Obama: 'No excuse' for violence in Baltimore

polgara said:

Greetings, ocean515. :2wave:

I don't understand how he intends to "correct the problem of impoverished communities that have been stripped away of opportunity" when it is his policies of "nanny government" that has created the problem by providing food stamps, housing assistance, and subsidies for everything else they want or need, including cell phones. What else can be done? Why blame anyone else, since none of us have anything to do with that? Why hasn't he created jobs for them, as he has promised every year since he was elected? And now he wants more jobs outsourced with his latest Trans-Pacific Treaty idea? That ought to solve a lot of problems - NOT! :thumbdown:

Click to expand...

Government assistance did not create that problem.

ocean515 said:

Hi Polgara :2wave:

So, imagine these pissed off, angry people. The President just laid out everything he thinks is wrong and that justifies their anger. Perhaps he even offered a few new ones they hadn't considered. And he does it with a preface that he's not trying to excuse anything BUT..........

So what are they going to think later? Imagine: "Hey, things still suck, the President even talked about it. And it's been like three weeks, and it's still sucks. Let's riot."

The denial on this thread that the President did this is quite remarkable.

Click to expand...

Those pissed off, angry people were protesting a legitimate issue of police abuses and to not acknowledge that would be insincere.


The other people, the rioters, are criminals and were explicitly condemned by the President.

Kobie said:

Only in conservative la-la land can a direct admonishment of rioters be considered tacit approval of rioting. The mental gymnastics being performed in this feeble attempt at maintaining a perfect score in the Blame Obama For Everything game are laughable.

Click to expand...

You don't get it Kobie, old buddy! This isn't about blaming Obama. It's about not having to discuss the issue at hand. That's all that has been done in this thread. The argument addressed in the OP was that Obama had approved of the rioting. When he EXPLICITLY came out and condemned it, they moved on to arguments about their personal emotions on the issue. Obama didn't do it "passionately" enough. He criticized every side! Even the police department! These are people who have no interest in ever addressing the underlying issue because they're fine with police brutality as long as it's used to maintain their beliefs on how things should be. The problem with their train of thought is that their way of discussing issues simply hasn't solved anything. The country tried it already.

ocean515 said:

:shock:

What the hell are you going on about? :lamo

When did I ever write that the President said anything before the riots?

Click to expand...

Reading is crucial. I said that your premise is destroyed by the fact that the people rioting did not need them to support them in the first place. If they riot again, it won't be because Obama approved or justified of anything. He didn't. It will be because protest themselves lend themselves to criminality if the right elements are present. How hard is that to understand?

polgara said:

Greetings, ocean515. :2wave:

I don't understand how he intends to "correct the problem of impoverished communities that have been stripped away of opportunity" when it is his policies of "nanny government" that has created the problem by providing food stamps, housing assistance, and subsidies for everything else they want or need, including cell phones. What else can be done? Why blame anyone else, since none of us have anything to do with that? Why hasn't he created jobs for them, as he has promised every year since he was elected? And now he wants more jobs outsourced with his latest Trans-Pacific Treaty idea? That ought to solve a lot of problems - NOT! :thumbdown:

Click to expand...

I'm with you. Let's not forget the massive of influx of illegal aliens he has encouraged. They have devastated black communities here in Southern California, and I have to imagine they will cause the same problems in places like Baltimore. In fact, Baltimore has been trying to get illegals to come live there!


Baltimore puts out welcome mat for immigrants, hoping to stop population decline

Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake (D) has told Latinos, in particular, that she is counting on them to help Baltimore gain 10,000 families within a decade. As a first step, she signed an order in March prohibiting police and social agencies from asking anyone about immigration status — and in the order, she explicitly asked federal immigration authorities to tell anyone they arrest that they are not agents of the city.

polgara said:

Greetings, ocean515. :2wave:

I don't understand how he intends to "correct the problem of impoverished communities that have been stripped away of opportunity" when it is his policies of "nanny government" that has created the problem by providing food stamps, housing assistance, and subsidies for everything else they want or need, including cell phones. What else can be done? Why blame anyone else, since none of us have anything to do with that? Why hasn't he created jobs for them, as he has promised every year since he was elected? And now he wants more jobs outsourced with his latest Trans-Pacific Treaty idea? That ought to solve a lot of problems - NOT! :thumbdown:

Click to expand...

