ADVERTISEMENT

"Suit up for battle" to save the statues...

Do you believe that people who have committed sexual assault or are suspected of murder should have monuments or buildings named after them?

I thought I'd made it clear that I wasn't a fan of monuments to people, but just in case, I wouldn't build a monument to any person.
 
You’re kidding, right? I’m just throwing out what I see on about 90% of the news feeds. In full disclosure I hate conservative sites also. There is no such thing as “news” anymore. The fact of the matter is that according to current thought Jefferson’s sins are now worse because he was white. Slavery was awful. Agreed. A LOT of races throughout history have been wrongly subjugated for that reason alone. I’m just saying you can’t ignore the good that a man like Jefferson did for our country. He was a product of his time.

Uh-huh. Sure. 90% of the news feeds. Got it. I've learned my lesson. ;)
 
But the Clintons are liberal politicians. Immune to all sins. Cmon man get with the times!!

where in the world did you get the idea that the Clintons were liberal.

do you know zero of Bill's administration or pay zero attention to Hilary's far right tendencies.

both are far right wing economically, neocons, especially Hilary, and not liberal even socially.

D does not equal liberal, though the non stop propaganda campaign is strong.

that said, no politician can be an economic liberal, let alone progressive or pro working class, and have party support from either party.

capitalism in direct partnership with the supremes, literally doesn't allow that.
 
where in the world did you get the idea that the Clintons were liberal.

do you know zero of Bill's administration or pay zero attention to Hilary's far right tendencies.

both are far right wing economically, neocons, especially Hilary, and not liberal even socially.

D does not equal liberal, though the non stop propaganda campaign is strong.

that said, no politician can be an economic liberal, let alone progressive or pro working class, and have party support from either party.

capitalism in direct partnership with the supremes, literally doesn't allow that.
Ummmmmm..... socialized medicine anybody? Just because they failed doesn’t
Mean they sure as hell tried
 
Ummmmmm..... socialized medicine anybody? Just because they failed doesn’t
Mean they sure as hell tried

possibly they didn't try as hard as you think, and being far and away the most economically responsible way to contain runaway costs, it could be legitimately argued as a conservative, not a liberal, approach.

Bill sold off our manufacturing base in exchange for cheap labor to benefit the investment class, and only the investment class.

China didn't build their manufacturing base, we literally set it up for them in a labor negotiation.

Bill deregulated the blatantly criminal operation investment banks to benefit the banks themselves, and only the banks themselves.

this didn't enable the possibility of the 2008 meltdown, it literally guaranteed it, and guaranteed more of the same as long as deregulated.

Hilary is a Wall St owned neocon who isn't even socially liberal till forced to be for self serving reasons.

they are who they are.
 
possibly they didn't try as hard as you think, and being far and away the most economically responsible way to contain runaway costs, it could be legitimately argued as a conservative, not a liberal, approach.

Bill sold off our manufacturing base in exchange for cheap labor to benefit the investment class, and only the investment class.

China didn't build their manufacturing base, we literally set it up for them in a labor negotiation.

Bill deregulated the blatantly criminal operation investment banks to benefit the banks themselves, and only the banks themselves.

this didn't enable the possibility of the 2008 meltdown, it literally guaranteed it, and guaranteed more of the same as long as deregulated.

Hilary is a Wall St owned neocon who isn't even socially liberal till forced to be for self serving reasons.

they are who they are.
Liberals Love them
 


lol.gif
lol.gif


Come on... it's worth another four more years just for his comedic value right?
 
Last edited:
Liberals Love them

the average liberal has zero idea what Clinton's governing record was, or who's interests he served first and foremost.

same could be said with Biden.

they cheer for the name on the front of the jersey, not the back.

if Biden wins, it will be without really having to campaign in the primary or the general, and with no one really knowing who he is.

he basically will have sat out the whole yr in his basement letting the DNC, Comcast, and AT&T, do all the campaigning and work for him.

and was never popular to begin with, nor has he ever governed as a liberal, nor was he doing squat in the primary this yr despite his Obama connection, until the DNC, Comcast, and AT&T, put an abrupt stop to all other primary candidates in the middle of the primary.

one can claim this isn't so, but that would make them either totally ignorant or dishonest or both.

it happened.

