The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/08/08/curt-brockway-montana-national-anthem-assaulter-trump-ordered/1958043001/

Disgusting and disturbing on many levels, but the worst is the defense attorney is seeking is raising a defense that his client though he was following the orders of the president.  While unlikely to secure a not guilty he is most certainly using that to angle for a nominal sentence.  And based on the judge allowing pr instead of bail, the defense seems tobe working.

I know, I know unfair of me to in anyway suggest Trump’s rhetoric incited this violence.

"Brockway suffered a traumatic brain injury in a vehicle crash in 2000 that has affected his decision making, and Jasper said he plans to raise that in his client’s defense."

This is a troubled man. Just like the Dayton killer being a Warren supporter and Antifa member . The common denominator is crazy people will find a reason to crazy.

Connor Betts defense atty isn’t raising the Warren told me to do it defense.  And Betts isn’t out on bail.  Brockway isn’t the first person to commit violence to please the president.  But Brockway’s atty is the first to advance that as a legal defense.

I agree he is a troubled crazy man.  Do you agree that releasing him on PR is dangerous. 

I'm so old that I remember when people were held responsible for their own actions.

I'm all on board Hoodie...while we're at it, let's crucify Jodie Foster for John Hinckley Jr. shooting Reagan.  It's all her fault!   ::)

Just a few months ago you were singing a different tune regarding Guyger.

(https://i.imgflip.com/2jhkym.jpg)

To the best of my knowledge Jodie Foster never said anything to suggest she wanted Reagan to be physically harmed.  

Elizabeth Warren has to the best of my knowledge never advocate physical violence against others.

Trump has on multiple times encouraged physical violence against those for whom he disagrees.  

Encouraging others to commit violence is a crime, inciting violence.

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQU54pwNID-tO0xSvyksrpHlfb9E2xcx87f_m7jQV5UYlMfH-Hnxw)

Did she plan it out? Did she make a mistake? Who the fuck knows? Either way she needs to be held accountable for her actions. If there is proof that she planned and premeditated to go to a black guy's apartment and kill him, then yes throw the book at her.

In this case, the guy is admitting that he did it and then blamed it on someone else. Two totally different situations, your apples and oranges comparisons are silly.

His lawyer Jasper added that Brockway “certainly didn’t understand it was a crime.”

If this grown adult didn't understand what he did was a crime, then it's obvious that he's got mental problems of some type.

^I bet he's a racist too because he supports Trump.   ::)

Rather than posting pointless memes please explain why “wouldn’t you like to punch them in the mouth” at a campaign rally is not inciting violence.

Or in another thread explain why you don’t consider Trumps comments about Judge Cruiel is not racism.

You accuse me of mental gymnastics.  But you have offered zero analysis to reach your conclusion.  None, zip.  Me and spider have posted lengthy explanation on why Trump is a racist.  Your response has been he is not with zero explication on how you reached that conclusion or poking holes in ours.  

That almost sounds like you agree the judges decision to release him on PR was an egregious mistake.

You lost me when you called us racists.  You don't deserve any sort of explanation when you blatantly disrespect users.  You've lost all respect from me.

Memes get through what I'd like to say, so memes is what you get.

You and Spider don't determine anything, much less who is or isn't a racist. You simply have opinions on an anonymous obscure internet forum. For all I know, Hillary could be running this web site and control 95% of the screen names.


Don't know, didn't read all the tidbits of the article. I simply addressed the "blame it on someone else angle". No one forced this guy to do anything, he made his own decisions. This is just another instance of liberals trying to blame anyone except the actual person responsible.

Here is your opportunity to change my mind.  Explain to me how Trump’s comments about Judge Cruiel is not racist.  My position is Trump is a racist and by supporting his racism is also racism.

There are two possible counter arguments 1) Trump is in fact not racist.  or 2) Trump is racist but I oppose his racism and support him for other reasons

The second one is the one taken by Ross and early on by many Republicans.  I think that is a very very weak argument.  Fau posted a quote that got to the heart of why supporting a racist is no different from being a racist.  