Obama didn't start food stamps, housing assistance or subsidies for "everything". There is absolutely no causation between welfare programs and criminality. However, there is a causation issue when discussing poverty and criminality. Which is what he discussed.

ocean515 said:

I'm with you. Let's not forget the massive of influx of illegal aliens he has encouraged.

Click to expand...

Which began just after Reagan's amnesty.
Except in the minds of delusional far righties--who think they all showed up on Obama day one .

Chaddelamancha said:

Those pissed off, angry people were protesting a legitimate issue of police abuses and to not acknowledge that would be insincere.


The other people, the rioters, are criminals and were explicitly condemned by the President.

Click to expand...

Yes they were condemned. Then the President gave them reason to riot again. He provided a laundry list of ills that he said must be addressed, or, in effect, we must expect this type of action to continue. He did that by stating that he wasn't offering excuses, but then went on to provide a bunch of excuses.

That's my read. If you don't agree, I guess we'll have to leave it at that.

NIMBY said:

Which began just after Reagan's amnesty.
Except in the minds of delusional far righties--who think they all showed up on Obama day one .

Click to expand...

Damn... that's cold baby. Why you gotta bring Reagan into this? Don't you know time started in 2008?

Hatuey said:

Damn... that's cold baby. Why you gotta bring Reagan into this? Don't you know time started in 2008?

Click to expand...

frighties also like to forget that 400+ billion deficits started with their doG.
That would be about 1.5 trillion today.
But Obama owns his numbers--Reagan's troopers, not so much .

ocean515 said:

That's my read. If you don't agree, I guess we'll have to leave it at that.

Click to expand...

Your read is always against your President--something we both can agree on--no matter what he says or does .

NIMBY said:

Which began just after Reagan's amnesty.
Except in the minds of delusional far righties--who think they all showed up on Obama day one .

Click to expand...

Hey my friend, long time.

Hey, don't mean to warp you brain away from your Reagan obsession, but the influx occurred long before Reagan. Remember, the Amnesty was created to deal with the millions of illegals once and for all.

As they say, fool me once, etc.

That's what makes this latest attempt by liberal/progressives to reward lawless people and further decimate cities like Baltimore even more offensive. ProgLibs are just moving on to the next group to exploit and lie to for political gain.

You're up on things. When do you think the Black communities will figure out they've been played, and finally see how this illegal alien reward program Democrats are pushing is going to screw them for decades?

NIMBY said:

Your read is always against your President--something we both can agree on--no matter what he says or does .

Click to expand...

Oh, there are a few things he has said and done that I have no problem with. However, by and large, I think he is a pathetic, unqualified, narcissistic POS. Best thing that ever happened to Jimmy Carter.

That being said, I would still refer to him as Mr. President, should we ever meet.

ocean515 said:

Yes they were condemned. Then the President gave them reason to riot again. He provided a laundry list of ills that he said must be addressed, or, in effect, we must expect this type of action to continue. He did that by stating that he wasn't offering excuses, but then went on to provide a bunch of excuses.

That's my read. If you don't agree, I guess we'll have to leave it at that.

Click to expand...

He didn't give them a reason, he just stated the obvious, that the reasons there were riots are still there. Like they needed permission to do it again. :roll:

Kobie said:

Government assistance did not create that problem.

Click to expand...

