Reparations for Blacks.......Legalize Looting

[katsteve2012]

Now , you are just being ignorant, arrogant, and immature. Why would you ask a question of a complete stranger, get an honest answer, and then proceed to act as if you are an authority on what I really think?

If you cannot stand what I post, then you are not obligated to respond to what I have to say.

"If you cannot stand what I post, then you are not obligated to respond to what I have to say."
I will give you exactly what you deserve.



Reality is defined by actions, not words.

Your actions....your posts....no matter what way you phrase it...are designed to mitigate the anarchy of Ferguson and the criminality of the culprit.

You and every other apologist deserve the same contumely that this President deserves for coming down on the side of the issue that supports lawlessness.

The thug did everything that earned him his final reward.
There is no quibbling, no tip toeing around it.
If the thug attacked not just a hard-working store owner, and a law enforcement officer....Officer Wilson's actions, I am certain, saved lives of other innocents.


I certainly hope that there will be a fund set up to help the officer find a way to replace the (earned) career that was taken from him.

"You will give me what I derserve"? Your ego is way of control, there kid. And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait.

You are entitled to your opinion, and you may continue this pointless dialogue with yourself by ASSuming what you believe I think.

However, I will now give you what you deserve. You are obviously a street corner philosopher, and not a very good one, who has read way too many books, listened to too many talk shows and in the process digested enough rhetoric to actually believe that you can accurately determine what the day to day "actions" are of a complete stranger on the Internet.

Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear.

And that is someone who actually is objective and has common sense.

You are too busy listening to YOURSELF talk, to actually listen with any objectivity.and that is a behavior that at some point in your life is going to cause you to be embarrased badly, if you already have not been.

What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours.

This is not the wild west, and this entire process has been questioned and criticized by "melanin challenged" legal experts who have a history of siding with law enforcement, so I suppose that makes them "apologists who are mitigating the criminality of the culprit"?

You are NOT a legal expert, nor am I, but if a number of real experts see the flaws in this case, and have gone public stating so, then that gets my attention.

If you don't like it, too bad. And not my problem.

And as far as the officer goes, he will not need a fund to assist him. There will be plenty of those out there like you who will deify him. He will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer in a dumpy little town like Ferguson.

1. " Your ego is way of control, there kid."
Guilty as charged.

2. "And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait."
There is never any ignorance associated with moi.

3. "You are entitled to your opinion,.."
Can't you get anything right?

It is the grand jury's considered decision, rather stronger than an opinion.


4. "....who has read way too many books,..."
"Liberals don't read books – they don't read anything … That's why they're liberals. They watch TV, absorb the propaganda, and vote on the basis of urges."
Coulter

5. "Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear."

You and those who 'think' as you do are a danger to society.

"...We were taught to work jolly hard. We were taught to prove yourself (sic). We were taught self-reliance. We were taught to live within our income. You were taught that cleanliness is next to godliness. You were taught always to give a hand to your neighbour. You were taught tremendous pride in your country.. All of these things are Victorian values. They are also perennial values.”
Margaret Thatcher's views in the Evening Standard of April 15, 1983.


Tell me where the thug Michael Brown fits in there.


6. "What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours."

See, this is where you cross over from simply wrong to become a lying sack of sewage.

He attacked the 'thin blue line' that stands between society and the law of the jungle.


7. "...He [Wilson] will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer..."
From your mouth to God's ear.

Spare me. I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime. You quote Margaret Thatcher from 1983 but obviously know nothing about the character of the lady herself. Frankly, I doubt that you were even a self supporting adult in 1983. As far as how I think being a danger to society, again if credible legal experts are questioning this entire process are they a danger to society as well?


I think it is people like you who are the real danger. Those who place the legal process on a pedestal and believe that blind obedience in the face of obvious corruption is a viable and honorable action. I think there is term that describes your ilk.....
."sheep".

As far as the rest of your empty headed rant..do me a favor and add me to your ignore list, you are taking up too much board space responding to me with your nonsense.

1. "I think it is people like you who are the real danger."
OMG!

A "so are you" post!!!!

Brilliant.


2. "I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime."
I agree with the "forgotten" part.
You might want to mention that to your doctor.
Trust me: I've rarely met anyone who reads as much as I.


