Wow! Elizabeth Warren.......Black Lives Matter Speech
Options
Comments
-
She is not running for any elected position
-
-
Did she not have to run for senator?
She's was voted in, in 2012
Did Black lives matter/black vote just become a problem bc people got cameras now or because a white person is speaking on it? -
She dropped some jewels that you won't hear openly said by most White people even if they agree with her.
I agree with her we evoke change through policy reformation and legislation; Hilary Clinton made similar comments before this but I guess some of y'all ain't fooling with her for whatever reasons though (I believe she'll be our next president).
To add to that we also need to start getting behind and voting for candidates with our best interest at heart and actually running for political offices ourselves.
I really don't care for as much for marches and trying to play on the conscience of someone who doesn't consider me to be an equal human being to begin with.
-
history informs the present so right now the bad situation we are in is a result of our decisions of the past.
I will say it again IN 2015 too many BLACK MEN are cowards and ? and too many black women are ? our standards of moral behavior have dropped dramatically and to make ? worse while we have 1 trillion dollars of spending power we don't actually have much wealth OR ECONOMIC CONTROL of our community
Uhm didn't the economy crash in 2007? Are you saying blacks were progressing & doing better under those republican policies than they are currently under this democratic presidency? (whose policies have been a far cry from liberal and are compromised at best)
Are you saying blacks were doing better under Reagonmics & the ? era than they did under the Clinton administration? (Another Wall Street friendly presidency that implemented compromised liberal policies AT BEST).
What we do see though is that every time we steer in that direction things generally begin to get progressively better. (Economy booms, jobs increase, deficits fall).
And then a conservative regime comes in right after and ? it all to hell by reversing the process. (Recessions, growth only for the top income brackets, jobs are lost, deficits skyrocket). -
history informs the present so right now the bad situation we are in is a result of our decisions of the past.
I will say it again IN 2015 too many BLACK MEN are cowards and ? and too many black women are ? our standards of moral behavior have dropped dramatically and to make ? worse while we have 1 trillion dollars of spending power we don't actually have much wealth OR ECONOMIC CONTROL of our community
Uhm didn't the economy crash in 2007? Are you saying blacks were progressing & doing better under those republican policies than they are currently under this democratic presidency? (whose policies have been a far cry from liberal and are compromised at best)
Are you saying blacks were doing better under Reagonmics & the ? era than they did under the Clinton administration? (Another Wall Street friendly presidency that implemented compromised liberal policies AT BEST).
What we do see though is that every time we steer in that direction things generally begin to get progressively better. (Economy booms, jobs increase, deficits fall).
And then a conservative regime comes in right after and ? it all to hell by reversing the process. (Recessions, growth only for the top income brackets, jobs are lost, deficits skyrocket).
It was the same problem before 2007 and before clinton and before reagan no matter who is in office as president we have the same problems because locally too many of us vote for liberals who put in place liberal policies that while they are supposed to help only hinder the black community from doing what we should really be doing attaining power and freedom. -
Did she not have to run for senator?
She's was voted in, in 2012
Did Black lives matter/black vote just become a problem bc people got cameras now or because a white person is speaking on it?
To put it simple for you
What you are seeing and hearing is an effort to push back against the false narrative that "All Lives Matter"
-
Does has it has to be explain why ""All Lives Matter"" is complete ? ??
-
history informs the present so right now the bad situation we are in is a result of our decisions of the past.
I will say it again IN 2015 too many BLACK MEN are cowards and ? and too many black women are ? our standards of moral behavior have dropped dramatically and to make ? worse while we have 1 trillion dollars of spending power we don't actually have much wealth OR ECONOMIC CONTROL of our community
Uhm didn't the economy crash in 2007? Are you saying blacks were progressing & doing better under those republican policies than they are currently under this democratic presidency? (whose policies have been a far cry from liberal and are compromised at best)
Are you saying blacks were doing better under Reagonmics & the ? era than they did under the Clinton administration? (Another Wall Street friendly presidency that implemented compromised liberal policies AT BEST).
What we do see though is that every time we steer in that direction things generally begin to get progressively better. (Economy booms, jobs increase, deficits fall).
And then a conservative regime comes in right after and ? it all to hell by reversing the process. (Recessions, growth only for the top income brackets, jobs are lost, deficits skyrocket).
It was the same problem before 2007 and before clinton and before reagan no matter who is in office as president we have the same problems because locally too many of us vote for liberals who put in place liberal policies that while they are supposed to help only hinder the black community from doing what we should really be doing attaining power and freedom.