all morality on both sides has been lost.

and i don't mean just the power players who were never moral, i'm talking the voters on both sides who once would have been appalled at what now goes on everyday on both sides.
 
the average liberal has zero idea what Clinton's governing record was, or who's interests he served first and foremost.

same could be said with Biden.

they cheer for the name on the front of the jersey, not the back.

if Biden wins, it will be without really having to campaign in the primary or the general, and with no one really knowing who he is.

he basically will have sat out the whole yr in his basement letting the DNC, Comcast, and AT&T, do all the campaigning and work for him.

and was never popular to begin with, nor has he ever governed as a liberal, nor was he doing squat in the primary this yr despite his Obama connection, until the DNC, Comcast, and AT&T, put an abrupt stop to all other primary candidates in the middle of the primary.

one can claim this isn't so, but that would make them either totally ignorant or dishonest or both.

it happened.

all morality on both sides has been lost.

and i don't mean just the power players who were never moral, i'm talking the voters on both sides who once would have been appalled at what now goes on everyday on both sides.

Um,actual people (not Comcast or AT&T or the DNC) actually voted and Bernie lost...by a lot. Biden won more delegates, more states, more counties...more votes...more than 7,000,000 more votes. It wasn't close. Democrats want Biden to be President. More than they wanted Bernie to be President. The people spoke...loudly. Sorry that your guy lost, but them's the breaks.
 
the average liberal has zero idea what Clinton's governing record was, or who's interests he served first and foremost.

same could be said with Biden.

they cheer for the name on the front of the jersey, not the back.

if Biden wins, it will be without really having to campaign in the primary or the general, and with no one really knowing who he is.

he basically will have sat out the whole yr in his basement letting the DNC, Comcast, and AT&T, do all the campaigning and work for him.

and was never popular to begin with, nor has he ever governed as a liberal, nor was he doing squat in the primary this yr despite his Obama connection, until the DNC, Comcast, and AT&T, put an abrupt stop to all other primary candidates in the middle of the primary.

one can claim this isn't so, but that would make them either totally ignorant or dishonest or both.

it happened.

all morality on both sides has been lost.

and i don't mean just the power players who were never moral, i'm talking the voters on both sides who once would have been appalled at what now goes on everyday on both sides.

You continually throw this nonsense out there. But you never explain how "these corporate fixers" manage to generate more enthusiasm and motivate many more people to actually GO TO THE POLLS? It's like you just ignore the reality that once we started getting into the more populous states where people actually VOTED, that people started voting in record numbers for the candidate they AS DEMOCRATS preferred.

Nobody stole anything from Bernie- his voters just did NOT go to the polls. He won the Michigan Primary in 2016. But this year he lost EVERY COUNTY, got fewer votes than he got in 2016 and yet 230,000 more people walked their asses to the polls to vote FOR Biden. If Dems were turning up in smaller numbers than they did in 2016 you'd have some semblance of a point. But people are united by the desire to BEAT TRUMP, and they voted for the Candidate that they feel is best positioned to get that accomplished...
 
Democrats haven't been this angry since Republicans freed their slaves in 1863
Is it actually possible you missed it when the Democrats made life hot for their racists and the Republicans, to their eternal shame, eagerly welcomed them in. “Southern Strategy” mean anything to you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cosmickid
Democrats haven't been this angry since Republicans freed their slaves in 1863

You have to be trolling. People who post on college message boards are really not this ignorant. Are they?

US-Election-1860.png


Had the Southern Democrats not split with the (National) Northern Democrat Party over SLAVERY, then the Dems would have won.
But Northern Democrats did NOT support slavery...

And btw, the racist Dems who left the Dem Party and mainly joined the GOP over the Dem pro-Civil Rights positions in 1948 and again in 1964-65 ALL came from states SOUTH of Indiana and Illinois on this map. There were dozens of them that you may have heard of like Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, John Tower, John Connally... And those are just the Senators...

"Rep. William C. Cramer, the first GOP rep in Florida, for instance, switched from the Democrats in 1949, won election in 1954, urged Ike to withdraw troops from Little Rock in 1957 and voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
4. Likewise, Rep. Edward Gurney, the second GOP representative in Florida, also abandoned the Democratic Party in the early 1960s, ran for Congress as a Republican in 1962 and won, and then voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
5. Rep. Dave Treen (R-LA) -- protege of legendary segregationist Leander Perez and a 1960 elector for the States Rights Party (a.k.a. "the Dixiecrats") -- switched to the GOP in 1962.