On that, I agree. There is no doubt that

Now , you are just being ignorant, arrogant, and immature. Why would you ask a question of a complete stranger, get an honest answer, and then proceed to act as if you are an authority on what I really think?

If you cannot stand what I post, then you are not obligated to respond to what I have to say.

"If you cannot stand what I post, then you are not obligated to respond to what I have to say."
I will give you exactly what you deserve.



Reality is defined by actions, not words.

Your actions....your posts....no matter what way you phrase it...are designed to mitigate the anarchy of Ferguson and the criminality of the culprit.

You and every other apologist deserve the same contumely that this President deserves for coming down on the side of the issue that supports lawlessness.

The thug did everything that earned him his final reward.
There is no quibbling, no tip toeing around it.
If the thug attacked not just a hard-working store owner, and a law enforcement officer....Officer Wilson's actions, I am certain, saved lives of other innocents.


I certainly hope that there will be a fund set up to help the officer find a way to replace the (earned) career that was taken from him.

"You will give me what I derserve"? Your ego is way of control, there kid. And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait.

You are entitled to your opinion, and you may continue this pointless dialogue with yourself by ASSuming what you believe I think.

However, I will now give you what you deserve. You are obviously a street corner philosopher, and not a very good one, who has read way too many books, listened to too many talk shows and in the process digested enough rhetoric to actually believe that you can accurately determine what the day to day "actions" are of a complete stranger on the Internet.

Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear.

And that is someone who actually is objective and has common sense.

You are too busy listening to YOURSELF talk, to actually listen with any objectivity.and that is a behavior that at some point in your life is going to cause you to be embarrased badly, if you already have not been.

What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours.

This is not the wild west, and this entire process has been questioned and criticized by "melanin challenged" legal experts who have a history of siding with law enforcement, so I suppose that makes them "apologists who are mitigating the criminality of the culprit"?

You are NOT a legal expert, nor am I, but if a number of real experts see the flaws in this case, and have gone public stating so, then that gets my attention.

If you don't like it, too bad. And not my problem.

And as far as the officer goes, he will not need a fund to assist him. There will be plenty of those out there like you who will deify him. He will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer in a dumpy little town like Ferguson.

1. " Your ego is way of control, there kid."
Guilty as charged.

2. "And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait."
There is never any ignorance associated with moi.

3. "You are entitled to your opinion,.."
Can't you get anything right?

It is the grand jury's considered decision, rather stronger than an opinion.


4. "....who has read way too many books,..."
"Liberals don't read books – they don't read anything … That's why they're liberals. They watch TV, absorb the propaganda, and vote on the basis of urges."
Coulter

5. "Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear."

You and those who 'think' as you do are a danger to society.

"...We were taught to work jolly hard. We were taught to prove yourself (sic). We were taught self-reliance. We were taught to live within our income. You were taught that cleanliness is next to godliness. You were taught always to give a hand to your neighbour. You were taught tremendous pride in your country.. All of these things are Victorian values. They are also perennial values.”
Margaret Thatcher's views in the Evening Standard of April 15, 1983.


Tell me where the thug Michael Brown fits in there.


6. "What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours."

See, this is where you cross over from simply wrong to become a lying sack of sewage.

He attacked the 'thin blue line' that stands between society and the law of the jungle.


7. "...He [Wilson] will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer..."
From your mouth to God's ear.

Spare me. I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime. You quote Margaret Thatcher from 1983 but obviously know nothing about the character of the lady herself. Frankly, I doubt that you were even a self supporting adult in 1983. As far as how I think being a danger to society, again if credible legal experts are questioning this entire process are they a danger to society as well?


I think it is people like you who are the real danger. Those who place the legal process on a pedestal and believe that blind obedience in the face of obvious corruption is a viable and honorable action. I think there is term that describes your ilk.....
."sheep".

As far as the rest of your empty headed rant..do me a favor and add me to your ignore list, you are taking up too much board space responding to me with your nonsense.

1. "I think it is people like you who are the real danger."
OMG!

A "so are you" post!!!!

Brilliant.


2. "I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime."
I agree with the "forgotten" part.
You might want to mention that to your doctor.
Trust me: I've rarely met anyone who reads as much as I.