But that is not the defense you have offered.  You claim he is not a racist.  So explain why it is not racist.  On the face of it saying someone can't be impartial because of his race, is racist. Explain why it isn’t.  

(Oh and by the way there is in fact a non-racist reason that Judge Cruiel might not be impartial in that case, the problems with that argument is it would not disqualify the judge, and you pretty much have to concede that building the wall and other comments by Trump are racist and offensive)

So offer your explanation of why calling you a racist is unfair.  

I really don't give a shit to change your mind.  You think it's acceptable to call me a racist for supporting Trump.  That is not enough reason to call me and others here racist, you're delusional.  That's a personal attack on me and my character and against board rules.  You're a mod, you should know better.  If you're willy-nilly going to call people racists, you can fuck off.

If you support racism you are a racist.  That is not name calling, that is literally applying the definition of the word.  It is literally no different than calling me a liberal.  And yes liberal has been used as an insult on this board. Although I never take it that way.

If I called you a snowflake for getting offended at being called a racist and asked you if you need a safe space then that would be a personal attack. 

I assume you are not such a racist that you want to reinstate the Jim Crow laws.....So lets say someone was to post that they feel CRA was a mistake and we should bring back segregation.  Let’s further assume that some of us called that person a racist.  Is that a personal attack or just an accurate description?   If you going with personal attack then you just don’t accept that words have definitions.  If you agree that it is an accurate description of someone who supports bringing back the Jim Crow laws is racism.  Then explain why Trumps actions are not racist. 

I find it funny that some of the more liberal members here get to "apply" literal definitions of words and use statistics to benefit their leftist agendas. However, if I use the literal definition of "normal/abnormal" when talking about LGBT. I'm labeled a homophobe. Or if I use official government statistics to point out that one group is responsible for more violence than other groups. I'm labeled a racist. Funny how that works isn't it. Either literal definitions and official statistics are useful for both sides or they're not. You can't just cherry pick what or ignore what you want.

(https://i.imgflip.com/2j9fqm.jpg)

^^^^ how so?  explain why it is mental gymnastics...what logical flaw did I present? .....what did I stretch? 

You can’t articulate it because you are the one engaging in mental gymnastics to justify your racism as something other than racism.

(https://i.imgflip.com/2h8dzp.jpg)

(https://concentuswealth.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/JackNicholson.jpg)

(https://i.imgflip.com/1zwubx.jpg)

I will concede that one to you, the right wing is better at memes.  In fact you thrive on them, rather articulate a complete thought just post a picture and phrase. 

It's funny how I'm supposed to be perfectly calm and indifferent discussing whether my race is inherently more violent and/or less intelligent than other races, but if I say "Hey, it's actually racist to say that black people must be more violent," suddenly I'm personally attacking others and being so offensive!

Similarly, you're perfectly fine with defending a man who says that Mexicans are rapists and that a judge is unfit to serve if he is Mexican, yet if we call you out for doing so, you throw a fit and start crying about blatant disrespect by being called a "racist."

If you're going to get on a message board and start defending people who want to disparage entire races, why don't you get some thicker skin?  You don't see me boohooing about "disrespect" and repeatedly shitposting memes every time pondwater cites some BS statistics to "prove" my race is dumb and violent.

It's a distinction without a difference .. when someone supports a racist politically, I've heard enough. Does their personal racism really matter at that point?

So FBI crime statistics are BS? I'll be sure to remind you of this "BS statistics" post when you cite your statistics in the future. Do you actually dispute that black people as a group commit more violent crimes than other groups in the US? You need not look past Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, Memphis, New Orleans, and Jackson MS.

