide as gun deaths again.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ths-by-country

[pad300]

Wishful thinking though. You got right wing media getting all the whities scared less of "invasions" and violence. I saw a video on Twitter this morning of video of black on white crimes. I've seen videos being retweeted incessantly of black kids beating up white kids in schools. Despite the fact that those videos disproportionately display the context that white on black crime is actually higher.
...

WTF?!? White on black crime is "higher" than black on white crime?

"The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Reagan

https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf

The table you want is table 14 (on page 13), and if you multiply the percentages by the number of incidents,

59778 incidents of White offenders committing violent crimes on blacks
547948 incidents of Black offenders committing violent crimes on whites

Keep in context, black population is roughly 1/5 the white population...

[offset formation]

WTF?!? White on black crime is "higher" than black on white crime?

"The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Reagan

https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf

The table you want is table 14 (on page 13), and if you multiply the percentages by the number of incidents,

59778 incidents of White offenders committing violent crimes on blacks
547948 incidents of Black offenders committing violent crimes on whites

Keep in context, black population is roughly 1/5 the white population...

Sigh...

From your source: "Among black victims, the percentage of violent incidents perceived to be committed by black offenders (70%) was 5.8 times higher than the representation of black persons in the population (12%)."

My point, evidently poorly worded for you, is that blacks commit crimes against blacks at a much higher clip than they do upon the white population. They commit crimes against whites roughly proportionate to their total population percentage which btw is quite shocking given white supremacy and the ill treatment they've received for centuries. Thus my point, blacks are not targeting whites disproportionately and any attempt to scare YT less with hyperbolic videos is utter nonsense that you snowflakes readily swallow. Also, since a crime isn't defined here, how do we know how many of these "crimes" weren't a bunch of Karen's saying that some guy did something to them that wasn't done? Certainly a bit of history behind white women screaming rape or violence against black men that didn't happen.

But go ahead and be fearful of the black folk. You might want to stop watching basketball though Ginger.

One last point, quoting Reagan on anything pertaining to supposed wisdom is ing rich. Dude literally destroyed the middle class singlehandedly by putting forth economic blow hards like Art Laffer. Don't believe me? Listen to his children.

Here are a couple links that were written that gave context to viral online memes you righties have been circulating for years now showing how hard it is to be white:

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-f...-idUSKBN23M2SX

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ce/5739522002/

[pad300]

Sigh...

From your source: "Among black victims, the percentage of violent incidents perceived to be committed by black offenders (70%) was 5.8 times higher than the representation of black persons in the population (12%)."

My point, evidently poorly worded for you, is that blacks commit crimes against blacks at a much higher clip than they do upon the white population. They commit crimes against whites roughly proportionate to their total population percentage which btw is quite shocking given white supremacy and the ill treatment they've received for centuries. Thus my point, blacks are not targeting whites disproportionately and any attempt to scare YT less with hyperbolic videos is utter nonsense that you snowflakes readily swallow. Also, since a crime isn't defined here, how do we know how many of these "crimes" weren't a bunch of Karen's saying that some guy did something to them that wasn't done? Certainly a bit of history behind white women screaming rape or violence against black men that didn't happen.

But go ahead and be fearful of the black folk. You might want to stop watching basketball though Ginger.

One last point, quoting Reagan on anything pertaining to supposed wisdom is ing rich. Dude literally destroyed the middle class singlehandedly by putting forth economic blow hards like Art Laffer. Don't believe me? Listen to his children.

Here are a couple links that were written that gave context to viral online memes you righties have been circulating for years now showing how hard it is to be white:

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-f...-idUSKBN23M2SX

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ce/5739522002/

So, you're trying to gaslight about what you clearly wrote originally, that White on Black crime was more common than Black on White crime.

Then you've made an assumption about my race "ginger", because you're obviously a racist... and you're pretty poor at logic (and math).

As to your so-called point , "that blacks commit crimes against blacks at a much higher clip than they do upon the white population", is useless. You can say the exact same thing changing the colors around: "whites commit crimes against whites at a much higher clip than they do upon the white population" Whites commit 62.1% of the violent incidents against whites, and only 10.6% of the violent incidents against blacks. By comparison, blacks commits 70.3% of the violent incidents against blacks, and 15.3% of the violent incidents against whites. Not to mention that you're playing games hiding things because of the size of the relative populations. Turn those percentages into real numbers Whites committed 2224025 of the violent incidents against whites and only 59778 violent incidents against blacks. By comparison, blacks commited 396450 violent incidents against blacks , and 547948 violent incidents against whites. Yeah, real world, black criminals attack more white people than black people.