3. "....do me a favor and add me to your ignore list,..."
Did you mistake me for a Liberal???
I have no such list.


4. "You quote Margaret Thatcher from 1983 but obviously know nothing about the character of the lady herself.?
Actually, I do.
But you 'reds' all say the same thing about folks like Lady Thatcher.


5. "...again if credible legal experts blah blah blah...."
Your education coming right up:
"An issue that involves the resolution of a factual dispute or controversy and is within the sphere of the decisions to be made by a jury."
Question of Fact legal definition of Question of Fact


Say....do you have a meeting of the Melanin Masters gang today?
If so......my regards to all.

I don't know you as you claim to know me, and I mistake you for nothing except what you are......someone with an opinion who happens to disagree with mine.

Your resorting to politicizing this exchange as a difference between "liberals and conservatives" is ludicrous at best. You have no idea if I am a liberal or not.

And then dodging and deflecting what the root issue is here, which is questioning the legal process in this case, makes you appear to be devoid of any semblance of common sense or belief in the ideals of what made this country great.

Maturity and life experience, combined with higher education provides one with the ability to dismiss a partisan hack as nothing but a wordy, self absorbed, buffoonish bookworm whose hallmark attribute is that "they have never met anyone who reads as much as they do"....big deal.

Not impressive or noteworthy at all.

I am much more comfortable with myself knowing that I base my views on what I have seen and experienced in 60+ years of living, traveling to different states and countries, meeting different people and absorbing the best of different cultures, versus what I was "required" to read in school, from kindergarten through college.

Lastly, since it appears that you cannot leave me alone, here is a direct question for you:

You quoted Margaret Thatcher from 1983. Where were you in 1983?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"If you cannot stand what I post, then you are not obligated to respond to what I have to say."
I will give you exactly what you deserve.



Reality is defined by actions, not words.

Your actions....your posts....no matter what way you phrase it...are designed to mitigate the anarchy of Ferguson and the criminality of the culprit.

You and every other apologist deserve the same contumely that this President deserves for coming down on the side of the issue that supports lawlessness.

The thug did everything that earned him his final reward.
There is no quibbling, no tip toeing around it.
If the thug attacked not just a hard-working store owner, and a law enforcement officer....Officer Wilson's actions, I am certain, saved lives of other innocents.


I certainly hope that there will be a fund set up to help the officer find a way to replace the (earned) career that was taken from him.

"You will give me what I derserve"? Your ego is way of control, there kid. And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait.

You are entitled to your opinion, and you may continue this pointless dialogue with yourself by ASSuming what you believe I think.

However, I will now give you what you deserve. You are obviously a street corner philosopher, and not a very good one, who has read way too many books, listened to too many talk shows and in the process digested enough rhetoric to actually believe that you can accurately determine what the day to day "actions" are of a complete stranger on the Internet.

Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear.

And that is someone who actually is objective and has common sense.

You are too busy listening to YOURSELF talk, to actually listen with any objectivity.and that is a behavior that at some point in your life is going to cause you to be embarrased badly, if you already have not been.

What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours.

This is not the wild west, and this entire process has been questioned and criticized by "melanin challenged" legal experts who have a history of siding with law enforcement, so I suppose that makes them "apologists who are mitigating the criminality of the culprit"?

You are NOT a legal expert, nor am I, but if a number of real experts see the flaws in this case, and have gone public stating so, then that gets my attention.

If you don't like it, too bad. And not my problem.

And as far as the officer goes, he will not need a fund to assist him. There will be plenty of those out there like you who will deify him. He will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer in a dumpy little town like Ferguson.

1. " Your ego is way of control, there kid."
Guilty as charged.

2. "And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait."
There is never any ignorance associated with moi.

3. "You are entitled to your opinion,.."
Can't you get anything right?

It is the grand jury's considered decision, rather stronger than an opinion.


4. "....who has read way too many books,..."
"Liberals don't read books – they don't read anything … That's why they're liberals. They watch TV, absorb the propaganda, and vote on the basis of urges."
Coulter

5. "Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear."

You and those who 'think' as you do are a danger to society.

