Homeless George Zimmerman Can No Longer Stand His Ground >>MOD WARNING<<

Yeah its totally faked....its a mass conspiracy.

 

Well by all means please tell us how a man slides on his back in the grass and mud and has a bloody head and not one drop of blood or one grass stain gets on his clothes. Did they stop by the dry cleaners on the way to the station.

 

Bazinga! Nice!

 

Wrong..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin

 

Ok, so what happened to all the grass stains by the time they arrived at the police station. Did he stop by the cleaners first. Like I said his shoes weren't even wet and they damn sure didn't have any mud or grass on them. How is that?

Please point out the grass stains for us.

So since OJ wasn't found guilty, you believe that justifies Zimmerman murdering a black teenager. Wow.

 

<Mod Edit>

 

So u don't mind posting that

What else is he going to say.

You made the claim, back it up.

I didn't claim he voted for Romney.

 

That's bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Those are the same clothes he had on at the crime scene and when he arrived at the police station. You don't have to take my word for it the clothes speak for themselves.

<Rule 3>

 

http://www.ibtimes.com/voting-form-...mocrat-confounding-message-pushed-left-430738
http://www.isthatbaloney.com/george-zimmerman-is-a-registered-democrat-and-voted-for-barack-obama/

<Rule 3> cite your sources that counter.

 

<Rule 3>

Forensics backed him up, his story was consistent with the evidence collected,TM's girlfriend told numerous lies, his nose and head were obviously busted, the officer who cuffed him at the scene saying his back was covered with grass and all you've got is his (*)(*)(*)(*)ing shoes weren't wet?

<Rule 3>

 

Why should he be treated differently from anyone else? He has already received more than his fair share of special treatment.

 

Cause Democrats are champions of the homeless. They care about income inequality and poverty...

So they say...

 

Does that mean they have to take in every homeless person?

 

George is not dead or homeless. The reports of his being homeless is based on very old news reports.


The report that he is dead was a rumor began by a black publication.

Currently George Zimmerman lives in a gated community and is enjoying life to the fullest....he has sold paintings for hundreds of thousands of dollars(not even to mention the pistol he used to rub out Taryvon: which went for several hundred thousand) and has many supporters despite the media's continuing efforts to demonize him.

<Mod Edit>

This topic has been debated backward and forwards on all message boards but still many do not have the basic facts of the case <Rule 3>

The only recent news about George is that about the conviction of the crazy white guy who was just recently found guilty of trying to murder George.

 

So you pick and choose who to help?

That's not very caring...

 

I asked you a question. I'm expecting an answer. Why should Democrats have to treat Zimmerman any differently from any other homeless person? Do you expect every Democrat to personally house any homeless person? Why?

Just because Democrats think government should treat people in a certain way, i.e. provide opportunities to under privileged people, it doesn't mean they have to become Mother Theresa. You don't see the absurdity in our assertions? There is a name for the argument you and others are making here. It's an argumentum ad absurdum argument. It's an illogical argument.

The issue here and the question I have posed many times without an answer to you and folks like you, is why should Zimmerman be treated any differently from any other homeless person? In my view, he shouldn't. He shouldn't receive anymore any less privilege than any other homeless person. But you and those of your ilk are arguing he should be. So please explain why you think Zimmerman should be treated differently.

 

Yea no one actually believed he is homeless. <Mod Edit>

 

I gave you an answer, you just didn't like it. Democrats care for the homeless, yes? They want to increase taxes, and to redistribute wealth from the top to those at the bottom in the name of... equality I guess?

If they cared half as much as they pretend they do, you'd think they'd be bending over backwards to donate their money to a worthy cause. See, me? I don't pretend to care for the homeless. Give them a building to hang out in, some food (bread and water is fine), and.. that's it. It's not the government's job to force me to care for them.

So, it's cool to care about SOME homeless, but not all? Correct? At what point do you go from 'provide opportunities' to 'Mother Theresa'? Is there a dollar amount? Or is it just when you feel like you've done enough?

I agree, he shouldn't.

But if you think Democrats don't demand we do more to help the under privileged, then you're simply being dishonest with me. And yourself.

Brought to you by the same people who claim Global Warming is killing the planet while flying in a private jet to a destination 45 miles away. Brought to you by the same people who were all about water conservation until they have to conserve water themselves. Brought to you by the same people who think guns need to be outlawed while being protected by people with guns. Brought to you by the same people who think walls are bad yet live in gated communities.

Are you starting to see the pattern here? Or no?

 

No, you gave me a question.

I don't see anyone forcing you to care about the homeless. How do you know they don't donate their money? But you are getting off topic here. This is about Zimmerman...remember?

Why would you say that? What you are doing here is creating another illogical argument commonly referred to as a straw man, i.e. argumentum ad logicam. No one has said, least of all me, that there should be disparate treatment of homeless individuals. In fact I explicitly stated I think all homeless people should be treated equally. What don't you get about that?

Then what's your beef?

Again, you are back to the straw man fallacies, and what does that have to do with the issue under discussion? Nothing....it has absolutely nothing to do with the issue under discussion. Additionally, your assertion is sufficiently vague as to become meaningless. Republicans have been known to favor the under privileged too, the Civil Rights movement of the 60's being a case in point. Republicans cooperated with Democrats to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and in my state, a solid red state, Republicans have mandated health insurance cover some autism. So when you make broad sweeping assertions as you have done, odds are you are wrong and you are wrong.

I haven't seen Democrats demand much, that's generally a Republican thing. But Democrats do have their issues e.g. Obamacare being a case in point, the right of women to chose being another. But in general, the Democratic Party is a party which likes to promote opportunity and the Republican Part is the party which likes to restrict individual opportunity.

No, I'm seeing right wing memes being mindlessly repeated as they were intended to be. Democrats didn't cause or bring about global warming. They are for the responsible use of our resources. And Democrats aren't for outlawing guns or taking people's guns away from them. They have never made such proposals. What they have done is propose to make it illegal for suspected terrorists to purchase weapons. What the have done is advocate for more and more through background checks. None of those are or should be radical by any stretch.

What does bother me is that both parties think they can fix every social ill with a law, with Democrats it's gun control and with Republicans it's drug laws, sex related laws, and fiscal laws. Every time there is a mass shooting, Democrats think they can somehow make it better with more gun regulation, and that's wrong. I haven't seen any gun regulation that Democrats want passed which would have prevented even one of the many mass shootings we have seen in recent years. If we make laws, those laws should have a reasonable chance of accomplishing what they're are suppose to accomplish and that's simply not the case with much of the gun regulation Democrats want to pass.

But again, that has nothing to do with Zimmerman or why he should be treated differently as suggested in the OP.

 

He was found not guilty but anyhow....time to shut this down...it has gotten off topic anyway and there were very few posts that were even truthful. This thing has been beaten to death on just about every message board for miles around <Rule 3>