He lost a few early races, but then won his seat in 1973 and later became governor in 1980.
6. Rep. Iris Faircloth Blitch, a segregationist who represented Georgia in Congress as a Democrat from 1955-1962, left the party over civil rights in 1964 and campaigned for Barry Goldwater.
7. Rep. James D. Martin (R-AL), originally a Democrat, joined the GOP in 1962 & won a House race in 1964.

During the Selma protests, he denounced MLK Jr. as a "rabble-rouser who has put on the sheep's clothing of non-violence while he pits race against race, man against law."

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1013981446615322624.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: travlinhoosier
You have to be trolling. People who post on college message boards are really not this ignorant. Are they?

US-Election-1860.png


Had the Southern Democrats not split with the (National) Northern Democrat Party over SLAVERY, then the Dems would have won.
But Northern Democrats did NOT support slavery...

And btw, the racist Dems who left the Dem Party and mainly joined the GOP over the Dem pro-Civil Rights positions in 1948 and again in 1964-65 ALL came from states SOUTH of Indiana and Illinois on this map. There were dozens of them that you may have heard of like Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, John Tower, John Connally... And those are just the Senators...

"Rep. William C. Cramer, the first GOP rep in Florida, for instance, switched from the Democrats in 1949, won election in 1954, urged Ike to withdraw troops from Little Rock in 1957 and voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
4. Likewise, Rep. Edward Gurney, the second GOP representative in Florida, also abandoned the Democratic Party in the early 1960s, ran for Congress as a Republican in 1962 and won, and then voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
5. Rep. Dave Treen (R-LA) -- protege of legendary segregationist Leander Perez and a 1960 elector for the States Rights Party (a.k.a. "the Dixiecrats") -- switched to the GOP in 1962.

He lost a few early races, but then won his seat in 1973 and later became governor in 1980.
6. Rep. Iris Faircloth Blitch, a segregationist who represented Georgia in Congress as a Democrat from 1955-1962, left the party over civil rights in 1964 and campaigned for Barry Goldwater.
7. Rep. James D. Martin (R-AL), originally a Democrat, joined the GOP in 1962 & won a House race in 1964.

During the Selma protests, he denounced MLK Jr. as a "rabble-rouser who has put on the sheep's clothing of non-violence while he pits race against race, man against law."

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1013981446615322624.html
Pearls before swine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T.M.P.
You have to be trolling. People who post on college message boards are really not this ignorant. Are they?

US-Election-1860.png


Had the Southern Democrats not split with the (National) Northern Democrat Party over SLAVERY, then the Dems would have won.
But Northern Democrats did NOT support slavery...

And btw, the racist Dems who left the Dem Party and mainly joined the GOP over the Dem pro-Civil Rights positions in 1948 and again in 1964-65 ALL came from states SOUTH of Indiana and Illinois on this map. There were dozens of them that you may have heard of like Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, John Tower, John Connally... And those are just the Senators...

"Rep. William C. Cramer, the first GOP rep in Florida, for instance, switched from the Democrats in 1949, won election in 1954, urged Ike to withdraw troops from Little Rock in 1957 and voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
4. Likewise, Rep. Edward Gurney, the second GOP representative in Florida, also abandoned the Democratic Party in the early 1960s, ran for Congress as a Republican in 1962 and won, and then voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
5. Rep. Dave Treen (R-LA) -- protege of legendary segregationist Leander Perez and a 1960 elector for the States Rights Party (a.k.a. "the Dixiecrats") -- switched to the GOP in 1962.

He lost a few early races, but then won his seat in 1973 and later became governor in 1980.
6. Rep. Iris Faircloth Blitch, a segregationist who represented Georgia in Congress as a Democrat from 1955-1962, left the party over civil rights in 1964 and campaigned for Barry Goldwater.
7. Rep. James D. Martin (R-AL), originally a Democrat, joined the GOP in 1962 & won a House race in 1964.

During the Selma protests, he denounced MLK Jr. as a "rabble-rouser who has put on the sheep's clothing of non-violence while he pits race against race, man against law."