"...We were taught to work jolly hard. We were taught to prove yourself (sic). We were taught self-reliance. We were taught to live within our income. You were taught that cleanliness is next to godliness. You were taught always to give a hand to your neighbour. You were taught tremendous pride in your country.. All of these things are Victorian values. They are also perennial values.”
Margaret Thatcher's views in the Evening Standard of April 15, 1983.


Tell me where the thug Michael Brown fits in there.


6. "What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours."

See, this is where you cross over from simply wrong to become a lying sack of sewage.

He attacked the 'thin blue line' that stands between society and the law of the jungle.


7. "...He [Wilson] will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer..."
From your mouth to God's ear.

Spare me. I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime. You quote Margaret Thatcher from 1983 but obviously know nothing about the character of the lady herself. Frankly, I doubt that you were even a self supporting adult in 1983. As far as how I think being a danger to society, again if credible legal experts are questioning this entire process are they a danger to society as well?


I think it is people like you who are the real danger. Those who place the legal process on a pedestal and believe that blind obedience in the face of obvious corruption is a viable and honorable action. I think there is term that describes your ilk.....
."sheep".

As far as the rest of your empty headed rant..do me a favor and add me to your ignore list, you are taking up too much board space responding to me with your nonsense.

1. "I think it is people like you who are the real danger."
OMG!

A "so are you" post!!!!

Brilliant.


2. "I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime."
I agree with the "forgotten" part.
You might want to mention that to your doctor.
Trust me: I've rarely met anyone who reads as much as I.


On that, I agree. There is no doubt that

"If you cannot stand what I post, then you are not obligated to respond to what I have to say."
I will give you exactly what you deserve.



Reality is defined by actions, not words.

Your actions....your posts....no matter what way you phrase it...are designed to mitigate the anarchy of Ferguson and the criminality of the culprit.

You and every other apologist deserve the same contumely that this President deserves for coming down on the side of the issue that supports lawlessness.

The thug did everything that earned him his final reward.
There is no quibbling, no tip toeing around it.
If the thug attacked not just a hard-working store owner, and a law enforcement officer....Officer Wilson's actions, I am certain, saved lives of other innocents.


I certainly hope that there will be a fund set up to help the officer find a way to replace the (earned) career that was taken from him.

"You will give me what I derserve"? Your ego is way of control, there kid. And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait.

You are entitled to your opinion, and you may continue this pointless dialogue with yourself by ASSuming what you believe I think.

However, I will now give you what you deserve. You are obviously a street corner philosopher, and not a very good one, who has read way too many books, listened to too many talk shows and in the process digested enough rhetoric to actually believe that you can accurately determine what the day to day "actions" are of a complete stranger on the Internet.

Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear.

And that is someone who actually is objective and has common sense.

You are too busy listening to YOURSELF talk, to actually listen with any objectivity.and that is a behavior that at some point in your life is going to cause you to be embarrased badly, if you already have not been.

What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours.

This is not the wild west, and this entire process has been questioned and criticized by "melanin challenged" legal experts who have a history of siding with law enforcement, so I suppose that makes them "apologists who are mitigating the criminality of the culprit"?

You are NOT a legal expert, nor am I, but if a number of real experts see the flaws in this case, and have gone public stating so, then that gets my attention.

If you don't like it, too bad. And not my problem.

And as far as the officer goes, he will not need a fund to assist him. There will be plenty of those out there like you who will deify him. He will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer in a dumpy little town like Ferguson.

1. " Your ego is way of control, there kid."
Guilty as charged.

2. "And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait."
There is never any ignorance associated with moi.

3. "You are entitled to your opinion,.."
Can't you get anything right?

It is the grand jury's considered decision, rather stronger than an opinion.


4. "....who has read way too many books,..."
"Liberals don't read books – they don't read anything … That's why they're liberals. They watch TV, absorb the propaganda, and vote on the basis of urges."
Coulter

5. "Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear."

You and those who 'think' as you do are a danger to society.

"...We were taught to work jolly hard. We were taught to prove yourself (sic). We were taught self-reliance. We were taught to live within our income. You were taught that cleanliness is next to godliness. You were taught always to give a hand to your neighbour. You were taught tremendous pride in your country.. All of these things are Victorian values. They are also perennial values.”
Margaret Thatcher's views in the Evening Standard of April 15, 1983.


Tell me where the thug Michael Brown fits in there.


