How Liberals really feel about black people

[ClosedCaption]

Actually, I find it funny that the Democrats consider blacks to be too stupid or lazy to go to the DMV and get a free ID...

Go figure...

Thats right! You set up hoops and then claim someone is weak because they wont jump through them!

If a person is too "weak" to be able to prove that they are eligible to vote in the district they wish to vote in, then they should not be allowed to vote. I don't care what type of "ID" is required, be it photo ID issued by the state (available for a pretty small fee, in some cases even free) or a recent utility bill establishing residence in said district, some sort of "ID" or proof of eligibility to vote in said district should be required. How is this an undue hardship?

Using "weak" as a characterization is akin to double dog daring. It means nothing

Then why did you use it? I was merely using the term you used. Also, please answer the question I posed or admit that it is not an undue hardship.

I already did...Try reading this thread. Someone asked me what hoops? and this was my response

Going to the DMV or getting another ID because the one you have suddenly doesnt count now. Or closing DMV's in certain areas then say "All you have to do is get to this other DMV"

Of course when someone says "Why do I have to do all this new shit?" you think by responding with "What? Are you too stupid?" doesnt answer the question.

 

[oldsoul]

Actually, I find it funny that the Democrats consider blacks to be too stupid or lazy to go to the DMV and get a free ID...

Go figure...

Thats right! You set up hoops and then claim someone is weak because they wont jump through them!

If a person is too "weak" to be able to prove that they are eligible to vote in the district they wish to vote in, then they should not be allowed to vote. I don't care what type of "ID" is required, be it photo ID issued by the state (available for a pretty small fee, in some cases even free) or a recent utility bill establishing residence in said district, some sort of "ID" or proof of eligibility to vote in said district should be required. How is this an undue hardship?

Using "weak" as a characterization is akin to double dog daring. It means nothing

Then why did you use it? I was merely using the term you used. Also, please answer the question I posed or admit that it is not an undue hardship.

I already did...Try reading this thread. Someone asked me what hoops? and this was my response

Going to the DMV or getting another ID because the one you have suddenly doesnt count now. Or closing DMV's in certain areas then say "All you have to do is get to this other DMV"

Of course when someone says "Why do I have to do all this new shit?" you think by responding with "What? Are you too stupid?" doesnt answer the question.

Try actually answering my question directly. I asked how it is that requiring an ID is an undue hardship. I did not ask how it is a hardship to obtain one. You may think it is splitting hairs or playing semantics, and perhaps it is, however, obtaining something and being expected to show that thing are two different things. Also, as I asked another poster: If it is fine to expect people to show ID to exercise one right, how is it not fine to have the same expectation for another right? Is that not the definition of a double standard?

 

[ClosedCaption]

I asked how it is that requiring an ID is an undue hardship. I did not ask how it is a hardship to obtain one.

Ok I'll go slowly here. If someone made it harder to GET an ID then it becomes and undue hardship to obtain the hard to get ID.

Its like asking me how is it a undue hardship to get water after I drop your ass in the desert. Was that specific enough for you?

 

[oldsoul]

I asked how it is that requiring an ID is an undue hardship. I did not ask how it is a hardship to obtain one.

Ok I'll go slowly here. If someone made it harder to GET an ID then it becomes and undue hardship to obtain the hard to get ID.

Its like asking me how is it a undue hardship to get water after I drop your ass in the desert. Was that specific enough for you?

So then you must admit that expecting one to show ID to obtain a firearm is an undue hardship. At least we can agree on that point. To be clear, I believe that ID should be required for BOTH.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I asked how it is that requiring an ID is an undue hardship. I did not ask how it is a hardship to obtain one.

Ok I'll go slowly here. If someone made it harder to GET an ID then it becomes and undue hardship to obtain the hard to get ID.

Its like asking me how is it a undue hardship to get water after I drop your ass in the desert. Was that specific enough for you?

So then you must admit that expecting one to show ID to obtain a firearm is an undue hardship. At least we can agree on that point. To be clear, I believe that ID should be required for BOTH.

Not sure about that one champ. If you have an ID you should be able to get one. If you just stroll in and want to buy one like a buy it out the trunk deal I dont see how that is a good thing for anyone

 

[oldsoul]

I asked how it is that requiring an ID is an undue hardship. I did not ask how it is a hardship to obtain one.

Ok I'll go slowly here. If someone made it harder to GET an ID then it becomes and undue hardship to obtain the hard to get ID.

Its like asking me how is it a undue hardship to get water after I drop your ass in the desert. Was that specific enough for you?

So then you must admit that expecting one to show ID to obtain a firearm is an undue hardship. At least we can agree on that point. To be clear, I believe that ID should be required for BOTH.

