Black Lives Matter Movement: Good or Bad for Society?

No, there really is no comparison on the Left... for how far Conservatives have gone Right (even since Ronald Reagan). It's astounding to see the difference, actually.

 

Sheer Abomination { Obama Nation }.Racist to it's core.Meant exclusively
as a Community Activist or Agitating vehicle to taunt and belligerently
bait others into accepting a bogus Racist meme { Black Lives Matter }.
Just substitute the word Cop or Priest or Teacher,for Black.It won't pass muster because
There are Black Cops and Priests and Teachers.As well many white.
Like the KKK { Ku Klux Klan } ... Blacks Need NOT Apply.
Blacks Lives Matter is an exclusive *club for blacks.Therefore it's inherent
nature is meant to Divide & Conquer.What Obama specializes in.As a Community
Organizer or what Michelle Obama described in 2007 as Community Actvist.
This entire BLM movement is inarticulate,Unintellectual and downright geared for
low I.Q.'s. Again likened to the KKK of the 30's and 40's.
Gven that Obama's Harvard mentor was Derrick Bell who also taught and
personally dabbled in Critical Race Theory as a way of intellectually being
dishonest.It was used to great effect with Trayvon Martin.
Just a completely innocent little schoolboy skipping back home with
his skittles and then Wham Bam ... another episode like Emmett Till.

* Strikingly similar in both rhetoric as well feelings as New Black Panther Party.

 

I am not "painting" anything. I have looked into the founders of this movement you obviously have not.

 

What you are expressing in your commentary is merely a biased caricature of a budding movement; that based upon sketchy info and your own ignorance.

Even so, I'm going to watch and see what BLM becomes; I know it will not be without some problems.

 

I have posted all the information in the past. Folks like you ignore it and then call others ignorant... Its sad man...

 

I have NOT ignored it. In fact, I've seen YOUR views and info expressed in other venues... more than a few times. That I don't conclude what YOU do from the same, is something that is reality.

We just disagree. Maybe that will change and maybe it won't.

 

I dont post in "other venues". So yes you have decided to turn a blind eye to the information out there. Heck i posted one of the founders own blogs and you folks ignore it.. Pathetic.

 

Alright, we are finished for now.

Take care.

 

Considering that a self proclaimed socialist is garnering about 30% in Democrat primaries, how can you possibly make this claim with a straight face?

 

I do not agree at all. Liberals have insinuated themselves into everything including the Confederate flag, bashing cops, legalizing marijuana, gay rights, illegal immigration, etc. and are trying to curb the rights of Christians. What has the Tea Party accomplished?

 

Many Americans are smart enough to know that a Democratic Socialist (ala the United States of America), is not the same as a 1960's hammer/sickle USSR politician.

America has embraced certain elements of socialism, since its inception. Sanders is saying/promoting what many Center, Center-Left and moderately Left have been hoping and advocating for the last 30 years or so.

Meanwhile, too many Conservatives (GOP) have gone so FAR over to the Right, compromising to pass a Federal budget is too much for them to stomach. (Dwight Eisenhower, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan wouldn't even know them as Republicans; they'd be on the fringe... which is where I see them myself.)

 

It doesn't have to mean a 1960's hammer /sickle USSR politician in order to clearly refute your assertion. It does mean markedly to the left. This much cannot credibly be denied. As such, your statement that there isn't anything comparable on the left in regards to how far right Conservatives have went, simply is not based in reality. There is a very large segment of the left currently that is advocating economic policies that are extremely far to the left. A few posts down someone is trying to advocate that accumulated wealth be limited to $10 million, and plenty of fellow leftists in that thread are shouting amen. These are the same people that are Bernie Sanders supporters, and he is garnering 30% of the Democrat voters.

 

Sanders is talking pragmatic SOLUTIONS.

You are one who thinks people cannot deal with the 'label' (political designation) he wears well enough, in order to consider/see the efficacy of his proposals, not to mention his record supporting the same is as SOLID and CONSISTENT as most as any politician (perhaps more so) living and running for office today.

