I am not advocating that blacks be killed, unless they are guilty of murder. I think white murderers should be executed too. I am not even advocating a return to compulsory sterilization. I am advocating an end to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Because you are a Republican I would expect you to agree.

 

Finally you are doing what I asked you three times to do, if you had done this simple task when I first asked then action would NOT have needed to be taken.

You may think that this higher crime rate is down to genetics, BUT until there is conclusive proof the matter is unclear and therefore any hypothese can be refuted.

You may consider racial pofilling as appropiate, BUT that policy is also flawed and as recent events have shown, wrong information can lead to disasterous consequences.

You may want more blacks expelled from schools, BUT this idea also has flaws. Take the case of Benjamin Carson, he was involved in crime, he was basically brought up by his single mother, he was NOT the brightest child in his school. Yet he has become a leading surgeon, his achievements would NOT have happened under your proposals because he is BLACK.

No-one can accurately predict what a child will be like or what they will grow up into, the proof of this can be seen everywhere, even Bill Clinton was brought up initially by his single mother. So yet another hypothese is found to be flawed.

So you did NOT think it necessary to change your account even though you had NO idea as to whether or not you would see your cheque book again, also it did NOT cross your mind to ask how long a cheque stays cancelled for, this is very naive behaviour and some might say that if the money had been taken you had brought it upon yourself.

 

Why do you have to bring politics into something that would affect EVERY person, regardless of race, colour or creed.

 

Out of interest D.L.

You keep going on about how much money would be saved if your hypotheses were implemented, surely you should first question why this money was spent.

*not_secure_link*www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29694228

=====================================

The US government has paid dozens of suspected Nazi war criminals millions of dollars in social security after forcing them to leave the US.
The payments, funded by taxpayers, were made through a legal loophole, an Associated Press investigation has uncovered. Some are still being paid



Getting paid:

• Jakob Denzinger began serving in a Death's Head Unit in 1942, later settled in Ohio and became a plastic industry executive
• Martin Hartmann volunteered for the SS in 1943, was stripped of his US citizenship and admitted to his Nazi past
• Martin Bartesch was a guard at the Mauthausen concentration camp in Austria, was working as a janitor when US authorities discovered past
• Arthur Rudolph is accused of using slave labour at a Nazi rocket factory, brought to US after war due to technical prowess
• John Avdzej was a Nazi-installed regional mayor in occupied Belorussia, claimed to have been a farmer when he immigrated to US
• Wasyl Lytwyn served in a Nazi SS unit in the Warsaw Ghetto, worked as a shipping clerk in Chicago and later admitted concealing his SS service
• Peter Mueller was a Nazi SS guard who came to the US in 1956 and resided in Illinois before voluntarily leaving for Germany

Four World War Two suspects are said to still be alive and collecting benefits. One is former SS guard Martin Hartmann, another is Auschwitz camp patroller Jakob Denzinger.
Mr Hartmann is said to have moved to Berlin from Arizona in 2007, while Mr Denzinger left Ohio for Germany in 1989. He currently resides in Croatia

At least 38 of 66 suspects who left the US kept their benefits, the Associated Press investigation found

====================================================================

 

Please post your own arguments in your own words.

World War II was a long time ago.

I am in favor of reducing the birth rate of the underclass through a combination of no more welfare support for their illegitimate children, and free abortion on demand. I am in favor or raising their death rate with a criminal justice system of ferocious cruelty. We do not need those people. I am confident that there is plenty of support for what I advocate.

 

Fucking hypocrite,,you use the past to encourage your debates, and arguments,, when it is shoved in your face,, you say ''World War II was a long time ago.''

 

You missed the point. My wife's reaction, when she saw the picture on the drivers license, was "Oh, he's black; we must be cautious and not let this robber know where we live; in fact, now the question is, what was this rascal doing on the golf course?"

She made assumptions based solely on the color of his skin. And her assumptions were wrong on every count, which is the normal outcome when we make assumptions.

When I pointed this out she had an epiphany.

Too bad you missed the point.

 

When my company hired a black computer programmer I was not told to mentor him, but I did. I like to share my knowledge with people. I take my position seriously as the Master of Facts. I am complemented when someone asks for my help.

He told my boss I was helping him. My boss took me into a room and said, "It is my job to mentor people I hire, but I do not always have the time to do that. You are making my job a lot easier."

That is the best thing a boss can tell a subordinate.