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1013981446615322624.html
Very nice research Cosmickid!
 
Now they’re burning elk statues in Portland. LMAO

I think there was real and legitimate anger at first when some of these statues were being torn down but it really jumped the shark when they tore down the U.S. Grant statue and beheaded the statue of an abolitionist in Wisconsin and threw him in the river. At this point it mostly seems to be destruction for the sake of destruction
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoopsdoc1978
I think there was real and legitimate anger at first when some of these statues were being torn down but it really jumped the shark when they tore down the U.S. Grant statue and beheaded the statue of an abolitionist in Wisconsin and threw him in the river. At this point it mostly seems to be destruction for the sake of destruction
Yabbut not one lawn ornament was killed by covid today, not a single one was gunned down by a cop, and there were no reports of Russian bounties on America's lawn ornaments. So, we have that going for us.

Priorities man..

Lawn Ornaments Matter

and my ceramic gnomes are safe.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Morrison
I think there was real and legitimate anger at first when some of these statues were being torn down but it really jumped the shark when they tore down the U.S. Grant statue and beheaded the statue of an abolitionist in Wisconsin and threw him in the river. At this point it mostly seems to be destruction for the sake of destruction

Yabbut not one lawn ornament was killed by covid today, not a single one was gunned down by a cop, and there were no reports of Russian bounties on America's lawn ornaments. So, we have that going for us.

Priorities man..

Lawn Ornaments Matter

and my ceramic gnomes are safe.

Parting ways with T.M.P is a sure sign you’re on the right track.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1 and dbmhoosier
You have to be trolling. People who post on college message boards are really not this ignorant. Are they?

US-Election-1860.png


Had the Southern Democrats not split with the (National) Northern Democrat Party over SLAVERY, then the Dems would have won.
But Northern Democrats did NOT support slavery...

And btw, the racist Dems who left the Dem Party and mainly joined the GOP over the Dem pro-Civil Rights positions in 1948 and again in 1964-65 ALL came from states SOUTH of Indiana and Illinois on this map. There were dozens of them that you may have heard of like Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, John Tower, John Connally... And those are just the Senators...

"Rep. William C. Cramer, the first GOP rep in Florida, for instance, switched from the Democrats in 1949, won election in 1954, urged Ike to withdraw troops from Little Rock in 1957 and voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
4. Likewise, Rep. Edward Gurney, the second GOP representative in Florida, also abandoned the Democratic Party in the early 1960s, ran for Congress as a Republican in 1962 and won, and then voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
5. Rep. Dave Treen (R-LA) -- protege of legendary segregationist Leander Perez and a 1960 elector for the States Rights Party (a.k.a. "the Dixiecrats") -- switched to the GOP in 1962.

He lost a few early races, but then won his seat in 1973 and later became governor in 1980.
6. Rep. Iris Faircloth Blitch, a segregationist who represented Georgia in Congress as a Democrat from 1955-1962, left the party over civil rights in 1964 and campaigned for Barry Goldwater.
7. Rep. James D. Martin (R-AL), originally a Democrat, joined the GOP in 1962 & won a House race in 1964.

During the Selma protests, he denounced MLK Jr. as a "rabble-rouser who has put on the sheep's clothing of non-violence while he pits race against race, man against law."

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1013981446615322624.html


The Democrats haven't changed much, Cosmic. In the 19th century Democrats saw African Americans as slaves. Now they see African Americans as freed slaves. With few exceptions, the white Democrats have never seen African Americans as people like themselves. During the great black migration of the middle 20th Century, the Democrats treatment of northern blacks like a voting block to be pandered to and pampered also left them economically and socially deprived. Like those few more or less humane slave owners of 200 years ago, the modern white Democrats don't see blacks as being able to cope in the world like whites can. The Democrats with varying degrees of ignorance and deliberation keep it this way.

The Democrats run every big city in the US. These places are cesspits of inequality, crime, drugs, poor education, and worse. Periodic eruptions into riots and burning is a regular and expected thing in these cities. There isn't just a correlation, there is a cause and effect between Democratic governance and social disfunction. The congressional and local Democrats have seized on the politically advantageous police reform theme to retain and acquire power while ignoring, and even working against, the much more important cause of educational reform. Black young men entering the 9th grade have about a 50% chance of graduating high school, and a 4% chance of receiving a quality higher education degree. The education system screams for reforms*, yet all the mostly white Democrats can manage with the current spate of upheaval is to ban choke holds, eliminate qualified immunity, and the old reliable more police training. All of that is pandering political bullshit. Police reforms have little to do with uneducated kids.