6. "What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours."

See, this is where you cross over from simply wrong to become a lying sack of sewage.

He attacked the 'thin blue line' that stands between society and the law of the jungle.


7. "...He [Wilson] will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer..."
From your mouth to God's ear.

Spare me. I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime. You quote Margaret Thatcher from 1983 but obviously know nothing about the character of the lady herself. Frankly, I doubt that you were even a self supporting adult in 1983. As far as how I think being a danger to society, again if credible legal experts are questioning this entire process are they a danger to society as well?


I think it is people like you who are the real danger. Those who place the legal process on a pedestal and believe that blind obedience in the face of obvious corruption is a viable and honorable action. I think there is term that describes your ilk.....
."sheep".

As far as the rest of your empty headed rant..do me a favor and add me to your ignore list, you are taking up too much board space responding to me with your nonsense.

1. "I think it is people like you who are the real danger."
OMG!

A "so are you" post!!!!

Brilliant.


2. "I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime."
I agree with the "forgotten" part.
You might want to mention that to your doctor.
Trust me: I've rarely met anyone who reads as much as I.


3. "....do me a favor and add me to your ignore list,..."
Did you mistake me for a Liberal???
I have no such list.


4. "You quote Margaret Thatcher from 1983 but obviously know nothing about the character of the lady herself.?
Actually, I do.
But you 'reds' all say the same thing about folks like Lady Thatcher.


5. "...again if credible legal experts blah blah blah...."
Your education coming right up:
"An issue that involves the resolution of a factual dispute or controversy and is within the sphere of the decisions to be made by a jury."
Question of Fact legal definition of Question of Fact


Say....do you have a meeting of the Melanin Masters gang today?
If so......my regards to all.

I don't know you as you claim to know me, and I mistake you for nothing except what you are......someone with an opinion who happens to disagree with mine.

Your resorting to politicizing this exchange as a difference between "liberals and conservatives" is ludicrous at best. You have no idea if I am a liberal or not.

And then dodging and deflecting what the root issue is here, which is questioning the legal process in this case, makes you appear to be devoid of any semblance of common sense or belief in the ideals of what made this country great.

Maturity and life experience, combined with higher education provides one with the ability to dismiss a partisan hack as nothing but a wordy, self absorbed, buffoonish bookworm whose hallmark attribute is that "they have never met anyone who reads as much as they do"....big deal.

Not impressive or noteworthy at all.

I am much more comfortable with myself knowing that I base my views on what I have seen and experienced in 60+ years of living, traveling to different states and countries, meeting different people and absorbing the best of different cultures, versus what I was "required" to read in school, from kindergarten through college.

Lastly, since it appears that you cannot leave me alone, here is a direct question for you:

You quoted Margaret Thatcher from 1983. Where were you in 1983?

"Where were you in 1983?"

Why?


"Lastly, since it appears that you cannot leave me alone,..."
Don't get your hopes up.


I must have hit a nerve.
You can simply not read what I post., or not respond.



Here's a plan: stop supporting criminals and I won't have to school you.

 

[katsteve2012]

"You will give me what I derserve"? Your ego is way of control, there kid. And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait.

You are entitled to your opinion, and you may continue this pointless dialogue with yourself by ASSuming what you believe I think.

However, I will now give you what you deserve. You are obviously a street corner philosopher, and not a very good one, who has read way too many books, listened to too many talk shows and in the process digested enough rhetoric to actually believe that you can accurately determine what the day to day "actions" are of a complete stranger on the Internet.

Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear.

And that is someone who actually is objective and has common sense.

You are too busy listening to YOURSELF talk, to actually listen with any objectivity.and that is a behavior that at some point in your life is going to cause you to be embarrased badly, if you already have not been.

What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours.

This is not the wild west, and this entire process has been questioned and criticized by "melanin challenged" legal experts who have a history of siding with law enforcement, so I suppose that makes them "apologists who are mitigating the criminality of the culprit"?

You are NOT a legal expert, nor am I, but if a number of real experts see the flaws in this case, and have gone public stating so, then that gets my attention.

If you don't like it, too bad. And not my problem.

And as far as the officer goes, he will not need a fund to assist him. There will be plenty of those out there like you who will deify him. He will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer in a dumpy little town like Ferguson.