Greetings, Kobie. :2wave:

If you had the authority as POTUS to fix this problem, how would you tackle it? They need to have the personal incentive to become self reliant, so how do you teach that? Schools are there for everyone to attend, so they're not lacking that; there are not enough well paying jobs for anyone these days, so they're not singled out there; and their physical needs are being taken care of by the government, so it looks more like a motivational problem than anything else. Government assistance may not have created the problem, but it may have inadvertently set the wheels in motion to perpetuate it - sometimes spanning more than one generation. How do you change the mindset of angry unhappy people?

polgara said:

Greetings, Kobie. :2wave:

If you had the authority as POTUS to fix this problem, how would you tackle it? They need to have the personal incentive to become self reliant, so how do you teach that? Schools are there for everyone to attend, so they're not lacking that; there are not enough well paying jobs for anyone these days, so they're not singled out there; and their physical needs are being taken care of by the government, so it looks more like a motivational problem than anything else. Government assistance may not have created the problem, but it may have inadvertently set the wheels in motion to perpetuate it - sometimes spanning more than one generation. How do you change the mindset of angry unhappy people?

Click to expand...

Hello Pol,

The problem isn't based on anything that started with the Conservative narrative regarding downturn in the quality of life of (white) America (supposedly in 2008). It's something which has existed for quite a few generations in the black community and the current situation simply isn't making better. Government assistance has verifiably improved the lives of millions of people who would have otherwise been on the street begging and engaging in criminality. All you need to do is look at any period in US urban history to recognize that. It has also made many people leeches of the system. That however is a separate subject in and of itself.

The issue Obama discussed is whether this poverty and the treatment by police have caused many people to become justifiably angry at the system. That doesn't in any way excuse rioting and looting. What it does in fact excuse (not that you need excuses to engage in the 1st amendment right to protest) is the concerns, opinions and peaceful demonstrations which have occurred. I can't stress enough the difference between the narrative Travis so dishonestly tried to push and the actual discussion in place.

Chaddelamancha said:

He didn't give them a reason, he just stated the obvious, that the reasons there were riots are still there. Like they needed permission to do it again. :roll:

Click to expand...

I'm sure they won't need permission, but I'm sure they appreciated the validation and endorsement. :wink2:

ocean515 said:

I'm sure they won't need permission, but I'm sure they appreciated the validation and endorsement. :wink2:

Click to expand...

Problem is the rioters aren't rioting for any of the reason he talked about. :shrug:

Hatuey said:

Obama: 'No excuse' for violence in Baltimore - CNNPolitics.com



Thought this was interesting. I guess it takes the wind out of the 'tacit approval' crowd.

Click to expand...

How low the office has sunk that the president's ardent supporters seek accolades for the president stating the obvious.

Chaddelamancha said:

Problem is the rioters aren't rioting for any of the reason he talked about. :shrug:

Click to expand...

Really? Well dang, I guess the President was clueless again.

Hatuey said:

Obama didn't start food stamps, housing assistance or subsidies for "everything". There is absolutely no causation between welfare programs and criminality. However, there is a causation issue when discussing poverty and criminality. Which is what he discussed.

Click to expand...

Greetings, Hatuey. :2wave:

I am not blaming him for the safety nets that are in place, since it's been law for a long time, and certainly needed. But what I don't understand is how poverty leads to criminality. By the world's standards, our poor are considered wealthy. They have cars, TVs, nice clothing and good food to eat. If our poor are envious of what others have, that's a personal problem. There are no good excuses for destroying what other people have worked for just because you're angry or envious, or feel a wrong has been done to you. It's a moral failing, IMO, but the entire world seems to be sinking into the same morass, and our leaders worldwide don't seem to know how to handle it, so what can we expect? Sad...

polgara said:

Greetings, Hatuey. :2wave:

I am not blaming him for the safety nets that are in place, since it's been law for a long time, and certainly needed. But what I don't understand is how poverty leads to criminality. By the world's standards, our poor are considered wealthy. They have cars, TVs, nice clothing and good food to eat. If our poor are envious of what others have, that's a personal problem. There are no good excuses for destroying what other people have worked for just because you're angry or envious, or feel a wrong has been done to you. It's a moral failing, IMO, but the entire world seems to be sinking into the same morass, and our leaders worldwide don't seem to know how to handle it, so what can we expect? Sad...