What you're trying to dance around, is table 12 with the percent ratio of offenses to population and victims to population. The white population is as a whole 0.8% likely to be violent offenders, and 1.1% likely to be a victim of violence. The black population as a whole is 1.8% likely to be violent offenders and 0.9% likely to be a victim of violence (actually less likely than white people!). Statistically, black criminals are responsible for a ridiculously large portion of the violence in the country. White people are responsible for 50.2% of the violent crimes in the country, while being 62.3% of the population. Whereas black people are responsible for 21.7% of the violent crimes in the country, while being 12% of the population. Modern black culture encouraging gangs, drugs and lack of education is a real problem...

[daboom1]

WTF?!? White on black crime is "higher" than black on white crime?

"The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Reagan

https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf

The table you want is table 14 (on page 13), and if you multiply the percentages by the number of incidents,

59778 incidents of White offenders committing violent crimes on blacks
547948 incidents of Black offenders committing violent crimes on whites

Keep in context, black population is roughly 1/5 the white population...

Yeah his post was awful and full of misinformation

[offset formation]

So, you're trying to gaslight about what you clearly wrote originally, that White on Black crime was more common than Black on White crime.

Then you've made an assumption about my race "ginger", because you're obviously a racist... and you're pretty poor at logic (and math).

As to your so-called point , "that blacks commit crimes against blacks at a much higher clip than they do upon the white population", is useless. You can say the exact same thing changing the colors around: "whites commit crimes against whites at a much higher clip than they do upon the white population" Whites commit 62.1% of the violent incidents against whites, and only 10.6% of the violent incidents against blacks. By comparison, blacks commits 70.3% of the violent incidents against blacks, and 15.3% of the violent incidents against whites. Not to mention that you're playing games hiding things because of the size of the relative populations. Turn those percentages into real numbers Whites committed 2224025 of the violent incidents against whites and only 59778 violent incidents against blacks. By comparison, blacks commited 396450 violent incidents against blacks , and 547948 violent incidents against whites. Yeah, real world, black criminals attack more white people than black people.

What you're trying to dance around, is table 12 with the percent ratio of offenses to population and victims to population. The white population is as a whole 0.8% likely to be violent offenders, and 1.1% likely to be a victim of violence. The black population as a whole is 1.8% likely to be violent offenders and 0.9% likely to be a victim of violence (actually less likely than white people!). Statistically, black criminals are responsible for a ridiculously large portion of the violence in the country. White people are responsible for 50.2% of the violent crimes in the country, while being 62.3% of the population. Whereas black people are responsible for 21.7% of the violent crimes in the country, while being 12% of the population. Modern black culture encouraging gangs, drugs and lack of education is a real problem...

Ha. No calling you Ginger was more about you being fearful than being white. But you're incapable of seeing the world through anything but a racial or ethnic lens evidently. So much so that you've broken down the math but co.pletely missed context on everything. Again on this new point, So black people commit 21.7 percent of all violent crime yet depending on the year, in 2013 it was 13.6% in 2019 in was 15% of violent crimes vs white people. They represent a little over 12% so those numbers are riugjly equal to the crimes peroetrated against whites. And you miss any sort of context or contributing factors about our criminal justice system, what cons utes criminality or evidence when accused by a white person. It lacks context as to social factors of the black population living in a post Jim Crow era world of poverty and lack of access to resources. Jobs, housing, loans, what incarceration of large numbers of black males does to family structures for non-violent drug crime (a huge number of black males lost years in the criminal justice system over drug convictions), etc.

Everytime one of you mother ers think you've made a point on crime statistics, all you've done is underscore what sociologists have been do enting for decades, and that is the inequality in the system. You want to post the statistic of how disproportionately our jails are filled with blacks to whites? Or how whites often get to adjudicate their sentences out of jail for the same or larger drug seizures? Nah, cause then your point crumbles. And did you know that merely having a gun at arrest when also having drugs is considered a violent crime? Did you know that people in poverty tend to self medicate themselves against their cir stances yet white kids actually use marijuana at higher clips than blacks do yet our jails are chock full of blacks convicted on marijuana possessions? Did you know the gun companies by way of legal gun shows flood the inner city, disproportionately so, with illegal guns? Did you read any of those articles?