Not sure about that one champ. If you have an ID you should be able to get one. If you just stroll in and want to buy one like a buy it out the trunk deal I dont see how that is a good thing for anyone

So, to be clear, are you saying that it is an undue hardship to show ID for voting, but it is not for a firearm purchase? Hate to break it to ya', but it's either an undue hardship or it's not. It matters not what right one is attempting to exercise.
I must give you props for the deflection though, you almost had me there...

 

[ClosedCaption]

I asked how it is that requiring an ID is an undue hardship. I did not ask how it is a hardship to obtain one.

Ok I'll go slowly here. If someone made it harder to GET an ID then it becomes and undue hardship to obtain the hard to get ID.

Its like asking me how is it a undue hardship to get water after I drop your ass in the desert. Was that specific enough for you?

So then you must admit that expecting one to show ID to obtain a firearm is an undue hardship. At least we can agree on that point. To be clear, I believe that ID should be required for BOTH.

Not sure about that one champ. If you have an ID you should be able to get one. If you just stroll in and want to buy one like a buy it out the trunk deal I dont see how that is a good thing for anyone

So, to be clear, are you saying that it is an undue hardship to show ID for voting, but it is not for a firearm purchase? Hate to break it to ya', but it's either an undue hardship or it's not. It matters not what right one is attempting to exercise.
I must give you props for the deflection though, you almost had me there...

Not SHOW ID but to require and accept only certain ID's. Like you said before showing isnt what you are talking about its how hard it is to get one and changing it every few months

 

[oldsoul]

I asked how it is that requiring an ID is an undue hardship. I did not ask how it is a hardship to obtain one.

Ok I'll go slowly here. If someone made it harder to GET an ID then it becomes and undue hardship to obtain the hard to get ID.

Its like asking me how is it a undue hardship to get water after I drop your ass in the desert. Was that specific enough for you?

So then you must admit that expecting one to show ID to obtain a firearm is an undue hardship. At least we can agree on that point. To be clear, I believe that ID should be required for BOTH.

Not sure about that one champ. If you have an ID you should be able to get one. If you just stroll in and want to buy one like a buy it out the trunk deal I dont see how that is a good thing for anyone

So, to be clear, are you saying that it is an undue hardship to show ID for voting, but it is not for a firearm purchase? Hate to break it to ya', but it's either an undue hardship or it's not. It matters not what right one is attempting to exercise.
I must give you props for the deflection though, you almost had me there...

Not SHOW ID but to require and accept only certain ID's. Like you said before showing isnt what you are talking about its how hard it is to get one and changing it every few months

Wait, wait, wait. Back up a second here. What ID's have been proposed as acceptable? One from Joe's Back Yard IDs?

If I said that showing the ID is not what I am referring to, then I miss-spoke. Showing a valid, acceptable ID is exactly what I am talking about. How hard to obtain said ID is another topic all together.

 

[Asclepias]

How come we don't hear liberals bitching about these other things that require an ID?

Elections matter.

Probably because voting doesnt require an ID and its a right. You white cave chimps dont get it do you?

 

[Asclepias]

Ok I'll go slowly here. If someone made it harder to GET an ID then it becomes and undue hardship to obtain the hard to get ID.

Its like asking me how is it a undue hardship to get water after I drop your ass in the desert. Was that specific enough for you?

So then you must admit that expecting one to show ID to obtain a firearm is an undue hardship. At least we can agree on that point. To be clear, I believe that ID should be required for BOTH.

Not sure about that one champ. If you have an ID you should be able to get one. If you just stroll in and want to buy one like a buy it out the trunk deal I dont see how that is a good thing for anyone

So, to be clear, are you saying that it is an undue hardship to show ID for voting, but it is not for a firearm purchase? Hate to break it to ya', but it's either an undue hardship or it's not. It matters not what right one is attempting to exercise.
I must give you props for the deflection though, you almost had me there...

Not SHOW ID but to require and accept only certain ID's. Like you said before showing isnt what you are talking about its how hard it is to get one and changing it every few months

Wait, wait, wait. Back up a second here. What ID's have been proposed as acceptable? One from Joe's Back Yard IDs?

If I said that showing the ID is not what I am referring to, then I miss-spoke. Showing a valid, acceptable ID is exactly what I am talking about. How hard to obtain said ID is another topic all together.

Give it a rest. The answer is no. I have an ID but I am against it being required to vote. Black people know instinctively that whenever whitey wants something to be required then there is probably some bullshit afoot.

 

[Asclepias]

I asked how it is that requiring an ID is an undue hardship. I did not ask how it is a hardship to obtain one.

Ok I'll go slowly here. If someone made it harder to GET an ID then it becomes and undue hardship to obtain the hard to get ID.

Its like asking me how is it a undue hardship to get water after I drop your ass in the desert. Was that specific enough for you?

So then you must admit that expecting one to show ID to obtain a firearm is an undue hardship. At least we can agree on that point. To be clear, I believe that ID should be required for BOTH.

Not really. You show me an instance where voting shot someone and killed them then i would agree they are the same.