Click to expand...

A good portion of the poor don't have cars, nice clothing, or good food to eat. TVs sure, but you can find a TV on the side of the road anymore right? Other than that your post isn't really saying anything than "Nanana boo boo to bad so sad" and doesn't have one bit of analysis of the situation. What causes a lot of this amongst poor black communities is how they are treated not just by the police, but by the rest of society, how their neighborhoods that many of them grew up in grow to be neglected and worthless overtime, while the rest of the surrounding neighborhoods spring up. A lot of what happened though, especially yesterday, I think came from youth that just generally can be angry. I was angry all the time for no reason when I was a kid, these kids have a reason and they don't know how to channel it properly, or they do and the schools are shut down for a few days like somehow that will make the situation better.

polgara said:

Greetings, Hatuey. :2wave:

I am not blaming him for the safety nets that are in place, since it's been law for a long time, and certainly needed. But what I don't understand is how poverty leads to criminality. By the world's standards, our poor are considered wealthy. They have cars, TVs, nice clothing and good food to eat. If our poor are envious of what others have, that's a personal problem. There are no good excuses for destroying what other people have worked for just because you're angry or envious, or feel a wrong has been done to you. It's a moral failing, IMO, but the entire world seems to be sinking into the same morass, and our leaders worldwide don't seem to know how to handle it, so what can we expect? Sad...

Click to expand...

Pol,

You probably haven't lived a level of poverty where your food groups are grape soda and mayo sandwiches. However, that does exist in our country and people make decisions based around it. Some people try their hardest and struggle for decades to get ahead. They work menial jobs, they take crap from ****ty employers. Some eventually make it out of that poverty and live what is referred to as the "American Dream". Others simply can't make it happen no matter how much crap they take or how hard they work.

In that second group (the group that doesn't get ahead), you have two kinds of people. The kind which continue trying and don't get anywhere and you have the group that simply decides to give up. This mentality is passed down from one generation to another and to a large extent, it's based on the real life experiences of people living in many of our inner cities. That kind of people is the kind that is responsible for a lot of the criminality in this country.

So what we have is a multifaceted problem. The first is that yes, poverty diminishes the possibilities of an individual. Secondly, it makes the easy (and trust me on this, they're pretty easy) profits of criminal activities. Finally, this mentality is handed down from one generation to the other.

With that stated, social programs do ensure that people are less likely to turn into criminals. They ensure that many people are kept away from the crushing poverty we saw in the early 20th century when these programs didn't exist.

Obviously, this doesn't explain why so many in Wall Street have turned to criminality. The reasons why the rich engage in crime are vastly different than the reasons the poor do. However, in the end, the majority of poor people who engage in criminality do so because they feel it is a good way to survive. I'm not justifying it in any way, but I can see how and why it happens. This is the least convoluted explanation I can give.

Cardinal said:

Well if all the coverage has been of black people rioting then why does he need to refer to them as "black savages?"

And I'm not trying to shut you down at all. I'm being pretty entertained at the moment by watching you try to walk back from your own statements.

Click to expand...

I guess when Obama called the rioters "thugs and criminals" it just wasn't quite up to snuff. He actually had to call them "black savages" to please a certain segment of the population. Because, of course, Obama needs so much more public/media grief than he's already gotten by calling them "thugs and criminals", eh? Poor Obama can't say anything right! :lol:

DiAnna said:

I guess when Obama called the rioters "thugs and criminals" it just wasn't quite up to snuff. He actually had to call them "black savages" to please a certain segment of the population. Because, of course, Obama needs so much more public/media grief than he's already gotten by calling them "thugs and criminals", eh? Poor Obama can't say anything right! :lol:

Click to expand...

That wouldn't be enough, either. It would only be sufficient when he admits to being single-handedly responsible for racial strife going back a hundred years, and promptly quits office.