I would have done the same thing for a white person. Indeed I have.

What does that mean? It means that I am good all over. :excited:

It is part of my genes. I was born good.

 

Well, there you go again, making assumptions; about my political party, even making assumptions that I ascribe to a single political party, and assumptions about what the rank and file of any party would do with TANF if they could.

You make a lot of assumptions about people and things. That's your loss.

Lets be clear; I'm all for law and order. Not totally sold on the death penalty. Do not believe in abortion but recognize that it is "the law", and will defend a woman's rights under the law. While I try to convince her that she has other options and owes it to her unborn child to reflect on her options.

I will defend to the end your right to spout your crap, and debate with you to the end how incredibly wrong you are in so many of your beliefs. Mainly your belief that
NIGGERS IS VIOLENT AND STUPID
because I know from long direct experience that they are anything but violent or stupid.

Your absolute refusal to understand what turned otherwise civilized human beings into raging inhumane brutes blinds you to a most fundamental aspect of human nature. One that explains how it is we can be so incredibly cruel to others.

And you, my friend, really do need to reconsider your fundamental beliefs about race.

 

Huh.
You were born male and Jewish I think. The rest of this is not very believable.

Sorry

 

A black person is more likely to commit a crime against you than a white person, because blacks have a much higher crime rate. Nevertheless, a black person or a white person is unlikely to commit a crime against you simply because they know where you live, unless he has found the key to your house.

Even if a person is a professional criminal he is less likely to commit a crime against you if you find his wallet and return it.

 

I am not Jewish, but I admire Jews. Anti Semitism infuriates me.

 

Serious Question.

What do I need to reconsider? I know that blacks have a much higher crime rate than whites. I know that from my personal life. I can easily document it. Are you telling me that I am mistaken?

What does this sentence mean, "Your absolute refusal to understand what turned otherwise civilized human beings into raging inhumane brutes blinds you to a most fundamental aspect of human nature."

I interpret this as meaning, "Yes blacks do have a high crime rate. This is because they were mistreated in the past."

Is that your meaning? If it is, so what? Are we supposed to forgive blacks their high crime rate because their ancestors were enslaved and discriminated against? Does forgiveness include punishing them lightly, or not at all when they commit crimes?

These are not rhetorical questions. I am trying to figure out what your opinions on the subject are.

My attitude is straightforward. Blacks have a very high crime rate. This ought to effect our behavior toward them.

Moreover, I believe that criminals deserve to be punished. If someone, black or white, shoots me and robs my wallet and watch I want that person to be sentenced to prison for a long time. I do not want that person to have educational and recreational opportunities in prison. I do not think he deserves that. He deserves to be punished. I do not care if his mother's boy friends beat him up on a regular basis. I did not do that. It was not my fault.

So what do I need to reconsider?

You can respond with a few smirky comments about Germans and Japanese, and "the bell curve thingy."

I am asking some serious questions. I would like you to respond seriously to them.

My low opinion of the Negro race does not include hostility against every Negro simply because he is a Negro. Nevertheless, that low opinion has been earned. I am liberal on most issues. When you and I are not arguing about blacks we are arguing about raising taxes on the rich. Nevertheless, I am not a guilt stricken white liberal. I do not feel guilty about anything. I hate criminals. I want them to suffer.

I am not a white supremacist. I readily acknowledge the superiority of Orientals by every criteria that I value in people. I have never had a bad experience with Orientals. I have never known one that I did not like. For several I have had the highest regard. I also have a high opinion of Jews.

So, what do I need to reconsider? And why?

 

D.L.
I did EXACTLY what you do, take a web-address and then copy and paste the relevant sections. If you cannot accept that then I pity you.

Read the report before commenting, these payments are STILL going on.

You keep reiterating that you want to END welfare payments to those less privileged, because it will save money, YET you REFUSE to acknowledge that your own precious government has been paying war criminals, who are NOT U.S.citizens, even though some of them are NO longer living in your country.
Talk about hypocrosy on a grand scale.

To think that your so-called master race, the people you hold so high in your esteem, are nothing but common criminals.

 

To cover your points as regards your final two statements.

Do read what has already been posted as I am sure you certainly need people like Benjamin Carson, who under your hypothese would either NOT be alive or he would have been placed into the adoption system. Also I bet that there are many people who he has helped, when given the choice between what they have now and what you advocate, they will stay with what they have.

