• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

91-year-old man beaten with brick, told 'go back to Mexico'

Hopefully they find the perpetrators and hit them with the max. People that commit violent criminal acts with any weapons should get mandatory minimum sentences. Decades.
 
Ikari said:
We're not really that far along, not sure how you already got lost. We're talking about your fantasy that Trump isn't the most divisive President in modern times.
Click to expand...

Look pal, I've already explained that on that issue you think he is, I don't think he is any more divisive than any myriad of democrat Presidents...So, instead of realizing like an adult that we disagree on that and move on, no, you have to act typically uncivil and continue to bait me....We are done with this subject as far as I am concerned, if you want to carry forth with your stupidity, do it on your own.
 
j-mac said:
Look pal, I've already explained that on that issue you think he is, I don't think he is any more divisive than any myriad of democrat Presidents...So, instead of realizing like an adult that we disagree on that and move on, no, you have to act typically uncivil and continue to bait me....We are done with this subject as far as I am concerned, if you want to carry forth with your stupidity, do it on your own.
Click to expand...

I know that's what you think, despite the fact that we've seen the divisive nature crank up to 11 on this.

It's not really just a "disagree", it's that you want to state 3 is 2, and I merely pointed out that no, 3 is not 2, it is 3. "I disagree" isn't really an excuse or argument, because it goes against the reality.
 
ElChupacabra said:
You seem to have forgotten about the Blue Dog Democrats.
Click to expand...

Actually more often than not the only reason that the Blue Dog Democrats argued against some things was to get more for their respective districts in the legislation that they were "arguing" against. As soon as they got what they wanted they would fall in.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Backtracking instead of admitting that you're wrong?
Click to expand...

Oh, now comes the baiting. What's for desert?

/snort

Let me demonstrate how once more, you are being dishonest AND hypocritically doing the exact thing you complain about another poster doing.


Kal'Stang said:
I hadn't noticed that until you pointed it out. Strange indeed.
Click to expand...

holbritter said:
Well, we know they weren't white, otherwise that would be in the headline.
I found this.

https://wsvn.com/news/us-world/poli...suspects-who-beat-92-year-old-man-with-brick/
Click to expand...

Now, see, words have meanings. So reread the bolded and red until you understand what it does and does not say:

Mr Person said:
Black people can't be Trump supporters but one article did not mention her race, therefore, the media is trying to fool people into thinking she was a Trump supporter?

The necessary assumption underlying your hackish attack on the media is just as foolish as the assumption that the attacker must be a Trump supporter.

She may be, she may not be, she may just hate Mexicans and not even care about politics. One thing is clear: she beat an old man and shouted that he needs to go back to his country.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

Then come the Kal’Stang word games:

Kal'Stang said:
Where did I say that she was/wasn't a Trump supporter? Oh right...I haven't.
Click to expand...

Ok, where did I say you said she wasn’t a Trump supporter? No where.

I said “the necessary assumption underlying…”
 
Captain Adverse said:
Strange for such reports, the race of the attackers is usually mentioned...but not in this case. I wonder why?

Here is another report posted today (07/10/18):

https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2018/07/10/91-year-old-man-beaten-with-brick/

Again, no mention of the alleged race of any of the attackers, although we already have a Forum member claiming they must be "Trumpist" xenophobes. This despite the fact, according to the victim, the men thought he was trying to abduct a child. We don't know why the woman acted as she did initially, we are informed she told the men were he was abducting her child, and the allegation is the attack occurred because the woman thought he was an illegal immigrant.

While this incident is bad, and the gentleman seems to have been an innocent victim...I would like to see more evidence of the incident before committing to a blanket "hate crime" scenario.

BTW, who was videoing him without helping him up? That seems fairly insensitive to me.
Click to expand...

The attacker(s) are Mexicans/Latinos. If they were white, the piece would have definitely noted that.
 
TobyOne said:
Are blacks ever charged with hate crimes? Thats not a rhetorical questions. Are there any stats about that? Or is it one of those things that blacks can't be racist because people who teach sociology say its not possible.

Its interesting that you can glean facts from a reported story from whats left out. If the attacker was white it would have been noted in the headline, have several paragraphs talking Trump and liberal outlets would be pounding this story out constantly.
Click to expand...

Yes. We had a case here in NY where a couple of black girls on a public bus claimed they were ganged up on by whites yelling racial slurs. They had a news conference and even Hillary Clinton commented on it.

The dummies didn't realize there was a camera on the bus. Showed they started the whole thing and no one yelled anything racial. They were charged, but I don't remember what the result was.
 
Mr Person said:
Oh, now comes the baiting. What's for desert?

/snort

Let me demonstrate how once more, you are being dishonest AND hypocritically doing the exact thing you complain about another poster doing.






Now, see, words have meanings. So reread the bolded and red until you understand what it does and does not say:



Then come the Kal’Stang word games:



Ok, where did I say you said she wasn’t a Trump supporter? No where.

I said “the necessary assumption underlying…”
Click to expand...

Ah I see...You're ASSUMING! Gotcha. You do know what happens when one "assumes" right? ;)
 
Ikari said:
I know that's what you think, despite the fact that we've seen the divisive nature crank up to 11 on this.

It's not really just a "disagree", it's that you want to state 3 is 2, and I merely pointed out that no, 3 is not 2, it is 3. "I disagree" isn't really an excuse or argument, because it goes against the reality.
Click to expand...