No to you, whitey is just a victim of the angry and violent black male that's out to get you. Again stats don't bear that out in that their crimes are overwhelmingly targeting their fellow black population and are roughly equal to their population when committed against whites. So again I say, it's you doing the gaslighting.

You want to see the crime rate come down in black communities? Stop electing idiots that are unaware of the things I just posted above. You can't just erase 200+ years of socioeconomics then say, you see, they're violent, submongrels, and moreover use data that lacks any context whatsoever.

[offset formation]

Yeah his post was awful and full of misinformation

Nothing could be more revealing to a person's intelligence or logical abilities than to jump on someone else's attempt to respond on tge merits after you've had the chance to reply yourself for like 2 days, and when you do it's only to say "cringe."

Sit your ass down donny, you're out of your element. And then when you think there's an opening, go find white island with Scott Adam's of Dilbert fame so you guys can wall yourself off from the blacks.

[pad300]

Ha. No calling you Ginger was more about you being fearful than being white. But you're incapable of seeing the world through anything but a racial or ethnic lens evidently. So much so that you've broken down the math but co.pletely missed context on everything. Again on this new point, So black people commit 21.7 percent of all violent crime yet depending on the year, in 2013 it was 13.6% in 2019 in was 15% of violent crimes vs white people. They represent a little over 12% so those numbers are riugjly equal to the crimes peroetrated against whites. And you miss any sort of context or contributing factors about our criminal justice system, what cons utes criminality or evidence when accused by a white person. It lacks context as to social factors of the black population living in a post Jim Crow era world of poverty and lack of access to resources. Jobs, housing, loans, what incarceration of large numbers of black males does to family structures for non-violent drug crime (a huge number of black males lost years in the criminal justice system over drug convictions), etc.

Everytime one of you mother ers think you've made a point on crime statistics, all you've done is underscore what sociologists have been do enting for decades, and that is the inequality in the system. You want to post the statistic of how disproportionately our jails are filled with blacks to whites? Or how whites often get to adjudicate their sentences out of jail for the same or larger drug seizures? Nah, cause then your point crumbles. And did you know that merely having a gun at arrest when also having drugs is considered a violent crime? Did you know that people in poverty tend to self medicate themselves against their cir stances yet white kids actually use marijuana at higher clips than blacks do yet our jails are chock full of blacks convicted on marijuana possessions? Did you know the gun companies by way of legal gun shows flood the inner city, disproportionately so, with illegal guns? Did you read any of those articles?

No to you, whitey is just a victim of the angry and violent black male that's out to get you. Again stats don't bear that out in that their crimes are overwhelmingly targeting their fellow black population and are roughly equal to their population when committed against whites. So again I say, it's you doing the gaslighting.

You want to see the crime rate come down in black communities? Stop electing idiots that are unaware of the things I just posted above. You can't just erase 200+ years of socioeconomics then say, you see, they're violent, submongrels, and moreover use data that lacks any context whatsoever.

Yes you are a racist, you're just digging deeper with this gaslighting. Now you suggest that ginger isn't a racial slur, but is associated with fear and cowardice. Which is ridiculous in and of itself, the ethnicities most associated with red hair and white skin (ie. gingers) are the Irish and the Scots, and historically speaking, they ain't been shy about fighting. Later on, you casually spit another racial slur, "whitey". You are clearly a racist.

The rest of the paragraph is incoherent. I posted the 21.7% of all violent crimes are committed by blacks, which came from the 2018 criminal victimization survey (which I posted a link to). You then contrast this to "violent crimes vs white people" in 2013 (13.6%)and 2019 (15%) - where you got those numbers is not clear. You suggest " They represent a little over 12% so those numbers are riugjly equal to the crimes peroetrated against whites." Presumably, the mis-spellings are supposed to be roughly and perpetrated, and of course, in my opinion, that's not "roughly equal"; 13.6/12 = 1.13, 15/12 = 1.25; 13% and 25% overrepresentation is significant at this scale of population sampling. Also, you continue to dodge the point, by changing the comparison from percentage of violent crimes in general to percentage of violent crimes in general. I personally don't care much about skin color of the victim; I greatly disapprove of violent crime... and the black population is enormously overrepresented as offenders.