1. " Your ego is way of control, there kid."
Guilty as charged.

2. "And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait."
There is never any ignorance associated with moi.

3. "You are entitled to your opinion,.."
Can't you get anything right?

It is the grand jury's considered decision, rather stronger than an opinion.


4. "....who has read way too many books,..."
"Liberals don't read books – they don't read anything … That's why they're liberals. They watch TV, absorb the propaganda, and vote on the basis of urges."
Coulter

5. "Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear."

You and those who 'think' as you do are a danger to society.

"...We were taught to work jolly hard. We were taught to prove yourself (sic). We were taught self-reliance. We were taught to live within our income. You were taught that cleanliness is next to godliness. You were taught always to give a hand to your neighbour. You were taught tremendous pride in your country.. All of these things are Victorian values. They are also perennial values.”
Margaret Thatcher's views in the Evening Standard of April 15, 1983.


Tell me where the thug Michael Brown fits in there.


6. "What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours."

See, this is where you cross over from simply wrong to become a lying sack of sewage.

He attacked the 'thin blue line' that stands between society and the law of the jungle.


7. "...He [Wilson] will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer..."
From your mouth to God's ear.

Spare me. I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime. You quote Margaret Thatcher from 1983 but obviously know nothing about the character of the lady herself. Frankly, I doubt that you were even a self supporting adult in 1983. As far as how I think being a danger to society, again if credible legal experts are questioning this entire process are they a danger to society as well?


I think it is people like you who are the real danger. Those who place the legal process on a pedestal and believe that blind obedience in the face of obvious corruption is a viable and honorable action. I think there is term that describes your ilk.....
."sheep".

As far as the rest of your empty headed rant..do me a favor and add me to your ignore list, you are taking up too much board space responding to me with your nonsense.

1. "I think it is people like you who are the real danger."
OMG!

A "so are you" post!!!!

Brilliant.


2. "I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime."
I agree with the "forgotten" part.
You might want to mention that to your doctor.
Trust me: I've rarely met anyone who reads as much as I.


On that, I agree. There is no doubt that

"You will give me what I derserve"? Your ego is way of control, there kid. And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait.

You are entitled to your opinion, and you may continue this pointless dialogue with yourself by ASSuming what you believe I think.

However, I will now give you what you deserve. You are obviously a street corner philosopher, and not a very good one, who has read way too many books, listened to too many talk shows and in the process digested enough rhetoric to actually believe that you can accurately determine what the day to day "actions" are of a complete stranger on the Internet.

Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear.

And that is someone who actually is objective and has common sense.

You are too busy listening to YOURSELF talk, to actually listen with any objectivity.and that is a behavior that at some point in your life is going to cause you to be embarrased badly, if you already have not been.

What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours.

This is not the wild west, and this entire process has been questioned and criticized by "melanin challenged" legal experts who have a history of siding with law enforcement, so I suppose that makes them "apologists who are mitigating the criminality of the culprit"?

You are NOT a legal expert, nor am I, but if a number of real experts see the flaws in this case, and have gone public stating so, then that gets my attention.

If you don't like it, too bad. And not my problem.

And as far as the officer goes, he will not need a fund to assist him. There will be plenty of those out there like you who will deify him. He will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer in a dumpy little town like Ferguson.

1. " Your ego is way of control, there kid."
Guilty as charged.

2. "And when combined with abject ignorance, that is not a very flattering trait."
There is never any ignorance associated with moi.

3. "You are entitled to your opinion,.."
Can't you get anything right?

It is the grand jury's considered decision, rather stronger than an opinion.


4. "....who has read way too many books,..."
"Liberals don't read books – they don't read anything … That's why they're liberals. They watch TV, absorb the propaganda, and vote on the basis of urges."
Coulter

5. "Your overinflated ego and lack of wordly experience make what you really ARE NOT, crystal clear."

You and those who 'think' as you do are a danger to society.

"...We were taught to work jolly hard. We were taught to prove yourself (sic). We were taught self-reliance. We were taught to live within our income. You were taught that cleanliness is next to godliness. You were taught always to give a hand to your neighbour. You were taught tremendous pride in your country.. All of these things are Victorian values. They are also perennial values.”
Margaret Thatcher's views in the Evening Standard of April 15, 1983.


