The bar just keeps getting raised on the insanity of the society we live in. I only hope De'Marquis's head hit the side of a paddy wagon a couple times on his way to the clink.
I wonder if there will be a media uproar like Trayvon's murder. An infant deliberately murdered in front of his mother for not having any money. What a world I am sentenced to live in.
I pray that God fixes this up some day and takes away the pain inflicted by mofo's like De'Marquis.
0
The bar just keeps getting raised on the insanity of the society we live in. I only hope De'Marquis's head hit the side of a paddy wagon a couple times on his way to the clink.
I wonder if there will be a media uproar like Trayvon's murder. An infant deliberately murdered in front of his mother for not having any money. What a world I am sentenced to live in.
I pray that God fixes this up some day and takes away the pain inflicted by mofo's like De'Marquis.
My prediction is the same crickets will be heard as the ones we hear regarding the 500+ murders a year in Chicago, or the 300 in Baltiimore, or the ....
A "new" movie is out this week called "Sins of the Father", oh I'm sorry it's called "42". It's been a few months since reliving the guilt of slavery or blacks barred from baseball, busses or you name it. This concept must be applied over and over again as if it is still common today. The Bible states you shouldn't be held responsible for the "Sins of your Father", I'm looking for the exception for this concept but it's not there (only in our society we must relive this over and over again as if anyone alive today had a hand in it).
0
My prediction is the same crickets will be heard as the ones we hear regarding the 500+ murders a year in Chicago, or the 300 in Baltiimore, or the ....
A "new" movie is out this week called "Sins of the Father", oh I'm sorry it's called "42". It's been a few months since reliving the guilt of slavery or blacks barred from baseball, busses or you name it. This concept must be applied over and over again as if it is still common today. The Bible states you shouldn't be held responsible for the "Sins of your Father", I'm looking for the exception for this concept but it's not there (only in our society we must relive this over and over again as if anyone alive today had a hand in it).
Well??? Where is the statement from the President about this murder?
Will there be running commentary on CNN DEMANDING JUSTICE from Al Sharpton???
Jesse Jackson won't be in town, either. If they ain't marching against "Whitey" there ain't enough interest among his core constituents to make it financially feasible. Jesse waits with baited breath and outstretched palms for the next Trayvon Martin to appear.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Randisist:
Well??? Where is the statement from the President about this murder?
Will there be running commentary on CNN DEMANDING JUSTICE from Al Sharpton???
Jesse Jackson won't be in town, either. If they ain't marching against "Whitey" there ain't enough interest among his core constituents to make it financially feasible. Jesse waits with baited breath and outstretched palms for the next Trayvon Martin to appear.
I'll tell you what it's supposed to mean since he won't and his parasite followers won't either. Of course you know what it means.
It means that it's a 'black sounding' name and therefore, we shouldn't be surprised by any this from what he believes is a morally bankrupt culture.
Of course, he allows for plausible deniability by just inferring it with 'nuff said' which gives him and his parasites wiggle room to throw the race card at ME when I call him out for it. These are the very same tactics used by the GOP when they attempt, and are still attempting, to pass voter suppression laws along racial lines.
And ya know what's amazing?
I'll pretty much guarantee that the Newton shooting, where TWENTY children were shot by a white male, didn't even cross his mind.
Why? Because the white shooter had a mental illness and his mother didn't lock up her guns. But NONE of that had to do with his race.
And why doesn't it have to do with race with him when it comes to the Newton shooting?
1) Because he's white and would never look at his race in the same terms he looks at the black race (even though the crime was much bloodier in terms of total dead)
2) There's no such thing as 'white on white' crime for him. But black on black crime is the primary basis for the way he wants you to perceive the black race. Black on black crime = relevant. White on white crime (even the atrocity at Newton) = irrelevant.
I don't waste much time with these dopes any more. The only thing they know about black history or even the history of civil rights are the words 'Al and Jesse' as shown here.
I would advise you not to waste your time with them either. The real cockroaches are not even a few inches above this post.
0
Quote Originally Posted by theblueprint:
Jesus christ man, what is this supposed to mean?
