You Bill Clinton Lovers get in here

? the Clintons and everybody that love 'em

Kai wrote: »

manofmorehouse wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Bernie Sanders voted for the same bill Clinton is being vilified for. U know that, right?? Also,did u or any other bernie supporter know of his "accomplishments" before 2015?? Why is that?? Say what u will about how horrible that bill was to us. There were MANY of us harming and killing our own that were swept up under it. I think a weed conviction is ridiculous, especially now, but if it's known that selling is illegal and that black men are overwhelmingly targeted, why in the ? would u put yourself in a position to get caught up?? I don't have to defend her positions Shell be the Prez come January 2017

bernie sanders voted for the crime bill as a compromise to get the violence against women acts passed and says so right here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuenGIA3YwI

he also states his problem with the bill:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTn3jUoMdVI


plus i was asking you to defend her positions as a black man which you can not, if you could you would. and yes i did know about bernie sanders and have for years, that's because i'm an informed person and a strident social democrat who seeks out elected officials who adhere to my beliefs. sadly they are very few and far between in america, although we had Dennis Kucinich, but no more.

There's no reason for me to defend her position. I'm voting for her because she's the best of the remaining candidates. Nothing more. As far as voting for the bill, it's OK to do so if something good comes of it?? Wouldn't that defend hillary position as well?? Lol just say u dislike her

Stiff wrote: »

The Clinton's record on the economy is trash.

It was Bill Clinton in cahoots with the Republican congress that repealed Glass-Steagle which allowed banks to favor speculation over lending and start gambling with depositor money. It didn't even take a decade for the economy to crash after Clinton signed the bill.

They will gladly sell out the American people as a whole for their wall street sponsors.

And the Clintons have a history of using Black people as political cannon fodder. Just don't understand how any educated Black person could support either of those two people. Y'all keep being "realistic" though.

What people fail to realize is that without repealing glass-steagle at the time, many African Americans who would've never been able to get homes were able to do so. It's easy to speak on what could and couldn't have been done after the fact. Also, even though u wouldn't be able to tell with recent policy, you're supposed to be able to make deals with the opposing party. That is what actually clears up obstruction. I'm surprised educated individuals are able to be sold on pipe dreams, but you know,feel the Bern, and ? lol

manofmorehouse wrote: »

The cycle of poverty and undereducation in our culture will continue because we're afraid to admit the role we play in our own destruction. I'm the first to admit that the system is against us and that we're set up to fail. What I won't accept are the constant excuses we continue to make for ourselves. I grew up in the 90s. I can tell u, without a doubt, Crenshaw and 76th in Los Angeles was ? horrible.

I didn't see white people in IFG or Crenshaw Mafia or Rolling 60s. I saw us killing us. Let's make the argument that drugs and gums were given to us by white people. Are we that stupid to accept the destruction of us and contribute to it?? Is that why we're admitting?? Fact is that bill took some monsters off the street.

It definitely took some nonviolent criminals as well, and they have to answer for that ? . But let's not act like ? ain't out here killing other ? over colors and other dumb ? . We walk around pretending the elephant doesn't exist within our own culture. ? know what it is. Let's stop bullshitting

Bruh. Stop

"Blk american culture" is so intertwined with american culture it's near impossible to separate the two

That said, the neighborhoods that have the highest crime rates are also have high concentrations of poverty. And when blk neighborhoods are compared with white neighborhoods of similar income levels, you see similar rates of crime, illegitimacy, high school drop out rate, etc

And it's not because poor people have bad attitudes or cultural deficiencies. Out of economic deprivation comes criminality. without a real economic safety net, what is required for survival can involve illegal business

Let's not also forget the poor feel the effects of nearly every major social ill. they lack access to health care, livingwage jobs, safe and affordable housing, clean air and water, and so on...conditions that limit their abilities to achieve to their full potential. Couple that with structural racism and blks are even more at a disadvantage. That is why the numbers are skewed

Ppl like to romanticize the past, but reality is a lot of the criminality we see today has been going on for generations. There was naturally a spike in violence when heroin and ? first hit the streets, same as with prohibition

Even going back to the late 19th century many of blk leaders was preaching about there being a lack of personal accountability in the community and subscribed to respectability politics ...Nothing you've said is new

There were even major campaigns where blk church based organizations would go in to impoverished blk communities and hand out pamphlets that “taught” folks how to “behave”, the value of chastity/education, and even how to properly bathe themselves. See what good that has done

That said, today a lot of what happens after you remove half the men out of a marginalized community already struggling with poverty ...while simultaneously cutting the safety net for single mothers sending them to work three part time jobs for slave wages

Their children become "thugs" turning to criminality for what's missing in their lives ... But young ppl don't make good gangsters because they have no impulse control, so the streets turn ?