Denver Public Schools was on a reform roll for years (Senator Michael Bennet was superintendent and a big part of that). Then the stick-in-the-mud teacher organizations mobilized and finally killed reform last year. Perversely, two black non-reformers now on the school board are loud voices in the Black Lives Matter movement. So that is where the Democrats have taken the country today with their racial politics. A vacuous bumper sticker like Black Lives Matter matters more to us, and corporate America (who skedaddled black neighborhoods because they have the wrong zip codes), than does meaningful educational reform for black kids.

We have the means and knowledge to do much better.

*statistics show many minority youngsters who do graduate high school can't read or do math at a functioning and useful level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1
CO, when the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964 black poverty was around 45%. Today it is around 20%. White poverty has stayed around 9-11% in that time period. Would you not say that is progress?

The states with the highest rates of black poverty tend to be run by Republicans.

1. Iowa
2. Wisconsin
3. Mississippi
3. Arkansas
5. Louisiana
5. Oklahoma
7. Kentucky
7. Puerto Rico (not a state but included in this list)
9. Ohio
9. Kansas
9. Minnesota

This is from 2018 and at that time only MN and PR would have had Democratic governors.

https://www.kff.org/other/state-ind...e=0&sortModel={"colId":"Black","sort":"desc"}
 
CO, when the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964 black poverty was around 45%. Today it is around 20%. White poverty has stayed around 9-11% in that time period. Would you not say that is progress?

The states with the highest rates of black poverty tend to be run by Republicans.

1. Iowa
2. Wisconsin
3. Mississippi
3. Arkansas
5. Louisiana
5. Oklahoma
7. Kentucky
7. Puerto Rico (not a state but included in this list)
9. Ohio
9. Kansas
9. Minnesota

This is from 2018 and at that time only MN and PR would have had Democratic governors.

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel={"colId":"Black","sort":"desc"}
I think cities (urban centers) are more salient for discussion than states for myriad reasons. Regardless I think this stuff is far more impt for change than police force reform: income gap, education gap, home ownership gap. All of which is infected with racism and leads to elevated crime rates and contacts with cops.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CO. Hoosier
I think cities (urban centers) are more salient for discussion than states for myriad reasons. Regardless I think this stuff is far more impt for change than police force reform: income gap, education gap, home ownership gap. All of which is infected with racism and leads to elevated crime rates and contacts with cops.

I think clearly both matter. But states have more power in setting education standards and levying taxes. So it would be wrong to absolve them of any responsibility.

And the focus on police reform is being led by black people on the ground. It is not something being dictated from on high by the Democratic Party. It might be nice to listen to the PEOPLE and what they think needs to be changed. Instead of white people telling black people what they need to do which we’ve been doing since the first slave ships hit our shores. No one is saying that police reform is the only issue. But if that is what people want fixed first, maybe it should be fixed first?
 
  • Like
Reactions: travlinhoosier
I think clearly both matter. But states have more power in setting education standards and levying taxes. So it would be wrong to absolve them of any responsibility.

And the focus on police reform is being led by black people on the ground. It is not something being dictated from on high by the Democratic Party. It might be nice to listen to the PEOPLE and what they think needs to be changed. Instead of white people telling black people what they need to do which we’ve been doing since the first slave ships hit our shores. No one is saying that police reform is the only issue. But if that is what people want fixed first, maybe it should be fixed first?
I agree with much of what you write, except the part about "white people telling black people what they think needs to be changed." that sounds like "woke" talk. good schools, gentrification, healthcare etc, enterprise zones, tax abatements, bonds, redlining, have nothing to do with "white people telling black people what they need." it's policy that isn't uniquely understood by "black people." there are entire, massive urban planning/public administration doctoral programs throughout the united states. they aren't taught exclusively by black faculty to black students because white people shouldn't tell black people what they need. the best practices of one city aren't created solely by black urban planners and public administrators.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoopsdoc1978
I agree with much of what you write, except the part about "white people telling black people what they think needs to be changed." that sounds like "woke" talk. good schools, gentrification, healthcare etc, enterprise zones, tax abatements, bonds, redlining, have nothing to do with "white people telling black people what they need." it's policy that isn't uniquely understood by "black people." there are entire, massive urban planning/public administration doctoral programs throughout the united states. they aren't taught exclusively by black faculty to black students because white people shouldn't tell black people what they need. the best practices of one city aren't created solely by black urban planners and public administrators.

