Obama pro/con (6)

Do you think Blacks might riot if Obama does not get The Presidency?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

ImmortalTechnique

Senior Veteran
May 10, 2005
5,534
410
39
✟15,270.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Clever, but fallacious rebuttal. Past performance is the best predictor of future performance. In the past 50 years, Blacks have found some success in getting what they want by rioting. They want The Presidency and it is within their grasp, but they don't have it yet. So, it is logical to conclude that this is a tactic they might use, if they recognize an opportunity to employ it.

the picture becomes clearer... there are three options

A. You are a fake account trying to stir things up
B. You are equally racist as the person in your avatar
C. You are MORE racist than the person in your avatar (unlikely)
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustOneWay
Upvote 0

Isernia

Newbie
Oct 18, 2006
120
1
✟7,788.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Your argument is still lacking and you are now starting to conflict with the OP because the OP asks if blacks will riot if Obama does not get elected, and now you are implying that the blacks will riot to get what they want....which is a black President. In order for them to succeed through rioting they would have to riot before the election. Nothing they do after the election will change the outcome. What are you really asking? Riots before or after?

Secondly, you have not provided any black riots which support your argument. You have not presented any black riots due to elections. You have not provided any scenarios that may bring about a riot. Here is a scenario that I believe would cause a riot....if Obama gets elected and is assassinated....I can safely say there will be black riots. Of course the OP is far too general and lacking any supporting evidence.

The question is stated in two different ways in the first post, intentionally. One to arouse feeling; the other to arouse thought. However, it is only stated one way in the poll, which is where I expressed my opinion. So, the question is not will they riot; it is: might they riot? You have gone off and challenged the other question. So, you should start over.
 
Upvote 0

praying

Snazzy Title Goes Here
Supporter
Jan 9, 2004
32,635
1,608
67
New Jersey
✟86,040.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Clever, but fallacious rebuttal. Past performance is the best predictor of future performance. In the past 50 years, Blacks have found some success in getting what they want by rioting. They want The Presidency and it is within their grasp, but they don't have it yet. So, it is logical to conclude that this is a tactic they might use, if they recognize an opportunity to employ it.

Success at what?
 
Upvote 0

platzapS

Expanding Mind
Nov 12, 2002
3,572
300
33
Sunshine State
Visit site
✟5,263.00
Faith
Humanist
Clever, but fallacious rebuttal. Past performance is the best predictor of future performance. In the past 50 years, Blacks have found some success in getting what they want by rioting. They want The Presidency and it is within their grasp, but they don't have it yet. So, it is logical to conclude that this is a tactic they might use, if they recognize an opportunity to employ it.
What have blacks gotten by rioting? I'm honestly curious.
 
Upvote 0

mont974x4

The Christian Anarchist
Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
17,630
1,304
Montana, USA
Visit site
✟46,615.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I suppose it's possible, as has been pointed out in the thread already many blacks have rioted over less important things in the past. And the illegals have had some success with their civil disobedience (violent in its own right at times).

Either way, I'll be praying for God to have mercy on our nation...come to think of it, I should have been more fervent in that starting decades ago.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 29, 2005
33,542
10,830
✟181,068.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
The question is stated in two different ways in the first post, intentionally. One to arouse feeling; the other to arouse thought. However, it is only stated one way in the poll, which is where I expressed my opinion. So, the question is not will they riot; it is: might they riot? You have gone off and challenged the other question. So, you must rephrase the question.
Feeling and thought? Will vs. might.... The words, the words.

I guess the thread deserves the only answer....anything can happen. Of course a meteor might, may, could strike tomorrow and all of this is moot.
 
Upvote 0

Isernia

Newbie
Oct 18, 2006
120
1
✟7,788.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Feeling and thought? Will vs. might.... The words, the words.

I guess the thread deserves the only answer....anything can happen. Of course a meteor might, may, could strike tomorrow and all of this is moot.

Look, it isn't all or nothing. I said might, but I didn't say a million to one odds. Quite frankly I think it is a real possibility, but then again, so is the possibility that Apple laptops might become affordable :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Isernia

Newbie
Oct 18, 2006
120
1
✟7,788.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hey, me too....Isernia?

Hi Scribbler, I like Louis Prima, but it's an aquired taste ;)

The question was, "what have Blacks gotten by rioting?"

Consider this. The police officers involved in the Rodney King case were acquitted by a jury. However, despite their Constitutional protection from double jeopardy, after Blacks rioted in L.A., the Feds gave them what they wanted. The officers were re-tried in a kangaroo court and sentenced to 30 months.

Rodney King led police on a high speed chase. When finally stopped, he attacked the police. They attempted to tase him, more than one time. However, he kept getting back up and attacking them. That in and of itself is terrifying; the man seemed "super human." Remember, the police get tased themselves as part of their training. So, they know this guy is really out of his mind, extremely strong and he keeps attacking them. They assume he is on PCP, which seems a reasonable assumption, given his behavior. However, the police do not kill him, which given his behavior, seemed long-suffering. Still, they did beat him, but Rodney King was unable to be restrained with standard tactics. Was his beating too severe? It looks that way on video tape. In a situation like that, the police are trained to intimidate the person into submission. So, they are supposed to surround him in a huddle formation. Rodney King's injuries were not that severe. His cheekbone healed within a weak and his broken leg was a hairline fracture. Considering his behavior and the threat he might have posed to officers who had their own lives and welfare to consider, his injuries seem insignificant. So, why should the case be re-tried by The Federal Government? Nothing in it warrants that kind of attention. However, they got it! And they got it because Blacks rioted.