Nonsense...Shoo troll.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Ah I see...You're ASSUMING! Gotcha. You do know what happens when one "assumes" right? ;)
Click to expand...

More baity lies. That or you really don't understand what "necessary assumption underlying" means.
 
Wow.

Reading this thread...there are some sick ****ers on this planet. Deranged.

How the **** is ANYONE trying to attribute this to Trump? The people that beat that 91 year old man are animals. They should get railed. But the people that gleefully use a battered 91 year old victim for a political attack knowing full well it had nothing to do with politics? You actually make the assailants look slightly less sick.
 
VanceMack said:
Wow.

Reading this thread...there are some sick ****ers on this planet. Deranged.

How the **** is ANYONE trying to attribute this to Trump? The people that beat that 91 year old man are animals. They should get railed. But the people that gleefully use a battered 91 year old victim for a political attack knowing full well it had nothing to do with politics? You actually make the assailants look slightly less sick.
Click to expand...

Probably because of this line, which is exactly in line with Trumpism.
"I heard her saying, go back to your country, go back to Mexico," she told CNN by phone. "When I tried to videotape her with my cell phone, she threw that same concrete block, tried to hit my car."
Click to expand...


Of course, assuming she is a Trump supporter is not any different than people playing partisan hack games by trying to insinuate that there was some media conspiracy to hide the female attacker's race (black) so as to portray white people (Trump supporters in specific) as racist.
 
Mr Person said:
More baity lies.
Click to expand...

Hey, you're the one that assumed. Not me. :shrug: You see Mr. Person, I wouldn't assume that the woman is for or against Trump as I know that there are Trump supporters that are black. I've even posted video's of such on this forum. So your assumption is wrong where it concerns me.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Backtracking instead of admitting that you're wrong?
Click to expand...

The obvious thing is that headlines are quick to point out if the bad guy/gal is white, not so much if they are any person of color. Either leave color out of all headlines, or include all colors in headlines. The media says they are not bias? Prove it.
 
Mr Person said:
More baity lies. That or you really don't understand what "necessary assumption underlying" means.
Click to expand...

Kal'Stang said:
Hey, you're the one that assumed. Not me. :shrug: You see Mr. Person, I wouldn't assume that the woman is for or against Trump as I know that there are Trump supporters that are black. I've even posted video's of such on this forum. So your assumption is wrong where it concerns me.
Click to expand...

I would advise you to learn what "necessary assumption underlying" means in both philosophy and the English language, because it sure doesn't mean what you are pretending it means.

Also since you so frequently seem to think other posters "missed" (aka understood but had the temerity to criticize) what you were actually saying, I would further advise that you work on making clear what you actually are saying.

Speaking as vaguely as possible and leaving things to a wink wink nudge nudge know what I mean isn't a good way to debate. It is, I grant, a good way to elicit criticism just so you can attack someone for supposedly "missing" what you said. After all, if you always make sure to leave where you're driving to necessary implication, you can always demand to know where an exact set of words is.



But again, I said "necessary assumption underlying", and you are pretending I said "I assume". That is the exact thing you're trying to complain about.
 
Last edited:
VanceMack said:
Wow.

Reading this thread...there are some sick ****ers on this planet. Deranged.

How the **** is ANYONE trying to attribute this to Trump? The people that beat that 91 year old man are animals. They should get railed. But the people that gleefully use a battered 91 year old victim for a political attack knowing full well it had nothing to do with politics? You actually make the assailants look slightly less sick.
Click to expand...

They sure disappeared fast when they found out it was a black woman. Comically fast.
 
Mr Person said:
I would advise you to learn what "necessary assumption underlying" means in both philosophy and the English language, because it sure doesn't mean what you are dishonestly pretending it means.
Click to expand...

I know what it means. It means that someone makes an assumption about something based on their belief of what another person is REALLY saying. You're applying it to me wrongly is all as I have already explained that I would not assume someones political affiliation just because of their skin color. There is evidence of this as I have already posted a few videos on this forum of black Trump supporters.

Now, do I believe that the media uses words in such a way as to put forth a certain narrative when it comes to race? I do indeed. But that has nothing to do with Trump. They've been doing that even before Trump became Prez.
 
Moot said:
The president sets the tone for the nation...like a tribal leader sets the tone for the village. Soon the whole country will speak and act just like Trump. Sad.
Click to expand...

That this needs to be explained says it all.
 
Top Cat said:
That this needs to be explained says it all.
Click to expand...

What Moot said there would only be true if the whole country were lemmings. Considering all the divisiveness in this country I would definitely not call this a country full of lemmings. It also is nothing more than an excuse to attempt to take personal responsibility out of the picture.
 
holbritter said:
The obvious thing is that headlines are quick to point out if the bad guy/gal is white, not so much if they are any person of color. Either leave color out of all headlines, or include all colors in headlines. The media says they are not bias? Prove it.
Click to expand...

Bingo!
 
Kal'Stang said:
What Moot said there would only be true if the whole country were lemmings. Considering all the divisiveness in this country I would definitely not call this a country full of lemmings. It also is nothing more than an excuse to attempt to take personal responsibility out of the picture.
Click to expand...

Trump's incessant rhetoric is fueling this kind of crap. To suggest otherwise is delusional.
 
Mr Person said:
Why do you even bother telling such blatantly false lies?

Do you actually expect even one person to forget history they've lived through because you said something stupid and dishonest?

Don't bother...
Click to expand...

He just pulls **** out of his ass. Just like his Orange Emperor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom