Who can disagree with O'Reilly on Baltimore?

[peach174]

Thugs getting what they want....attention and free boo's. I'd say they're winning.

Coming out as pro-crime and thug is a loser for the democrats as it paints them as a party of instability and failure.

I don't see this as hurting the Dems brand too much. And they'll have their education wing write about this to their liking in the history books.

Which means nothing will get done and address the root of the many problems, because Democrats do Band-Aid fixes.

 

[EverCurious]

There are more whites in poverty in America than blacks. And the poverty of those whites, in rural areas of the South, is worse than the poverty of the Blacks in the inner cities. On top of that, those very poor whites are discriminated against in Affirmative Action programs, and those poor whites still don't riot.

We're a bit OT here so:

I suppose there's a point there. One would think it should be equal across the board, but it never has been, it's always been special interest groups, minority groups, etc. get the leg up. I guess I always figured it was that guilt thing, for some reason "fixing the problem" has never been enough and it's always come with a "concession" of some kind.

One could argue that white's don't riot in the "take to the streets and break shit" way, our "riots" generally tend to be far more passive and quiet as a whole. Look at the outrage from Christian's over being asked to serve LGBT interests and getting fines; not a "riot" but instead a concerted push for law changes/protections of their perceived rights, and an outpouring of money to help those affected pay fines. It's true in the reverse LGBT agenda as well. I happen to think that is the "proper" way of doing things, of changing things - though changing laws/adding laws to guard their personal interests - but then again, I'm white and that supposedly affects my thinking/methods somehow to be different from minority groups. (Though for the record I'm a bisexual currently living a straight life in deference to my husbands insecurity. I suppose that's my "concession," not to him per say, but rather to my love for him.)

I don't know that we /could/ get rid of it all now; get rid of special agenda, get rid of special treatments, get rid of AA, etc. - those "concessions." Society as a whole has become less friendly to each other, less empathic, and less patient with others in general. While I do not think that AA and special agenda concessions are the best answer to American's failed empathy problems, I'm not sure what other option we have due to generations of precedence. At some point the violent back-lash of it isn't worth it - I don't want another civil war.

Though it does feel like we're going to end up having one - this one is going to be against our police and wealthy though and it's going to end far more poorly for the country; and I mean that both literally and figuratively... Just under half of my wealth friends have left the country because of the 99 vs 1% mentality that's taken over here. Hell my parents and my family almost left the country with them, but our military "pride" and generations of service made us stick it out - my parents have elected to continuously take world vacations and spend the bulk of their money in other countries - go home for a few days or a week then leave the country again... All said and done, just in /my/ social circle, it's easily into the millions that are no longer being spent in various US economies (outside airline/cruise tickets, taxes, and utilities.) I can't imagine they're the only ones...