Lol liberal policies? That's a historical fact? That's why the civil rights act didn't pass until the 60s right? That's why bans on ? marriage wasn't deemed unconstitutional until this year right? That's why healthcare reform (another policy compromised by repubs) wasn't implemented until last year right? You might want to research the roaring 20s leading into the Great Depression & the economic recovery there after before you continue down this path.
You conservatives are some disingenuous ? , I swear it lol
Especially the black ones. Yo, where do they find y'all?
-
history informs the present so right now the bad situation we are in is a result of our decisions of the past.
I will say it again IN 2015 too many BLACK MEN are cowards and ? and too many black women are ? our standards of moral behavior have dropped dramatically and to make ? worse while we have 1 trillion dollars of spending power we don't actually have much wealth OR ECONOMIC CONTROL of our community
Uhm didn't the economy crash in 2007? Are you saying blacks were progressing & doing better under those republican policies than they are currently under this democratic presidency? (whose policies have been a far cry from liberal and are compromised at best)
Are you saying blacks were doing better under Reagonmics & the ? era than they did under the Clinton administration? (Another Wall Street friendly presidency that implemented compromised liberal policies AT BEST).
What we do see though is that every time we steer in that direction things generally begin to get progressively better. (Economy booms, jobs increase, deficits fall).
And then a conservative regime comes in right after and ? it all to hell by reversing the process. (Recessions, growth only for the top income brackets, jobs are lost, deficits skyrocket).
It was the same problem before 2007 and before clinton and before reagan no matter who is in office as president we have the same problems because locally too many of us vote for liberals who put in place liberal policies that while they are supposed to help only hinder the black community from doing what we should really be doing attaining power and freedom.
Lol liberal policies? That's a historical fact? That's why the civil rights act didn't pass until the 60s right? That's why bans on ? marriage wasn't deemed unconstitutional until this year right? That's why healthcare reform (another policy compromised by repubs) wasn't implemented until last year right? You might want to research the roaring 20s leading into the Great Depression & the economic recovery there after before you continue down this path.
You conservatives are some disingenuous ? , I swear it lol
Especially the black ones. Yo, where do they find y'all?
If you go back so far then liberal vs conservative means something totally different than it means today as even the average liberal during the roaring 20's war a complete and total anti-black racist. However since the end of 1960's liberalism has not served to really empower black folks and we should turn away from it because it is little use to us. -
The way this ? keeps getting killed....
Never has a screen name been more appropriate. -
Libs love a under dog..if u know what i know..u know i called it..goat a ?
-
The way this ? keeps getting killed....
Never has a screen name been more appropriate.
That ? avoids the question all the time.. -
The way this ? keeps getting killed....
Never has a screen name been more appropriate.
I don't really expect to win on a website loaded with misguided black liberals you support the paternalistic white supremacy of liberalism. IF BLACK PEOPLE WANT TO BE FREE AND POWERFUL WE HAVE TO TURN TO GARVEYISM WHICH IS IN ESSENCE A CONSERVATIVE IDEOLOGY with a focus on the black community taking care of itself. -
not_osirus_jenkins wrote: »
Ask me any question and i will answer you directly -
Ask me any question and i will answer you directly
How do zzombies think with no brain?
-
They have brains though. They just have reduced functionality... Wait a minute... -
I dont believe her till she takes some black ? .
-
If this ? was running for president i would be worried don't let her speech fool you she is a liberal which means she's misguided
I appreciate how she put her foot up Jamie Dimon and the other big banks ? though. She's a pit bull in a skirt, senate is the right place for her. Presidency wouldn't be. I can agree with her on a few things -
MarcusGarvey wrote: »If this ? was running for president i would be worried don't let her speech fool you she is a liberal which means she's misguided
I appreciate how she put her foot up Jamie Dimon and the other big banks ? though. She's a pit bull in a skirt, senate is the right place for her. Presidency wouldn't be. I can agree with her on a few things
I AM PRETTY sure there would be some things i agree with her on but i also don't think she should be president as a general rule i deeply believe reliance on the government is a bad thing giving them too much say so in the social and economic lives of the population is a bad thing. -
It depends on the fictional universe you are talking about in the marvel zombies universe. The zombies are intelligent however they are driven by the need to consume. -
MarcusGarvey wrote: »If this ? was running for president i would be worried don't let her speech fool you she is a liberal which means she's misguided
I appreciate how she put her foot up Jamie Dimon and the other big banks ? though. She's a pit bull in a skirt, senate is the right place for her. Presidency wouldn't be. I can agree with her on a few things
I AM PRETTY sure there would be some things i agree with her on but i also don't think she should be president as a general rule i deeply believe reliance on the government is a bad thing giving them too much say so in the social and economic lives of the population is a bad thing.
