Police: Obama caused war on cops!

How is Obama more honest than Nixon?

Google Obama's ties to the Black Panthers.

 

Translation: it really makes us cops mad when we get caught killing black people but it makes us even madder when a President mentions it too.

 

Did not say Obama was more honest than Nixon. I simply said that Nixon was not an honest person while you claimed Nixon was honest. In fact, you were not comparing the two other than for honesty and greatness in a simple up and down yes or not conclusion.

 

So a mass shooting from a nutcase that is angry about police shootings, at a gathering in Dallas that is a protest reflecting the anger about the Baton Rouge shooting, is in no way linked to the Baton Rouge shooting?....Huh ? That has to be one of the more convoluted bits of reasoning that I have seen on here.

 

The protests by BLM is not linked to a singular incident, but to a series of incidents whom they (BLM) believe that the system (our checks and balances for justice) is broken. That is the basic argument for BLM. There are some who try to use rhetoric that is extremely controversial, such as the reverend Jeff Wood who said "White America sucks" or something to that accord. But in the end, rhetoric on both sides is causing the situation to be worse. People need to stop, listen, reflect, and stop reacting like a bunch of small children on a playground.

 

If not for the 2 incidents that week, none of those protests would have taken place last week. They were a direct consequence of those two incidents, and not something that was planned prior to those incidents. To say that the mass shooting and Baton Rouge are unrelated is a significant stretch in logic. It was the impetus for the rally AND the last straw for the nutcase shooter.

 

You need to know the difference between causation and actual facts. They are not the same. According to the Dallas Police Chief, the suspect in the Dallas Shooting was planning on something that would have been bigger and more involved than what he did on that fateful night. This would mean that he was committed into shooting police officers, or any officers, based on his own manifesto regardless of whether BLM protested or not. This also means that there is no link between the shooter and the protests.

 

So a nutcase had grandiose plans, and after the Baton Rouge incident he was pushed over the edge and decided he needed to act immediately at the protest to the Baton Rouge incident. Perhaps he otherwise would have went on to do something on a grander scale, or perhaps he would have went on medication or been hospitalized and gotten the help that he needed. We will never know. The fact remains, Baton Rouge and the subsequent protest is what spurred him to action. To call that unrelated is utterly preposterous.

 

Again, you are looking at causation, not facts. The fact is that nothing was linked to the protests. Even the Texas governor made that statement initially and he is an extremist GOP person.

 

I think that you are taking the phrase causation doesn't equal correlation and trying to bastardize it to include the word facts. I am looking at BOTH causation AND the facts. The facts are what shows the causation. The facts are that a lunatic went to the protest about the police shooting in Baton Rouge and decided to kill a bunch of police officers. Unless you are trying to say that he was going to go to that garage and shoot cops that night anyway, it is preposterous to call those two things unrelated. The "cause" of why that nutcase went to THAT garage on THAT night and shot 12 cops is the outrage over another police shooting and the event taking place that was protesting that shooting. Without the Baton Rouge incident, there wouldn't not have been a protest, and a congregation of cops would not have been there. I couldn't care less what the Texas governor said, and I'm sure you are twisting his words anyway. Nor could I care less whether he is a Democrat or a Republican. The nutcase took the protest over Baton Rouge and chose THAT as his venue to vent his anger over police shootings. To say that Baton Rouge is unrelated is patently ridiculous.

 

the person used the protest with the presence of police officers to shoot and kill the police officers. Those officers did their jobs while observing the protesters and keeping the peace.

 

You have a firm grip on the obvious. You may want to add that he used a gun.

 

You have no personal knowledge of me so it is difficult to consider this statement to be credible.

What do you think the average citizen should do? Lie and make willing parasites feel all better? I won't do that. There are structural problems with our economy on both ends, and I will continue to criticize both.

 

Actually, you are being a bit unfair. I have heard intimations the shooter actually was working on a grander plan involving a bomb.

 

Did Reagan blame the police when the police got killed?

 

Every bit as much as Obama blamed the police.
We are talking real world - right. Not Hannity World.

 

Yes, I just watched Obama as we speak state the Police need to listen. Show me Reagans statement.

 

obviously it past your head while you were looking with both eyes.

The point is that the guy and the protest were separate. Somehow, you are trying pathetically to make it the same when it was not. Even the DPD will call you out on this, among other things.

 

Yes, a guy targeting police due to his anger at perceived unjustified police shootings, AT a protest about perceived unjustified police shootings are COMPLETELY unrelated. Gotcha. Nothing to see here.

 

Nothing unfair about it.

 

Then I would say you are not really listening to what the protesters are arguing. It is not simply the police, but the whole judicial system.

As for the shooter, the decision he made is not something that is done overnight or in course of a few weeks or months. And until the LEO's complete their investigation, you are making assumptions for pure political gains here.

 

Got ya. You believe that a man that is angry about his perception of unjustified police shootings that decides to shoot a bunch of cops at a protest over perceived unjustified police shootings, is not related at all to that protest, and any claim to the contrary is therefore obviously just for political reasons. You have made your position quite clear. Let the reader decide whether that makes a lick of sense. There is no need to keep repeating yourself over and over and over and over etc.