Then you start ranting about the justice system and how it's unfair, which shows you clearly don't understand the data that I have presented. The criminal victimization survey is not impacted by police conduct, nor the justice system. What they do is ask randomly selected subjects from the general population have they been subjected to criminal violence in the last 6 months before the current one. They are not asking the justice system about convictions. They are not querying the police agencies about their activities. They are asking the general public about their personal experiences with violent crime; what the police and the court system do or have done does not affect the data.

[daboom1]

[ChumpDumper]

Did statistics just stop being kept after 2010?

No, they did not.

[Ef-man]

Did statistics just stop being kept after 2010?

No, they did not.

Another interesting fact: AR15 related mass murders committed in US (e.g., schools and shopping malls) rose astronomically when comparing time period of 1776 to 2023.

[offset formation]

Yes you are a racist, you're just digging deeper with this gaslighting. Now you suggest that ginger isn't a racial slur, but is associated with fear and cowardice. Which is ridiculous in and of itself, the ethnicities most associated with red hair and white skin (ie. gingers) are the Irish and the Scots, and historically speaking, they ain't been shy about fighting. Later on, you casually spit another racial slur, "whitey". You are clearly a racist.

The rest of the paragraph is incoherent. I posted the 21.7% of all violent crimes are committed by blacks, which came from the 2018 criminal victimization survey (which I posted a link to). You then contrast this to "violent crimes vs white people" in 2013 (13.6%)and 2019 (15%) - where you got those numbers is not clear. You suggest " They represent a little over 12% so those numbers are riugjly equal to the crimes peroetrated against whites." Presumably, the mis-spellings are supposed to be roughly and perpetrated, and of course, in my opinion, that's not "roughly equal"; 13.6/12 = 1.13, 15/12 = 1.25; 13% and 25% overrepresentation is significant at this scale of population sampling. Also, you continue to dodge the point, by changing the comparison from percentage of violent crimes in general to percentage of violent crimes in general. I personally don't care much about skin color of the victim; I greatly disapprove of violent crime... and the black population is enormously overrepresented as offenders.

Then you start ranting about the justice system and how it's unfair, which shows you clearly don't understand the data that I have presented. The criminal victimization survey is not impacted by police conduct, nor the justice system. What they do is ask randomly selected subjects from the general population have they been subjected to criminal violence in the last 6 months before the current one. They are not asking the justice system about convictions. They are not querying the police agencies about their activities. They are asking the general public about their personal experiences with violent crime; what the police and the court system do or have done does not affect the data.

Lmao. Dude, chill. I'm Scots-Irish...lol. Ginger is what me and my stupid and immature friends called each other on a golf course if we left a putt short. Because one of us was named Fred. Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers. Most people used Nancy. We used Ginger. It was stupid ribbing.

I promise you, if anything betrays one of us on our internal racial dialogue, you regurgitating crime stats without context does that on your inner thoughts, not my reference to you as Ginger.

Also did you just learn the phrase gaslighting? Inquiring minds and all.

And finally and my last reply on this topic, as for your data, again you buried the lede. Do you not understand that whites have been accusing blacks of for as long as we've been a country? So a business owner gets robbed and says some black guys did it when it might have been some black dudes, some white or Hispanics, a mix of ethicities, etc. Also, you evidently read over the part where I emphasized the historical context for higher crime rates in the black community especially. Poverty-stricken communities where the criminal justice system has unjustly and non-uniformly sentenced black men to jail for crimes white men got a slap on the wrist for has the intended side effect of destabilizing the family. Kids get raised without dads. Kids don't excel in school. Kids don't get as good of jobs. It's a viscious cycle that has its roots dating back to the Reconstruction era and Jim Crow era. Black families have been ripped up socially and economically. Little to no generational wealth gets passed on. Homeownership is low. Etc. All of these things impact crime. It's both *not* a black and white issue (of simplistic diagnostics) and *is* a black and white issue (of the entrenched inequality). You want to see the crime stats change? There are multiple policies that would begin to engender change, some of which are easy while others are harder. But I guarantee you, in a vacuum, had black kids been raised with equal opportunities and without the historical baggage, those stats would reflect that. And again as it is, whites are not so e disproportionately impacted victim of black crime as it relates to their overall population percentage.