 

[oldsoul]

So then you must admit that expecting one to show ID to obtain a firearm is an undue hardship. At least we can agree on that point. To be clear, I believe that ID should be required for BOTH.

Not sure about that one champ. If you have an ID you should be able to get one. If you just stroll in and want to buy one like a buy it out the trunk deal I dont see how that is a good thing for anyone

So, to be clear, are you saying that it is an undue hardship to show ID for voting, but it is not for a firearm purchase? Hate to break it to ya', but it's either an undue hardship or it's not. It matters not what right one is attempting to exercise.
I must give you props for the deflection though, you almost had me there...

Not SHOW ID but to require and accept only certain ID's. Like you said before showing isnt what you are talking about its how hard it is to get one and changing it every few months

Wait, wait, wait. Back up a second here. What ID's have been proposed as acceptable? One from Joe's Back Yard IDs?

If I said that showing the ID is not what I am referring to, then I miss-spoke. Showing a valid, acceptable ID is exactly what I am talking about. How hard to obtain said ID is another topic all together.

Give it a rest. The answer is no. I have an ID but I am against it being required to vote. Black people know instinctively that whenever whitey wants something to be required then there is probably some bullshit afoot.

Well then, Would you apply the same logic to other rights? 2nd Amend. rights perhaps? One would be required to show valid ID to purchase a firearm, via background check. You have to prove who you are. How is that different from voting?

 

[oldsoul]

I asked how it is that requiring an ID is an undue hardship. I did not ask how it is a hardship to obtain one.

Ok I'll go slowly here. If someone made it harder to GET an ID then it becomes and undue hardship to obtain the hard to get ID.

Its like asking me how is it a undue hardship to get water after I drop your ass in the desert. Was that specific enough for you?

So then you must admit that expecting one to show ID to obtain a firearm is an undue hardship. At least we can agree on that point. To be clear, I believe that ID should be required for BOTH.

Not really. You show me an instance where voting shot someone and killed them then i would agree they are the same.

I sure will, as soon as you show me where a gun, by it's self, shot someone. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

 

[katsteve2012]

This thread is hilarious. It is priceless entertainment observing non blacks debate about which non black is more racist.

 

[Wyld Kard]

How come we don't hear liberals bitching about these other things that require an ID?

Elections matter.

Probably because voting doesnt require an ID and its a right. You white cave chimps dont get it do you?

That depends on where the fuck one lives stupid.

Strict photo ID required in effect: Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

Strict non-photo ID required in effect: Arizona, North Dakota and Ohio.

Non-Strict photo ID required in effect: Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Rhode Island, South Dakota and Texas.

Non-Strict non-photo ID required in effect: Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and Washington.

No ID required to vote at ballot box: California, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming, and Washington, D.C.

Apparently, you don't fucking get it.

 

[sealybobo]

I've been saying for years that the political left is no less racist and bigoted than the far right. The only difference is they divide and exploit minorities to advance their agenda.



I thought this one guy's comment on the video was exceptional

"Progressive white liberals are the most condescending racist beings on the planet. They treat blacks like inferior pets and if you come across with any knowledge they'll treat you like a dependant pet who bit their hand during feeding time. THIS, I know all too well. The soft bigotry of low expectation."

Well the problems in the black community are now for the Republicans to solve. And if the black community still has problems in 4 years it will only be the black communities fault. After all, they elected the conservatives by staying home, right?

 

[sealybobo]

This thread is hilarious. It is priceless entertainment observing non blacks debate about which non black is more racist.

Since I see black people mostly arguing with conservatives when it comes to things like politics and cop shootings, I just assumed it was a given cons were more racist than liberals.

I guess we are going to find out. Lets see how blacks are doing 4 years from now. Lets see if being bad citizens who don't vote ends up paying off for them or if I'm right and they suffer for their laziness.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Well the problems in the black community are now for the Republicans to solve.

Why isn't it the black community's problem to solve?

 

[sealybobo]

Well the problems in the black community are now for the Republicans to solve.

Why isn't it the black community's problem to solve?

It is. In fact lately I've been telling black people I'm starting to get the sense that they are just making excuses. No matter what they are doing wrong it's always whitey's fault.

And I've been defending the black community for 30 years now. So in a way I've been doing the same thing they have.

Example

White: Black fathers don't take care of their kids

Black/Liberal/Me: That's because of institutionalized racism man! It's not their fault. This started back in slavery when we broke up the family,blablabla

Another example:

White: Blacks shouldn't get affirmative action

Blacks/Liberals/Me: We need to make up for whites who won't hire blacks by forcing quotas.

The problem with that is that black people feel they are a protected class. They can't be fired for fear of being sued. So employers keep bad black employees around instead of firing them. Now I agree that blacks have to get a job because they are qualified and keep it because they are good at the job.

You're going to see me agreeing with you a lot more than I argue over the next year.

 

[Unkotare]

Bobo=idiotic, racist douche