Those who follow know it doesn't come down to things like abortion or voter IDs - the reality is, it comes down to the budget:
•Health care spending
•Defence spending
•Tax code reform
Who's going to work with this congress to get one or more of these done?
All the rest - the Fannie and Freddie, regulation, welfare, minimum wage, criminal reform (sorry to say) are secondary issues
And btw on I'm for sensible regulation of Wall Street (while still understanding that its a big part of american economy) - read Bloomberg article "Congress saved GSachs from themselves - GSach wanted to be like Glencore" -
MarcusGarvey wrote: »If this ? was running for president i would be worried don't let her speech fool you she is a liberal which means she's misguided
I appreciate how she put her foot up Jamie Dimon and the other big banks ? though. She's a pit bull in a skirt, senate is the right place for her. Presidency wouldn't be. I can agree with her on a few things
I AM PRETTY sure there would be some things i agree with her on but i also don't think she should be president as a general rule i deeply believe reliance on the government is a bad thing giving them too much say so in the social and economic lives of the population is a bad thing.
Flawed argument with the government there would be no highways and interstates, free public education for elementary and adolescent age kids, there would be no such thing as state and university hospitals, there would be no public transportation, no state jobs, no social security, no retirement, no prisons, etc.
All that is state and federal government sponsored stuff.
The argument of less dependence on the government is flawed because then private corporations would take over all the abovementioned programs and the average America (which most of us fall into) would not be able to afford an education or even be able to drive down the highway because the road would be private owned.
We are all dependent on the government in some way without government involvement some for profit organization would take the place of the government and best believe they wouldn't be looking out for you and me.
-
MarcusGarvey wrote: »If this ? was running for president i would be worried don't let her speech fool you she is a liberal which means she's misguided
I appreciate how she put her foot up Jamie Dimon and the other big banks ? though. She's a pit bull in a skirt, senate is the right place for her. Presidency wouldn't be. I can agree with her on a few things
I AM PRETTY sure there would be some things i agree with her on but i also don't think she should be president as a general rule i deeply believe reliance on the government is a bad thing giving them too much say so in the social and economic lives of the population is a bad thing.
Flawed argument with the government there would be no highways and interstates, free public education for elementary and adolescent age kids, there would be no such thing as state and university hospitals, there would be no public transportation, no state jobs, no social security, no retirement, no prisons, etc.
All that is state and federal government sponsored stuff.
The argument of less dependence on the government is flawed because then private corporations would take over all the abovementioned programs and the average America (which most of us fall into) would not be able to afford an education or even be able to drive down the highway because the road would be private owned.
We are all dependent on the government in some way without government involvement some for profit organization would take the place of the government and best believe they wouldn't be looking out for you and me.
smh..... i did not say the government has no role or that we don't need the government at all i just said that OVER RELIANCE on government is a bad thing. -
MarcusGarvey wrote: »If this ? was running for president i would be worried don't let her speech fool you she is a liberal which means she's misguided
I appreciate how she put her foot up Jamie Dimon and the other big banks ? though. She's a pit bull in a skirt, senate is the right place for her. Presidency wouldn't be. I can agree with her on a few things
I AM PRETTY sure there would be some things i agree with her on but i also don't think she should be president as a general rule i deeply believe reliance on the government is a bad thing giving them too much say so in the social and economic lives of the population is a bad thing.
Flawed argument with the government there would be no highways and interstates, free public education for elementary and adolescent age kids, there would be no such thing as state and university hospitals, there would be no public transportation, no state jobs, no social security, no retirement, no prisons, etc.
All that is state and federal government sponsored stuff.
The argument of less dependence on the government is flawed because then private corporations would take over all the abovementioned programs and the average America (which most of us fall into) would not be able to afford an education or even be able to drive down the highway because the road would be private owned.
We are all dependent on the government in some way without government involvement some for profit organization would take the place of the government and best believe they wouldn't be looking out for you and me.
smh..... i did not say the government has no role or that we don't need the government at all i just said that OVER RELIANCE on government is a bad thing.
How can the government be less involved in our lives? Do tell.