The majority of wealthy people in the US are white (much more so than whites as a % of the population), so either the statistics must be BS, or that must mean white people are better at making money than other races!

pondwater, I'm sure you are aware that Nazis used carefully-selected statistics to "prove" that the Jews were a menace, and that the Aryan race is superior.  Hell, in our own country around 100 years ago, there were "scientists" using statistics to prove that the Negro is inferior.  It is not any sort of impressive accomplishment to twist statistics (even factual statistics!) to a faulty conclusion.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: poor people are more likely to commit violent crime in the US, and - due to several centuries of white supremacy - blacks and other people of color are more likely to be poor.  White supremacists focus on their race as a factor, when in fact race is as irrelevant as eye color.

Not sure if I even trust the FBI crime stats on race given they rely on local jurisdictions for the info......

I recall a few years ago a man with a white mom and AA dad raped a woman with an AA mom and white dad and sheriff reported it as black man raped white woman. And the sheriff even made comments about this becoming a problem post-integration. Made the news cycle for less than a day.

According to the FBI’s stats Heather Heyer was NOT a victim of a hate crime. 

https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2019/08/11/hate-crime-data-federal-reports-heather-heyer-khalid-jabara-sidner-pkg-vpx.cnn

IMO, they need to get rid of "hate crimes".   Murder or rape is murder or rape regardless of who does it to whom.   As such, they should be severely punished. 

Also, quit labeling people as "minorities".   People are people and everyone deserves equal treatment.  Nobody should get special or favorable treatment unless they have a disability that requires assistance.

You can’t effectively deploy crime prevention resources unless you know the causes of the crime.  The steps to combat drug related crimes is different than hate crimes.  Preventing date rape is different than preventing someone who randomly stalks someone. 

In other words, blacks are more violent. Your words, not mine. Game over, thanks for playing.

Hey, you see what you want to see.

I say, "Poor people are more likely to commit violent crime and race isn't a factor in that, but more black people are poor," and you see "Blacks are more  violent."

Your math is wacky. Roughly 13% of the population is responsible for roughly 50% of the violent crimes. I would counter that when total population levels of different races are taken into account, there are many more poor white people in the country than poor black people in the country. Therefore, in your scenario actually white people should proportionally make up a much larger percentage of violent crimes. Either way, being poor isn't a reason to assault, rob, or kill others. Refusal to acknowledge the problem or blame it on anything but historic white racism is only going to make things worse. 

It's simple. If whites commit more violent crimes per capita, then they are more violent. If Hispanics commit more violent crimes per capita, then Hispanics are more violent. If Asians commit more violent crimes per capita, then Asians are more violent. If blacks commit more violent crimes per capita, then blacks are more violent.

No one is picking on blacks, that facts are what the facts are. What does the data say? If the data says that whites commit more rape or acts of pedophilia, then great. If the data says that whites suck at sports compared to another racial group, then great. Maybe you should stop using your emotions and stop making excuses for black people, it's not helping them.

Black people (and minorities in general) make up a larger percentage of the poor than they do of the total population.

Though I suppose from your standpoint, that just means blacks are worse at making money. In for a penny, in for a pound, as it were.

I wonder what proportion of mass-murdering terrorists are white compared to the racial demographics of the country as a whole, and what conclusion we can draw about the entire white race from that factual statistic?  What about those who commit financial crimes like insider trading?  Oh, wait... that kind of talk is only allowed when disparaging brown people.

Let me just add something:


This is racism, purely distilled and neatly packaged.

Consider the following statement:

"If blondes commit more violent crimes per capita, then they are more violent. If brunettes commit more violent crimes per capita, then brunettes are more violent. If redheads commit more violent crimes per capita, then redheads are more violent."

Such a statement is obvious nonsense, because we all understand that regardless of the statistical correlation, hair color is not a causative factor in the commission of crimes.

However, you clearly appear to believe that race is a causative factor in the commission of crimes, and that some races are more predisposed to committing crimes than others.  How is that anything but textbook racism?  Do you somehow figure that as long as you don't use the n-word, it must be OK?