The violence and criminality needs to stop. But going into their hoods marching, handing out pamphlets preaching for folk to "stop gang banging" and" stay in school", as we have been doing, is only half the battle...especially if joining a gang in an impoverished community with several gangs offers financial benefits and considerable protection from violence and attack from rival gangs

Meaning we also need to find ways to disincentivize these behaviors on a major scale

One of which is voting for politicians whose policies are focused on alleviating the effects of poverty

How can anyone get around the fact that Bernie voted YES on that 1994 crime bill? Backtracking 20+ years later means nothing. And what did he do for black civil rights? Get arrested 50 years ago? Anything since? He represents Vermont, the whitest state in America. How many black people actually benefited from his lockup a half century ago?

babelipsss wrote: »

How can anyone get around the fact that Bernie voted YES on that 1994 crime bill? Backtracking 20+ years later means nothing. And what did he do for black civil rights? Get arrested 50 years ago? Anything since? He represents Vermont, the whitest state in America. How many black people actually benefited from his lockup a half century ago?

That doesn't matter. He's "anti-establishment" and promises things that sound good but will never pass.

Lol at Clinton being the reason people's homes were foreclosed on. People had their homes close to paid off but refinanced using adjustable rate mortgages. Key word: adjustable. People assumed wrongly that prices would adjust down, so they refinanced to pull money out and ended up on the wrong side of the coin. ? happens when u gamble.

This wtf yall talkin bout on Saturday night?

Sion wrote: »

Stiff wrote: »

Sion wrote: »

Stiff wrote: »

manofmorehouse wrote: »

Stiff wrote: »

The Clinton's record on the economy is trash.

It was Bill Clinton in cahoots with the Republican congress that repealed Glass-Steagle which allowed banks to favor speculation over lending and start gambling with depositor money. It didn't even take a decade for the economy to crash after Clinton signed the bill.

They will gladly sell out the American people as a whole for their wall street sponsors.

And the Clintons have a history of using Black people as political cannon fodder. Just don't understand how any educated Black person could support either of those two people. Y'all keep being "realistic" though.

What people fail to realize is that without repealing glass-steagle at the time, many African Americans who would've never been able to get homes were able to do so. It's easy to speak on what could and couldn't have been done after the fact. Also, even though u wouldn't be able to tell with recent policy, you're supposed to be able to make deals with the opposing party. That is what actually clears up obstruction. I'm surprised educated individuals are able to be sold on pipe dreams, but you know,feel the Bernie, and ? lol

You mean the same homes that ultimately went into foreclosure and led to a global economy crashing mortgage crisis? Bro Blacks were preyed on at a disproportional rate by these banks and those policies made it possible. It was designed in a way that the banks were still able to make money off of the foreclosures of Black people who couldn't afford the homes in the first place because of insurance...led people to financial ruin. The ? was a disaster for Black people.

For Hillary "making deals with the opposing party" means doing what the Republicans want. Reaching across the aisle is history the climate now is zero sum and that's just the reality.

Black people weren't responsible for the housing crash. Banks preyed on everybody white, black, hispanic, etc. Banks made money up to a certain point but what eroded it and decimated a dozen smaller and mid-sized banks was the fact that those same mortgages they gave to people they were backing assets behind. When people started going into foreclosure the assets backed by them became "toxic" which is then why the gov't had to step in. By assets backed this means hundreds of billions were at stake. AIG is a great example of company that was exposed and could have destroyed a dozen fortunes. Only the biggest and most important banks (whoever you bank with) was bailed out b/c they were too big to fail. The rest were not so lucky. If Sanders had his way and they failed, most of yall would be broke with literally no money.

I think there's a lot of ignorance surrounding Glass-Steagall and a lot of people don't understand why it was repealed in the first place and no it wasn't so that the rich could "prosper". They repealed it in 99 b/c by then everybody had found 101 loopholes and it wasn't necessary any more. Different policies and laws came into place.

Once again I say, in politics this is their game. Sanders knows there's no single issue, it should be social change but the public is not warming up to it the same. So he brings up the economy to get you fired up so he can win an election. This is why Obama had to come out and clarify that the economy was NOT in shambles or in need of great reform like Sanders was insinuating.

Of course Black people weren't responsible for the housing crash..we were victims of it at disproportional rates. The reason why the bail-out was such ? was because people from that line of work preach the whole "free-market" ideals and privatization, and capitalism and all of that.

But when it came down to it their TRUE philosophy is to privatize the profit but socialize the loss. How can you out one side of your mouth criticize Bernie Sanders because he's a socialist but then be PRO bail out?

It wasn't ? . It saved the country and the government gave back to people the opportunity to make millions through the TARP warrants but most were blinded by Occupy Wallstreet and the frequent history of distrust b/w blacks and financial institutions which is why black people in general don't have a good relationship with banks and are on the lower spectrum when it comes to financial knowledge. We're getting there but there's still a huge distrust which leads to a lack of interest. Any good economy in the world - let alone the world superpower is going to at times (as it should) sputter out of control and create problems once or twice a decade (on average this is how often we get a recession). You didn't privatize the loss because banks still got ? and MOST of them did go under barring the biggest and most important ones (your Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Citigroup, etc).

The last sentence comes from your lack of understanding. If you understand why the recession and the bailout happened, how can you agree with Sanders' idea to let banks fail and not bail them out, but at the same time enjoy the fact your still have a bank account and your finances because the largest banks in America (the big 6) were bailed out ? You're not making any sense fam. If Sanders had his way, they wouldn't have been bailed out and would have failed. Like I said before, Sanders says things the average American is not going to understand in depth but is what people want to hear. He's a classic politician.

The whole situation was ? but I'm not even saying that it shouldn't have been done. My point is the same people that criticize Bernie SAnder's socialism and tout "letting the market correct itself" are also the same people who advocated for a government bailout of financial institutions. If you can't see the irony in that then I can't make it any clearer.

On some real ? I suspect you're being intellectual dishonest here though. You're a financial sector guy and a banker so I'll be the first to admit that you have more knowledge of the intricacies of finance..no doubt. But at the same time you, being part of the financial sector, are inclined to support policies that benefit the financial sector even if it may come at the expense of the economy as a whole.

You can use your perceived knowledge to just say "anybody who disagrees with me doesn't understand the issue." Ultimately an argument not worth having.

Sion wrote: »

Stiff wrote: »

Sion wrote: »

Stiff wrote: »

Sion wrote: »

Stiff wrote: »

manofmorehouse wrote: »

Stiff wrote: »

The Clinton's record on the economy is trash.

It was Bill Clinton in cahoots with the Republican congress that repealed Glass-Steagle which allowed banks to favor speculation over lending and start gambling with depositor money. It didn't even take a decade for the economy to crash after Clinton signed the bill.

They will gladly sell out the American people as a whole for their wall street sponsors.

And the Clintons have a history of using Black people as political cannon fodder. Just don't understand how any educated Black person could support either of those two people. Y'all keep being "realistic" though.

What people fail to realize is that without repealing glass-steagle at the time, many African Americans who would've never been able to get homes were able to do so. It's easy to speak on what could and couldn't have been done after the fact. Also, even though u wouldn't be able to tell with recent policy, you're supposed to be able to make deals with the opposing party. That is what actually clears up obstruction. I'm surprised educated individuals are able to be sold on pipe dreams, but you know,feel the Bernie, and ? lol

You mean the same homes that ultimately went into foreclosure and led to a global economy crashing mortgage crisis? Bro Blacks were preyed on at a disproportional rate by these banks and those policies made it possible. It was designed in a way that the banks were still able to make money off of the foreclosures of Black people who couldn't afford the homes in the first place because of insurance...led people to financial ruin. The ? was a disaster for Black people.



I think there's a lot of ignorance surrounding Glass-Steagall and a lot of people don't understand why it was repealed in the first place and no it wasn't so that the rich could "prosper". They repealed it in 99 b/c by then everybody had found 101 loopholes and it wasn't necessary any more. Different policies and laws came into place.

Once again I say, in politics this is their game. Sanders knows there's no single issue, it should be social change but the public is not warming up to it the same. So he brings up the economy to get you fired up so he can win an election. This is why Obama had to come out and clarify that the economy was NOT in shambles or in need of great reform like Sanders was insinuating.

Of course Black people weren't responsible for the housing crash..we were victims of it at disproportional rates. The reason why the bail-out was such ? was because people from that line of work preach the whole "free-market" ideals and privatization, and capitalism and all of that.

But when it came down to it their TRUE philosophy is to privatize the profit but socialize the loss. How can you out one side of your mouth criticize Bernie Sanders because he's a socialist but then be PRO bail out?

It wasn't ? . It saved the country and the government gave back to people the opportunity to make millions through the TARP warrants but most were blinded by Occupy Wallstreet and the frequent history of distrust b/w blacks and financial institutions which is why black people in general don't have a good relationship with banks and are on the lower spectrum when it comes to financial knowledge. We're getting there but there's still a huge distrust which leads to a lack of interest. Any good economy in the world - let alone the world superpower is going to at times (as it should) sputter out of control and create problems once or twice a decade (on average this is how often we get a recession). You didn't privatize the loss because banks still got ? and MOST of them did go under barring the biggest and most important ones (your Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Citigroup, etc).

The last sentence comes from your lack of understanding. If you understand why the recession and the bailout happened, how can you agree with Sanders' idea to let banks fail and not bail them out, but at the same time enjoy the fact your still have a bank account and your finances because the largest banks in America (the big 6) were bailed out ? You're not making any sense fam. If Sanders had his way, they wouldn't have been bailed out and would have failed. Like I said before, Sanders says things the average American is not going to understand in depth but is what people want to hear. He's a classic politician.

The whole situation was ? but I'm not even saying that it shouldn't have been done. My point is the same people that criticize Bernie SAnder's socialism and tout "letting the market correct itself" are also the same people who advocated for a government bailout of financial institutions. If you can't see the irony in that then I can't make it any clearer.

On some real ? I suspect you're being intellectual dishonest here though. You're a financial sector guy and a banker so I'll be the first to admit that you have more knowledge of the intricacies of finance..no doubt. But at the same time you, being part of the financial sector, are inclined to support policies that benefit the financial sector even if it may come at the expense of the economy as a whole.

You can use your perceived knowledge to just say "anybody who disagrees with me doesn't understand the issue." Ultimately an argument not worth having.

I have no reason to pick one candidate over the other my dude. None at all. You have to realize when it comes to politics this isn't about "? the rich" and everybody. If you're going to become president then you're "everyone's president" and you have to toe the line and keep the balance.

I think he's strong in some areas but with the economy he has dangerous policies. I'm a thinker first and then an individual. I'm inclined to be objective, and to make a decision based on my objectivity - not because everyone says it's the cool thing to do. That's how Jimmy Carter got elected and destroyed the U.S. economy during his tenure.

It's ok to vote for someone, but it's even more important to understand what they're proposing and WHY both good and bad. I think you have a personal like for Sanders and that's ok but he has downsides to him I'm pointing out and you shouldn't get upset by that but instead try to understand it.

And here's why the bolded is ? too tho. I'm trying to do exactly the bolded, I post a video of somebody in the financial world (the inspiration of the character Gordon Gekko) giving an opinion that differs from yours and I simply ask for your thoughts...and just for that I'm an idiot, my school system failed me, and Americans are viewed as stupid world-wide.

Lol you're biased bro. Enjoy your weekend too though

blackrain wrote: »

manofmorehouse wrote: »

blackrain wrote: »

manofmorehouse wrote: »

The cycle of poverty and undereducation in our culture will continue because we're afraid to admit the role we play in our own destruction. I'm the first to admit that the system is against us and that we're set up to fail. What I won't accept are the constant excuses we continue to make for ourselves. I grew up in the 90s. I can tell u, without a doubt, Crenshaw and 76th in Los Angeles was ? horrible.

I didn't see white people in IFG or Crenshaw Mafia or Rolling 60s. I saw us killing us. Let's make the argument that drugs and gums were given to us by white people. Are we that stupid to accept the destruction of us and contribute to it?? Is that why we're admitting?? Fact is that bill took some monsters off the street.

It definitely took some nonviolent criminals as well, and they have to answer for that ? . But let's not act like ? ain't out here killing other ? over colors and other dumb ? . We walk around pretending the elephant doesn't exist within our own culture. ? know what it is. Let's stop bullshitting

How about you stop bullshitting and pretending as if there hasn't been efforts for decades now to combat poverty and violence in the black community. It ain't no elephant in the room. People know the problems exist and have been working to solve them for a long ass time. Its disrespectful and disingenuous to ignore that.

Main problem with the crime bill isn't just that it took non violent offenders off the street it's that it did ? like put those non violent offenders away and effectively ruining their futures. That's the elephant in the room that needs to be addressed if there is one. It ain't people not talking about the violence because that's done every damn day.

It's the context of how it's talked about. No bullshitting on my part. Weed is just now becoming legal in certain states. Sellimg drugs has always been illegal. Should we ? and assume that ? didn't know it was illegal in the 90s?? Who's bullshitting who?? I did a crime. I know in America as a black man, I'll be targeted more severely but I continue doing said crime. Then am heartbroken when the system that's been unjust since blacks arrived does exactly what is has done since we've arrived. Who's bullshitting who??

That has nothing to do with what I addressed in your post. You talking about nobody addressing the elephant in the room in terms of crime w/in the black community as if there hasn't been efforts towards that since forever. You trying to put yourself on some high horse as if you're so much better than the people you're looking down on and criticizing. You're not better you just happened to make different choices. Props to you for making those choices but don't sit and act as if there aren't people working within the community every single day to help people make those same better choices. To sit there and say that it's something not being addressed is ignorance on your part.

What did I say that implied I was better than anyone?? How is holding people accountable for personal choices ignorant?? The ? ?? Reread your post and my post again and explain what I didn't address. The idea that the crime bill targeted nonviolent criminals wouldn't be an issue if people weren't selling illegal ? at the time. Do u not understand that?? The rebuttal will be "they had no other means" to which I call ? . Life, as stated before, is about the choices u make. Every choice has a consequence. Being ignorant is assuming ? didn't know the risks they were taking. That's life. What else would u like for me to address??