Forget my frickin' "assertion"... all I want to say is that a LOT of people see Bernie Sanders as an interesting AND reasonable choice for President of the United States; and I happen to be one of them.

 

Okay. We see this all very different. We'll all see what transpires in the months and years to come. So be it.

Regards.

 

Sanders wants to drastically increase the size and scope of government. If you call that pragmatic, then you too advocate a position that is extremely far to the left of the political center. I personally couldn't care less about the "label". The far left wants a larger government, and the far right wants a smaller one. There is no one of note on the right, that is advocating shrinking government anywhere near the amount that Sanders wants to grow it. There is no basis whatsoever for claiming that the far right is further away from the center than is the far left.

 

That's what you say. I see him as well as millions of other Americans, wanting to drastically IMPROVE the role of government, the part it plays. It's not about "size" per se, but 'function'.

This current notion that has gotten out of hand, where the government is allowed to be commandeered by a wealthy few, in order to serve their interests primarily... is untenable and unsustainable. The way we do things here in America is OUT OF BALANCE; favors lean way too much in the direction of those with money. That needs to be changed so that the nation can be more healthy (on many different levels).

All of that didn't have much to do with BLM, but it is in the spirit of taking on the less-than- efficacious status quo and challenging things to be improved. I have no problems with that.

 

i have a feeling that by the time its over they will have achieved the exact opposite of what they were going for.

 

Saying that he wants to increase the size of government isn't what "I" say, it is what HE says. This discussion isn't to discuss the merits or lack thereof regarding Bernie Sanders, rather it is to point out that he is admittedly extremely left of center. He is further left of center than anyone of note is right of center, which shoots down your initial claim that the far right is further from the center than is the far right. The fact that someone as far left of center as Sanders has 30% of the Democrat vote speaks volumes. I realize the left wing blogosphere loves to run with the notion that the far right is has moved far from the center, but the reality is that description more aptly fits the far left as evidenced by the level of Sanders support.

 

Sanders is a total moron . It is always the middle class that get the short end . Sanders was in office 28 years what the H*LL has he done ? What is the point of working if some moron wants to give away your wealth to the joe blow sitting at home every day watching Jerry Springer ? Spending 19 TRILLION he doesn't have .

 

When the Left takes away the money from their core of 'intelligentsia', i.e., the aparatchiks, to spread among the worthless only then will most see the wrong in this. It has failed in EVERY country that has invoked it. Name one country where socialism succeeded. Just one. You can't.

Sanders is insane. There are winners & there are losers in life. Spit polishing a turd does not make it a winner.

 

They are all so FAT. How can they not be getting enough food?

 

... much other than BLM. ("Black Lives Matter Movement: Good or Bad for Society?")

Overall, this is good for correcting problems which are 'longstanding' and have led to dire outcomes in this society.

I'm VERY interesting in what BLM can/will do and also concerned about the propaganda currently being leveled against the movement.

The movement us needed, because there have been 'patterns' of abuse in the system (criminal justice/law enforcement), which are both detectable and discernible at this point in time. Government has not acted in significant ways to correct these patterns of problems which we KNOW exist.

I don't agree with individuals who are mere agitators or those who may advocate violence. Those leading BLM should speak against and discourage such, in my view.

Bottom line: BLM is needed and useful, in light of all that has led to the budding movement itself. It can and should ultimately do a lot of good.

 

These "patterns of abuse" are nothing but propaganda. BLM is a myth based religious like cult. No one has been able to make a legitimate case that the claims made by BLM are true....not one person.

 

Where have you grown up? What have you seen?

Get it through your head that hundreds of thousands of experiences and complaints (on-record, some now recorded) are not "propaganda".

You can accept reality, or play the stupid game of treating it like "Play-Doh" in your own mind. I'm not going to reject what is, for what YOU want to say. We disagree, and that is what's most clear at this juncture.

The mentioning of the profiling and physical abuse is NOT "propaganda"... it is the expression of real concerns by real people.

It is not whether or not these things happen... it is how much these things have happened (and other related questions).

 

My thoughts exactly.