Maybe they do, maybe they don't. I haven't looked into it. I would assume from the gap in population levels that there are more total poor whites in the country than total poor blacks in the country. Do you have any stats to back up your assertation?

Nope, that kind of talk is just fine with me. There is plenty of negative and bad shit that whites do. If the stats and number add up, it's all good. See, I don't take it personal. Numbers are numbers and facts are facts. If whites rape more, commit more mass murder, or acts of pedophilia. That's cool, it's all good as long as the stats are factual. Then once you admit the problem exists, then you can move to the causes and solutions. Your logic is ass backwards.

the science of what you say here is just all wrong..

First off you conflate totals with proportions .. and then you go on to reinforce racial identity as causal to behavior. which by the way is the text book definition of racism. It doesn't matter that you can find a commonality and then a behavior and then attribute it to race. That assumes right up front that race and race alone is a factor in behavior. And it is not.  Wealth is. That's the problem with the whole narrative. The wealth gap is what correlates to the crime statistics.

You keep referring to the color of one's skin. The color of one's skin isn't the causative factor. The actual factor in my opinion, is actually black culture and upbringing. Which will always be intertwined with the color of ones skin. Racial and racist is not the same thing like you seem to think.

Regardless of what you say, roughly 13% of the population is committing roughly 50% of the violent crime in the country. That data point says that when it comes to the issue of violent crime, the black population well above statistical norms for all other groups. IE, blacks commit more violence as a group, hence they are a more violent as a group. Sorry you don't like how facts work. But hey, feel free to just indiscriminately throw the "racist" term around all willy nilly and see if it sticks.

^^^ I love it.  The  color of skin isn't the reason,  it is the culture associated with the color of skin. Holy shit.

As noted in the last post, race and culture are 2 different things that can't be unraveled from each other. All races have different cultures and belief systems. Cultures and belief systems influence behaviors. So it's not the actual race or color that is attributed to the behaviors, it's the cultures that a particular race have adopted.

Anyhow, white, black, or green. You're still attempting to make excuses for people's bad behavior. Being poor is no excuse to rape, rob, or kill people. Are people in the Middle East and Africa more violent than people in the US?

So you're saying that that black culture isn't a reason for violence? Or maybe bad upbringing in fatherless homes? If not, what do you attribute the spike in black violence over all other groups? Since blacks make up only around 13% of the total population, there have to be at least as many poor whites as there are poor blacks, if not more. Why aren't they committing violent crime at the same pace as blacks? What's the reason? Is it because the liberals think I'm a racist? Is it my fault? LMFAO....

Maybe if we say "poverty" or "wealth gap" a few more times, you'll figure it out?

Let's try this: if I provide factually accurate statistics showing that black people have less average wealth than white people in the US, will you stop insisting that skin color "black culture" is a causative factor in crime?

Nope, because average wealth doesn't make people CHOOSE to kill other people. It's ok, you can be wrong. I won't lose any sleep.

Oh, by the way. When you say that "blacks are more likely to be poor." It's no different than saying "blacks are more likely to be violent." You're using a set of statistical data to make a general negative determination about a racial group. But just like the liberal playbook says, "no one else can use statistical data and literal definitions of words but us".

Therefore, "You clearly appear to believe that race is a causative factor whether someone is poor or not, and that some races are more predisposed to being poor than others.  How is that anything but textbook racism?" So, are you a racist, a hypocrite, or both?

But skin color "black culture" does?

Are you one of those "prosperity gospel" people that believes poor people are poor because of subpar morality, and that the rich are rich because of their outstanding character?  Being poor is not a moral failing, unlike being a violent criminal (or, according to you, skin color "black culture").

If you say "Blacks are more likely to have sickle-cell anemia," that is not a moral judgment.  If you say "Blacks are more likely to be violent criminals," that is.

So I guess it's OK if we say that you're being "racialist"?

I hear "race realist" is the preferred term for today's up-and-coming eliminationists.