Go ahead though and gaslight that.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The NRA's legal position is that any law after 1782 or the like is invalid claiming 'FOUNDERS!' which in and of itself is a nebulous idea.

Of course the legal work, legislation, and enforcement that founders like Adams, Washington, Jefferson, and Madison performed over the next 20-40 years are to be ignored.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yes you are a racist, you're just digging deeper with this gaslighting. Now you suggest that ginger isn't a racial slur, but is associated with fear and cowardice. Which is ridiculous in and of itself, the ethnicities most associated with red hair and white skin (ie. gingers) are the Irish and the Scots, and historically speaking, they ain't been shy about fighting. Later on, you casually spit another racial slur, "whitey". You are clearly a racist.

The rest of the paragraph is incoherent. I posted the 21.7% of all violent crimes are committed by blacks, which came from the 2018 criminal victimization survey (which I posted a link to). You then contrast this to "violent crimes vs white people" in 2013 (13.6%)and 2019 (15%) - where you got those numbers is not clear. You suggest " They represent a little over 12% so those numbers are riugjly equal to the crimes peroetrated against whites." Presumably, the mis-spellings are supposed to be roughly and perpetrated, and of course, in my opinion, that's not "roughly equal"; 13.6/12 = 1.13, 15/12 = 1.25; 13% and 25% overrepresentation is significant at this scale of population sampling. Also, you continue to dodge the point, by changing the comparison from percentage of violent crimes in general to percentage of violent crimes in general. I personally don't care much about skin color of the victim; I greatly disapprove of violent crime... and the black population is enormously overrepresented as offenders.

Then you start ranting about the justice system and how it's unfair, which shows you clearly don't understand the data that I have presented. The criminal victimization survey is not impacted by police conduct, nor the justice system. What they do is ask randomly selected subjects from the general population have they been subjected to criminal violence in the last 6 months before the current one. They are not asking the justice system about convictions. They are not querying the police agencies about their activities. They are asking the general public about their personal experiences with violent crime; what the police and the court system do or have done does not affect the data.

What race is denoted by red hair?

I do like the blithely posting crime stats and ignoring the discussion about law enforcement policy and enforcement methods.

[tonight...you]

I'm so glad minds have been changed and views have been altered in this thread.
Education is happening folks!

[Barfunk]

Not even the blood of innocent children could sway Republicans into rethinking their gun policies. These Republicans need to start putting their money where their mouth is. They portray themselves as men and women of God but they're the biggest group of wolves in sheeps' clothing there is on the planet.

I will say this: To the minute group of reasonable and logical Republicans out there, whoever and wherever you are, I commend you.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm so glad minds have been changed and views have been altered in this thread.
Education is happening folks!

I agree people should stop trying to persuade people for gun control. It is very pointless. I think going after the NRA as an ins ution is a better idea. They are the crux of the problem much like other public safety issues regarding lead and smoking and their respective lobbying efforts.

[offset formation]

I'm so glad minds have been changed and views have been altered in this thread.
Education is happening folks!

Yes, I agree it's a waste of time. Minds never change when context is included. Twitter is a cesspool and underscores your point. I read an interesting one earlier today about some right winger who is convinced that climate change is a left wing lie and when prompted for proof he responded with 3 people, two of whom aren't even scientists and the other of which acknowledges the climate is warming but disputes that climate change is anthropogenic in nature. They were then given a link to over 1500 climate scientists that concur and he protested they were stooges of left wing universities.

You simply cannot reason with that or dispute their point because it's not based in reality. It's based on belief. And you don't change beliefs because more often than not beliefs came from one's parents and those people were not taught logic or critical thinking skills that challenged long held views.

It. is. precisely. why. we're. ed. irrevocably. as. a. nation.

[tonight...you]

Yes, I agree it's a waste of time. Minds never change when context is included. Twitter is a cesspool and underscores your point. I read an interesting one earlier today about some right winger who is convinced that climate change is a left wing lie and when prompted for proof he responded with 3 people, two of whom aren't even scientists and the other of which acknowledges the climate is warming but disputes that climate change is anthropogenic in nature. They were then given a link to over 1500 climate scientists that concur and he protested they were stooges of left wing universities.

You simply cannot reason with that or dispute their point because it's not based in reality. It's based on belief. And you don't change beliefs because more often than not beliefs came from one's parents and those people were not taught logic or critical thinking skills that challenged long held views.

It. is. precisely. why. we're. ed. irrevocably. as. a. nation.

Depressing.

[tonight...you]

I agree people should stop trying to persuade people for gun control. It is very pointless. I think going after the NRA as an ins ution is a better idea. They are the crux of the problem much like other public safety issues regarding lead and smoking and their respective lobbying efforts.

Tough thing to do, but a noble act to affect.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yes, I agree it's a waste of time. Minds never change when context is included. Twitter is a cesspool and underscores your point. I read an interesting one earlier today about some right winger who is convinced that climate change is a left wing lie and when prompted for proof he responded with 3 people, two of whom aren't even scientists and the other of which acknowledges the climate is warming but disputes that climate change is anthropogenic in nature. They were then given a link to over 1500 climate scientists that concur and he protested they were stooges of left wing universities.

You simply cannot reason with that or dispute their point because it's not based in reality. It's based on belief. And you don't change beliefs because more often than not beliefs came from one's parents and those people were not taught logic or critical thinking skills that challenged long held views.

It. is. precisely. why. we're. ed. irrevocably. as. a. nation.

The climate concensus paper has been thoroughly prepped with talking points. It was done years ago. What is cool about climate is that when you actually reduce the thermodynamics down mechanically it is what it is. The issue with climate science is one more of insufficient sampling and computing power as opposed to a mechanics issue.

As a result, like the rest of physics and other more rigorous science, it is much more uniform and you can find the same type of studies coming out of conservative universities to corroborate the rest.

The Kochs when they were doing there propaganda tour were going for rallies where it was about chanting slogans and disparaging speeches with no science at all. They've moved onto working the judiciary lately. YAY!

But that is kind of case in point. Billionaires got the public to reject physics for hype for about a decade. They have moved on now and now we are actually seeing movement in climate legislation and public opinion.

I see the NRA playing a similar role and since they are actually funded by Colt, S&W, and Sig they aren't going anywhere. Need to stop them from taking advantage of the suggestable and dumb.

[offset formation]

The climate concensus paper has been thoroughly prepped with talking points. It was done years ago. What is cool about climate is that when you actually reduce the thermodynamics down mechanically it is what it is. The issue with climate science is one more of insufficient sampling and computing power as opposed to a mechanics issue.

As a result, like the rest of physics and other more rigorous science, it is much more uniform and you can find the same type of studies coming out of conservative universities to corroborate the rest.

The Kochs when they were doing there propaganda tour were going for rallies where it was about chanting slogans and disparaging speeches with no science at all. They've moved onto working the judiciary lately. YAY!

But that is kind of case in point. Billionaires got the public to reject physics for hype for about a decade. They have moved on now and now we are actually seeing movement in climate legislation and public opinion.

I see the NRA playing a similar role and since they are actually funded by Colt, S&W, and Sig they aren't going anywhere. Need to stop them from taking advantage of the suggestable and dumb.

Exactly. It was turned into a partisan issue by people with their investments heavily in the carbon game. Big business dollars funded places like Fox and media like Rush. Within a year or two, it was quickly politicized as left wing efforts to raise taxes. And once that line of thought got into the mainstream of Republican media, the game for climate change action was already over.

The thing is, Republicans and conservatives are ing gullible morons that will fall for anything and everything that's spoonfed them by their corporate masters but they're gotdamn dogged and don't stop. And liberals are too busy to be bothered while their house burns down around them from multiple sources the regressive forces have started. They don't quite grasp the villainy that's ongoing by a very motivated and very determined "enemy."

That's how the Republicans got SCOTUS and the judges hips necessary to impose their ideology on America despite them not winning the total popular vote in an American election since 2004. They play the slow game and keep their eye on the prize. And in so doing through the rule of law, science-based understanding, and any semblance of playing fairly out the window.

I repeat, were ed.

[scott]

Think positively guys, relatively few humans get to witness the fall of a great civilization in real time.

[xellos88330]

so I hope that gun lovers are okay with people owning nukes. If the 2nd amendment is all about protecting yourself against a tyrannic government, then you should have access to the same weapons. Now, the interesting part is: what if my name is Mohammed Al Hussein and I’m an American, should I be allowed to have nukes to protect myself?

Nukes... WMDs? Why are those necessary when it has been proven time and again that a military force struggles against insurgent forces and guerilla warfare? Are you suggesting that the government immediately knows exactly who is rising up to fight them?