The brave officers and the compassionate men who trained them, to intimidate people like Rodney King instead of killing them, can honestly say, our media and elites have turned the good they did into wrath.

We will reap what we've sown.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Scribbler

Ignoring all links to Huffington Post
Dec 9, 2004
7,344
631
54
right behind you.
Visit site
✟25,722.00
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Hi Scribbler, I like Louis Prima, but it's an aquired taste ;)
???


The question was, "what have Blacks gotten by rioting?"

Consider this. The police officers involved in the Rodney King case were acquitted by a jury. However, despite their Constitutional protection from double jeopardy, after Blacks rioted in L.A., the Feds gave them what they wanted. The officers were re-tried in a kangaroo court and sentenced to 30 months.

Rodney King led police on a high speed chase. When finally stopped, he attacked the police. They attempted to tase him, more than one time. However, he kept getting back up and attacking them. That in and of itself is terrifying; the man seemed "super human." Remember, the police get tased themselves as part of their training. So, they know this guy is really out of his mind, extremely strong and he keeps attacking them. They assume he is on PCP, which seems a reasonable assumption, given his behavior. However, the police do not kill him, which given his behavior, seemed long-suffering. Still, they did beat him, but Rodney King was unable to be restrained with standard tactics. Was his beating too severe? It looks that way on video tape. In a situation like that, the police are trained to intimidate the person into submission. So, they are supposed to surround him in a huddle formation. Rodney King's injuries were not that severe. His cheekbone healed within a weak and his broken leg was just a hairline fracture. Considering his behavior and the threat he might have posed to officers who had their own lives and welfare to consider, his injuries seem insignificant. So, why should the case be re-tried by The Federal Government? Nothing in it warrants that kind of attention. However, they got it! And they got it because Blacks rioted.
Errr....no. the first trial was for criminal charges. The second was for Civil Rights violations.
The brave officers and the compassionate men who trained them, to intimidate people like Rodney King instead of killing them, can honestly say, our media and elites have turned the good they did into wrath.
We will reap what we've sown.

So, when all's said and done, what blacks got by rioting was....what you consider a retrial?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

praying

Snazzy Title Goes Here
Supporter
Jan 9, 2004
32,635
1,608
67
New Jersey
✟86,040.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat

In best cartoon voice....


I don't know we might rabbit we might ;)



080304_Pol_BugsTN.gif
 
Upvote 0

Billnew

Legend
Apr 23, 2004
21,246
1,234
58
Ohio
Visit site
✟35,363.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Blacks, as all people that feel oppressed, riot as a last resort. When Goverment doesn't take them seriously, rewards people for harming a race,(as percieved in Rodney Kings beating(not trying to start a pro or con thing here), as in the 60's, with oppressive laws, and again violence
against blacks for being in the way.(or whatever stupid reason they had back then to beat on black people.)
Rioting can be a way to get change, but the random violence harms more of the people around the area, then does the people that caused the riots.
Blacks will not riot, unless Obama is assasinated and little is done to catch the person or persons involved.
The Election is a peaceful transition of popwer. With the hope of next election, the people might be upset, but they won't riot.
Tensions would be elevated if Obama looses like Gore did, by a very thin margin, and the Supreme court has to stop the endless recount demands.
But even then I doubt it would turn to violence.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

HerbieHeadley

North American Energy Independence Now!
Dec 23, 2007
9,746
1,184
✟15,282.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
Barack Obama has said he believes the troop surge would not do anything then he does on to say the troop surge would only make things worse! Obama then goes on to say "I do not believe this troops surge will work and in 8 weeks we will have no change in Iraq!"...8 weeks later violence was down 30%. Barack said "I will end this war" and then on an interview he say's "I never said the troops should be withdrawn" he also say's he does not think there should be a timetable now he has a 16 month timetable. Mr. Obama said "When I was asked would I appoint to the 87 billion dollars and i said no". Obama said another time "We do need to support the troops with funding".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-8i-K5RkVE

Will we ever get a straight answer?
 
Upvote 0

oldbetang

Senior Veteran
Jul 21, 2005
7,361
461
✟17,487.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Barack Obama has said he believes the troop surge would not do anything then he does on to say the troop surge would only make things worse! Obama then goes on to say "I do not believe this troops surge will work and in 8 weeks we will have no change in Iraq!"...8 weeks later violence was down 30%. Barack said "I will end this war" and then on an interview he say's "I never said the troops should be withdrawn" he also say's he does not think there should be a timetable now he has a 16 month timetable. Mr. Obama said "When I was asked would I appoint to the 87 billion dollars and i said no". Obama said another time "We do need to support the troops with funding".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-8i-K5RkVE

Will we ever get a straight answer?

Obama never said any of those things before he said them. ;)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.