I'll tell you what it's supposed to mean since he won't and his parasite followers won't either. Of course you know what it means.
It means that it's a 'black sounding' name and therefore, we shouldn't be surprised by any this from what he believes is a morally bankrupt culture.
Of course, he allows for plausible deniability by just inferring it with 'nuff said' which gives him and his parasites wiggle room to throw the race card at ME when I call him out for it. These are the very same tactics used by the GOP when they attempt, and are still attempting, to pass voter suppression laws along racial lines.
And ya know what's amazing?
I'll pretty much guarantee that the Newton shooting, where TWENTY children were shot by a white male, didn't even cross his mind.
Why? Because the white shooter had a mental illness and his mother didn't lock up her guns. But NONE of that had to do with his race.
And why doesn't it have to do with race with him when it comes to the Newton shooting?
1) Because he's white and would never look at his race in the same terms he looks at the black race (even though the crime was much bloodier in terms of total dead)
2) There's no such thing as 'white on white' crime for him. But black on black crime is the primary basis for the way he wants you to perceive the black race. Black on black crime = relevant. White on white crime (even the atrocity at Newton) = irrelevant.
I don't waste much time with these dopes any more. The only thing they know about black history or even the history of civil rights are the words 'Al and Jesse' as shown here.
I would advise you not to waste your time with them either. The real cockroaches are not even a few inches above this post.
I'll tell you what it's supposed to mean since he won't and his parasite followers won't either. Of course you know what it means.
It means that it's a 'black sounding' name and therefore, we shouldn't be surprised by any this from what he believes is a morally bankrupt culture.
Of course, he allows for plausible deniability by just inferring it with 'nuff said' which gives him and his parasites wiggle room to throw the race card at ME when I call him out for it. These are the very same tactics used by the GOP when they attempt, and are still attempting, to pass voter suppression laws along racial lines.
And ya know what's amazing?
I'll pretty much guarantee that the Newton shooting, where TWENTY children were shot by a white male, didn't even cross his mind.
Why? Because the white shooter had a mental illness and his mother didn't lock up her guns. But NONE of that had to do with his race.
And why doesn't it have to do with race with him when it comes to the Newton shooting?
1) Because he's white and would never look at his race in the same terms he looks at the black race (even though the crime was much bloodier in terms of total dead)
2) There's no such thing as 'white on white' crime for him. But black on black crime is the primary basis for the way he wants you to perceive the black race. Black on black crime = relevant. White on white crime (even the atrocity at Newton) = irrelevant.
I don't waste much time with these dopes any more. The only thing they know about black history or even the history of civil rights are the words 'Al and Jesse' as shown here.
I would advise you not to waste your time with them either. The real cockroaches are not even a few inches above this post.
Excellent reply to a veiled racist post.
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
I'll tell you what it's supposed to mean since he won't and his parasite followers won't either. Of course you know what it means.
It means that it's a 'black sounding' name and therefore, we shouldn't be surprised by any this from what he believes is a morally bankrupt culture.
Of course, he allows for plausible deniability by just inferring it with 'nuff said' which gives him and his parasites wiggle room to throw the race card at ME when I call him out for it. These are the very same tactics used by the GOP when they attempt, and are still attempting, to pass voter suppression laws along racial lines.
And ya know what's amazing?
I'll pretty much guarantee that the Newton shooting, where TWENTY children were shot by a white male, didn't even cross his mind.
Why? Because the white shooter had a mental illness and his mother didn't lock up her guns. But NONE of that had to do with his race.
And why doesn't it have to do with race with him when it comes to the Newton shooting?
1) Because he's white and would never look at his race in the same terms he looks at the black race (even though the crime was much bloodier in terms of total dead)
2) There's no such thing as 'white on white' crime for him. But black on black crime is the primary basis for the way he wants you to perceive the black race. Black on black crime = relevant. White on white crime (even the atrocity at Newton) = irrelevant.
I don't waste much time with these dopes any more. The only thing they know about black history or even the history of civil rights are the words 'Al and Jesse' as shown here.
I would advise you not to waste your time with them either. The real cockroaches are not even a few inches above this post.
Doesn't matter if his name is Demarquis Washington, Paul Nelson, Javier Sanchez, or Shin Chi Lui, anybody that shoots a 13 month old baby in front of his mom is absolutely pure EVIL!!!!!!
0
Doesn't matter if his name is Demarquis Washington, Paul Nelson, Javier Sanchez, or Shin Chi Lui, anybody that shoots a 13 month old baby in front of his mom is absolutely pure EVIL!!!!!!
Sorry Scalabrains, but unlike the Newton shootings, this was a hate crime. Pretty easy to see based off of the victim's skin tone and the cockroaches that did the murder didn't go and kill themselves after they carried out their plan like the Newton killer. Do you think these 2 cockroaches would have tried to rob a black woman and then after they did, shot her baby in the head? I don't think so.
I know you'll try and argue this, but facts are facts. And for every one white Newton shooter there is, you have 100 of these cockroaches that have invested the country with no fear and no cares in the world other than carry out their hate filled plans without thinking twice.
0
Sorry Scalabrains, but unlike the Newton shootings, this was a hate crime. Pretty easy to see based off of the victim's skin tone and the cockroaches that did the murder didn't go and kill themselves after they carried out their plan like the Newton killer. Do you think these 2 cockroaches would have tried to rob a black woman and then after they did, shot her baby in the head? I don't think so.
I know you'll try and argue this, but facts are facts. And for every one white Newton shooter there is, you have 100 of these cockroaches that have invested the country with no fear and no cares in the world other than carry out their hate filled plans without thinking twice.
I'll tell you what it's supposed to mean since he won't and his parasite followers won't either. Of course you know what it means.
It means that it's a 'black sounding' name and therefore, we shouldn't be surprised by any this from what he believes is a morally bankrupt culture.
Of course, he allows for plausible deniability by just inferring it with 'nuff said' which gives him and his parasites wiggle room to throw the race card at ME when I call him out for it. These are the very same tactics used by the GOP when they attempt, and are still attempting, to pass voter suppression laws along racial lines.
And ya know what's amazing?
I'll pretty much guarantee that the Newton shooting, where TWENTY children were shot by a white male, didn't even cross his mind.
Of course it did, but it had nothing to do with a hate crime like this situation here. But the Media won't say that, no , no, no.
Why? Because the white shooter had a mental illness and his mother didn't lock up her guns. But NONE of that had to do with his race.
Because a white person would have to have a mental illness to do something like that. It surprises the 80% of the white people when we see something like that because it isn't the norm for our race.
And why doesn't it have to do with race with him when it comes to the Newton shooting?
Maybe because the killer was white and the majority of the kids were white.
1) Because he's white and would never look at his race in the same terms he looks at the black race (even though the crime was much bloodier in terms of total dead)
No, it is because 5%(which are the black males) are creating 60% of the violent crime in the country. this isn't even debatable. 5% are 60% of the problem.
2) There's no such thing as 'white on white' crime for him. But black on black crime is the primary basis for the way he wants you to perceive the black race. Black on black crime = relevant. White on white crime (even the atrocity at Newton) = irrelevant.
More people were killed that same day by minorities spread across the country. Sure there is white on white crime, everyone knows that, but this one was a hate crime, but the Liberal media will not promote it that way it that way out of fear and backlash.
I don't waste much time with these dopes any more. The only thing they know about black history or even the history of civil rights are the words 'Al and Jesse' as shown here.
And the only thing that you know is making excuses for the actions of the 5% of the people creating the 60%+ of the problem.
I would advise you not to waste your time with them either. The real cockroaches are not even a few inches above this post.
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
I'll tell you what it's supposed to mean since he won't and his parasite followers won't either. Of course you know what it means.
It means that it's a 'black sounding' name and therefore, we shouldn't be surprised by any this from what he believes is a morally bankrupt culture.
Of course, he allows for plausible deniability by just inferring it with 'nuff said' which gives him and his parasites wiggle room to throw the race card at ME when I call him out for it. These are the very same tactics used by the GOP when they attempt, and are still attempting, to pass voter suppression laws along racial lines.
And ya know what's amazing?
I'll pretty much guarantee that the Newton shooting, where TWENTY children were shot by a white male, didn't even cross his mind.