Tell me where the thug Michael Brown fits in there.


6. "What is in question from my perspective, is not that the one who was shot shoplifted, because he did, for which he should have been arrested, and detained, not shot 6 times and left in the street for 4 hours."

See, this is where you cross over from simply wrong to become a lying sack of sewage.

He attacked the 'thin blue line' that stands between society and the law of the jungle.


7. "...He [Wilson] will land softly on his feet and likely earn more doing interviews, signing autographs at gun shows, and making personal appearances on talk shows in the next 6 months to a year than he would have earned in multiple years as a police officer..."
From your mouth to God's ear.

Spare me. I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime. You quote Margaret Thatcher from 1983 but obviously know nothing about the character of the lady herself. Frankly, I doubt that you were even a self supporting adult in 1983. As far as how I think being a danger to society, again if credible legal experts are questioning this entire process are they a danger to society as well?


I think it is people like you who are the real danger. Those who place the legal process on a pedestal and believe that blind obedience in the face of obvious corruption is a viable and honorable action. I think there is term that describes your ilk.....
."sheep".

As far as the rest of your empty headed rant..do me a favor and add me to your ignore list, you are taking up too much board space responding to me with your nonsense.

1. "I think it is people like you who are the real danger."
OMG!

A "so are you" post!!!!

Brilliant.


2. "I have probably read and forgotten more than you have read in your lifetime."
I agree with the "forgotten" part.
You might want to mention that to your doctor.
Trust me: I've rarely met anyone who reads as much as I.


3. "....do me a favor and add me to your ignore list,..."
Did you mistake me for a Liberal???
I have no such list.


4. "You quote Margaret Thatcher from 1983 but obviously know nothing about the character of the lady herself.?
Actually, I do.
But you 'reds' all say the same thing about folks like Lady Thatcher.


5. "...again if credible legal experts blah blah blah...."
Your education coming right up:
"An issue that involves the resolution of a factual dispute or controversy and is within the sphere of the decisions to be made by a jury."
Question of Fact legal definition of Question of Fact


Say....do you have a meeting of the Melanin Masters gang today?
If so......my regards to all.

I don't know you as you claim to know me, and I mistake you for nothing except what you are......someone with an opinion who happens to disagree with mine.

Your resorting to politicizing this exchange as a difference between "liberals and conservatives" is ludicrous at best. You have no idea if I am a liberal or not.

And then dodging and deflecting what the root issue is here, which is questioning the legal process in this case, makes you appear to be devoid of any semblance of common sense or belief in the ideals of what made this country great.

Maturity and life experience, combined with higher education provides one with the ability to dismiss a partisan hack as nothing but a wordy, self absorbed, buffoonish bookworm whose hallmark attribute is that "they have never met anyone who reads as much as they do"....big deal.

Not impressive or noteworthy at all.

I am much more comfortable with myself knowing that I base my views on what I have seen and experienced in 60+ years of living, traveling to different states and countries, meeting different people and absorbing the best of different cultures, versus what I was "required" to read in school, from kindergarten through college.

Lastly, since it appears that you cannot leave me alone, here is a direct question for you:

You quoted Margaret Thatcher from 1983. Where were you in 1983?

"Where were you in 1983?"

Why?


"Lastly, since it appears that you cannot leave me alone,..."
Don't get your hopes up.


I must have hit a nerve.
You can simply not read what I post., or not respond.



Here's a plan: stop supporting criminals and I won't have to school you.

ROFLAMO! School me? School yourself, little kid.

Just as I thought, you cannot speak to what you have seen or done, only what you have read, because all you have done is read, but obviously learned very little.

You are likely some safely insulated, stay at home "20 something" who has not had to get out into the real world and make it on your own. Your obvious dodging of the direct question proves that.

A mature person who has lived it and not just read it, would not be as obtuse as you are,

Here is clue......learn to distinguish challenging "process" from "supporting criminals" .

Not once have I defended looting or arson, but I HAVE stated that I agree with the credibility of the legal process in Ferguson being questioned.

That being said, you're a pointless waste of time and words.

Now, let's test your self control and see if you will not respond, because I cordially invited you to do so about 4 posts earlier.