Also remember that your own Bill Clinton was born to a single mother, and as you advocate that unmarried mothers of ALL races who DO NOT have a sufficiently high I.Q. should have their children aborted, which is the ONLY option left after you state that unmarried mothers of ALL races who have sufficienty high I.Q.'s should put her child up for adoption.

So this raises the question: How do you determine which child is going to be an asset to society, WHEN they are first born?

Until you can provide an accurate and foolproof method, then your hypotheses are about as useful and helpful as a chocolate fire-guard.

 

Red Herring fallacy

First of all, if I want hot air from the internet I will find it myself. Write your own arguments. Try to keep them to a single computer screen. I have a short attention span for nonsense.

Second, I think we ought to execute Nazi war criminals.

Third, mentioning Nazi war criminals is what is known in logic as a red herring.

---------

Description of Red Herring

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

1. Topic A is under discussion.
2. Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
3. Topic A is abandoned.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.
*not_secure_link*www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html

---------

Fourth, I am in favor of free abortion on demand. I am opposed to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.

Fifth, I am in favor of more, longer, and harsher prison sentences, and plenty of executions.

 

What the fuck are you talking about: If you cannot answer the relevant points put to you, then say so instead of spouting off complete an utter nonsense. Also if you CANNOT read the full post then CHANGE YOUR SETTINGS, not my problem if your computer screen is too small.

You keep spouting off that you are in favour of ending welfare to the "underclass" so it wll save money. YET you refuse to acknowledge that your precious government has wasted money paying war criminals social security benefits even though some of them DO NOT live in the U.S.

If you DO NOT consider the people named as war criminals, then You truly are delusional and a disgrace.

Jakob Denzinger began serving in a Death's Head Unit in 1942, later settled in Ohio and became a plastic industry executive ( worked at Auschwitz)

Martin Hartmann volunteered for the SS in 1943, was stripped of his US citizenship and admitted to his Nazi past (Former S.S.)



Martin Bartesch was a guard at the Mauthausen concentration camp in Austria, was working as a janitor when US authorities discovered past (Mauthausen camp guard)



Arthur Rudolph is accused of using slave labour at a Nazi rocket factory, brought to US after war due to technical prowess



John Avdzej was a Nazi-installed regional mayor in occupied Belorussia, claimed to have been a farmer when he immigrated to US



Wasyl Lytwyn served in a Nazi SS unit in the Warsaw Ghetto, worked as a shipping clerk in Chicago and later admitted concealing his SS Service (S.S.)



Peter Mueller was a Nazi SS guard who came to the US in 1956 and resided in Illinois before voluntarily leaving for Germany



The first two are still alive and still getting paid.

So you consider a report from the B.B.C. as "hot air" just because it is NOT on your list of credible sources, yet freakonomics is.

You are struggling to back up your hypotheses under the vast amount of information that is available which show flaws in EVERY area, so you have to resort to complaining about the size of a post and branding the B.B.C. as "hot air."

You really are just a spoilt little boy, who thinks he knows everything and CANNOT accept being shown where his plans have major faults.

 

What does that have to do with black crime? Are you arguing that Nazi war crimes mean that we should forgive black criminals? Those are serious questions. I would like some serious answers.

 

Funny how you can see this post, yet complained about the last post which was smaller in size

My point which is clear to everyone apart from YOU: Before you spout off that you want to end welfare payments to the under-priviledged because of saving money. You should first ask WHY your government has wasted and continues to waste money by paying war criminals benefits even when they are NO longer resident in the country.

Regardless of whether or not an unmarried mother is of a lower I.Q. than what you desire them to be, whether or not they are black, whether or not their children MAY grow up to be involved in a life of crime; IF they are a U.S. citizen and live in the country, then they have MORE entitlement to benefits than Nazi war criminals. Yet you want to deny them this and you refuse to accept that the payments to war criminals is WRONG.

 

If I did not make this clear previously, I will now: I think every Nazi war criminal, and especially everyone who participated in the Holocaust, should have been hanged right after World War II. Unfortunately, a lot of them were not. I think those who are still alive should still be hanged. If some of them have trouble walking up the steps to the platform of the gallows, I am more than willing to help.

Nevertheless, a ninety year old former concentration camp guard does not threaten me. A nineteen year old black ghetto thug does threaten me. I want him to be put into prison. I want him to be kept there until he is too old to threaten anyone. I want him to be treated harshly enough to discourage gansta wannabees from trying to emulate him.