Of course it did, but it had nothing to do with a hate crime like this situation here. But the Media won't say that, no , no, no.
Why? Because the white shooter had a mental illness and his mother didn't lock up her guns. But NONE of that had to do with his race.
Because a white person would have to have a mental illness to do something like that. It surprises the 80% of the white people when we see something like that because it isn't the norm for our race.
And why doesn't it have to do with race with him when it comes to the Newton shooting?
Maybe because the killer was white and the majority of the kids were white.
1) Because he's white and would never look at his race in the same terms he looks at the black race (even though the crime was much bloodier in terms of total dead)
No, it is because 5%(which are the black males) are creating 60% of the violent crime in the country. this isn't even debatable. 5% are 60% of the problem.
2) There's no such thing as 'white on white' crime for him. But black on black crime is the primary basis for the way he wants you to perceive the black race. Black on black crime = relevant. White on white crime (even the atrocity at Newton) = irrelevant.
More people were killed that same day by minorities spread across the country. Sure there is white on white crime, everyone knows that, but this one was a hate crime, but the Liberal media will not promote it that way it that way out of fear and backlash.
I don't waste much time with these dopes any more. The only thing they know about black history or even the history of civil rights are the words 'Al and Jesse' as shown here.
And the only thing that you know is making excuses for the actions of the 5% of the people creating the 60%+ of the problem.
I would advise you not to waste your time with them either. The real cockroaches are not even a few inches above this post.
Sorry Scalabrains, but unlike the Newton shootings, this was a hate crime. Pretty easy to see based off of the victim's skin tone and the cockroaches that did the murder didn't go and kill themselves after they carried out their plan like the Newton killer. Do you think these 2 cockroaches would have tried to rob a black woman and then after they did, shot her baby in the head? I don't think so.
I know you'll try and argue this, but facts are facts. And for every one white Newton shooter there is, you have 100 of these cockroaches that have invested the country with no fear and no cares in the world other than carry out their hate filled plans without thinking twice.
Oh it's 'obviously' a hate crime? Where do you have a SINGLE article posted in this thread that verifies that statement. Do you know how serious and evident the charges must be for something to be a hate crime under federal law? Post ONE verfying it's a hate crime.
Or is it just a hate crime because when black teens commit a murder on a white person, it's ALWAYS Hate crime to you, something you try to spin in post #19, which is pretty amazing because I could post some articles here where there is overwhelmingly compelling evidence of white on black hate crime status that was never charged but to you it's ALWAYS a hate crime under those circumstances.
Stick with nursing kid. I know how you think and needless to say, I've left jokes like yourself in the scrapheap of debate time and time again. But I really don't even want to get into with you because you say the same exact things you were saying over a year ago. Nothing has changed and nothing will.
0
Quote Originally Posted by crod1980:
Sorry Scalabrains, but unlike the Newton shootings, this was a hate crime. Pretty easy to see based off of the victim's skin tone and the cockroaches that did the murder didn't go and kill themselves after they carried out their plan like the Newton killer. Do you think these 2 cockroaches would have tried to rob a black woman and then after they did, shot her baby in the head? I don't think so.
I know you'll try and argue this, but facts are facts. And for every one white Newton shooter there is, you have 100 of these cockroaches that have invested the country with no fear and no cares in the world other than carry out their hate filled plans without thinking twice.
Oh it's 'obviously' a hate crime? Where do you have a SINGLE article posted in this thread that verifies that statement. Do you know how serious and evident the charges must be for something to be a hate crime under federal law? Post ONE verfying it's a hate crime.
Or is it just a hate crime because when black teens commit a murder on a white person, it's ALWAYS Hate crime to you, something you try to spin in post #19, which is pretty amazing because I could post some articles here where there is overwhelmingly compelling evidence of white on black hate crime status that was never charged but to you it's ALWAYS a hate crime under those circumstances.
Stick with nursing kid. I know how you think and needless to say, I've left jokes like yourself in the scrapheap of debate time and time again. But I really don't even want to get into with you because you say the same exact things you were saying over a year ago. Nothing has changed and nothing will.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.