I’m not trying to be woke. Perhaps I didn’t explain myself well enough. What I meant was that in this moment, black people seem to have determined that the most important issue to them is police reform in their communities. I see a lot of posts on this site saying that isn’t really important and we should focus on this or that issue instead. I think there are plenty of important issues we could focus on but if black people think the most important issue facing them at this moment is police reform, I believe we should move that to the top of the list. Which isn’t to say that white people or police officers or anyone else should have no say in how that reform is enacted!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66
CO, when the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964 black poverty was around 45%. Today it is around 20%. White poverty has stayed around 9-11% in that time period. Would you not say that is progress?

The states with the highest rates of black poverty tend to be run by Republicans.

1. Iowa
2. Wisconsin
3. Mississippi
3. Arkansas
5. Louisiana
5. Oklahoma
7. Kentucky
7. Puerto Rico (not a state but included in this list)
9. Ohio
9. Kansas
9. Minnesota

This is from 2018 and at that time only MN and PR would have had Democratic governors.

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel={"colId":"Black","sort":"desc"}
I think clearly both matter. But states have more power in setting education standards and levying taxes. So it would be wrong to absolve them of any responsibility.

And the focus on police reform is being led by black people on the ground. It is not something being dictated from on high by the Democratic Party. It might be nice to listen to the PEOPLE and what they think needs to be changed. Instead of white people telling black people what they need to do which we’ve been doing since the first slave ships hit our shores. No one is saying that police reform is the only issue. But if that is what people want fixed first, maybe it should be fixed first?

It all matters. But poor education is in my view the single most important factor. I think we have a different view in what listening to the people means. Black leaders are not the people. There are reasons why the black leadership is saying black cops are not black while ordinary black people trying to get by as regular folks seem to want more policing, not less. Police reform is a political shiny object. The reform is mostly window dressing anyhow. In most agencies, reform has been going on for years. I’m struck by the number of female and or people of color police chiefs on the air this year; while the retired ones on the air are white guys.

Lower poverty rates are great. But that doesn’t touch as many lives as higher drug use, more violence, and poorer educations.

I don’t buy the notion that education is a state issue. While states are more involved in funding because of court decisions about state-wide equity, with limited exceptions, the actual operation is at the local level.
 
It all matters. But poor education is in my view the single most important factor. I think we have a different view in what listening to the people means. Black leaders are not the people. There are reasons why the black leadership is saying black cops are not black while ordinary black people trying to get by as regular folks seem to want more policing, not less. Police reform is a political shiny object. The reform is mostly window dressing anyhow. In most agencies, reform has been going on for years. I’m struck by the number of female and or people of color police chiefs on the air this year; while the retired ones on the air are white guys.

Lower poverty rates are great. But that doesn’t touch as many lives as higher drug use, more violence, and poorer educations.

I don’t buy the notion that education is a state issue. While states are more involved in funding because of court decisions about state-wide equity, with limited exceptions, the actual operation is at the local level.

It seems to me there have been plenty of black people in the streets in US cities for the last month or so. Surely not all of them are black leaders. I do agree that we do not need less policing and I too have noticed the diversification of police forces. My sister in law will be a senior in college this year and is leaning towards a career in law enforcement. She has talked to plenty of people who would love to have her because they want female officers. I do believe most departments are trying to improve. But I can’t deny they still have an issue with brutality and killing unarmed civilians and it does need to be addressed.

Cities certainly have a huge role in enducation. The first post of yours I responded to seemed to blame issues with education entirely on Democrats. I feel that was an oversimplification of the issue but would love to see any data that shows Republican run cities have better education systems than Democratic controlled cities. I would guess the opposite to be true if only because most of the rich cities in our country are run by Democrats
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT