Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/sevyn/status/791432200608702464

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:She is driven by power and money and has poor ethics.

I get why people hold that POV, but IMO it is also somewhat a selective one and reduces her to a caricature.

Her full biography reveals a person who from a very early age through more than half of her life demonstrated a genuine commitment to public service, particularly in regard to the welfare of children.

If people want to view her full biography as some sort of craven pre-meditated long-term masterplan to rise to the corridors of political power, they can and apparently do.

What it demonstrates to me is the capacity for genuine compassion and public service is there, and seen through that lens it becomes more difficult to reduce her to a Bond villain.

Will you acknowledge and support a Trump win?

Acknowledge? Certainly.

Support? I'm genuinely not certain what form that takes?

Which biography are you referring to, when was it written? and by whom?

I AM of the opinion that she has spent much of her adult life to try and be POTUS, so IMO yes, it could have been written for just that case or to create an alternate caricature of her. Alternate to the one that many people do maintain for her and for good reason. Even BO and MO called her out during the 2008 campaign as being dishonest.

Who is to blame for the so-called caricature that you mention?
-Getting kicked off the Watergate commission for bad ethics for instance.
-making thousands on futures trades she had no idea of what to do.
- and countless of other "gates" that follow her literally EVERYwhere ever she goes. The list is staggering. How is that? Is it all a Right wing conspiracy? If so, then I am an idiot. I'll admit it.

I understand that standing up and fighting for children's rights is commendable. However, why then did she defend a guy who raped a 12 year old girl? Why not defend that child or defer from the case? Maybe that was the inspiration for her to be an advocate for children but if so, then reach out and apologize to that girl and now woman!

The latest leaks show her campaign staff to treat "women and brown" people as objects to be used when they need a certain message. The leaked memo that exposes "Bill Clinton Inc" and how they get donations essentially so he can have a salary. Corporations pay for their vacations, plane rides, whatever. The leaks show that her own staff compared WJC to Cosby an admission of equivalence! There is evidence of possible pay for play while SOS. The Podesta-Russia thing that Assange himself was on today talking about!

It seems to be that just as the Trumpsters will support their guy, the HRC supporters will support her regardless of anything that is exposed about her, WJC or the CF.

I simply cannot. To me her entire public image is made up and IMO, bears little or no resemblance to who she is.

DJT's image is who he is and I absolutley accept your argument as to why you cannot support him.

The political establishment in US is a reality show created to entertain the public.
Current set of clowns is fascinating and amusing.
It does not really matter who is the face of the power or if it even has a face.
Our society is self-driving machine oiled by law and fueled by wealth.
The driver just directed to keep a hand on the wheel so passengers will be comforted.
And elections exist to make passengers think that they are in control.
So don't worry, we will have a happy ending regardless.

I'll entertain this premise.

What would you be doing in a genuinely free society?

Freedom is realized necessity.
Being free meaning understand the necessities and be in piece with them.
We as spices are not free of the environment, society, family, traditions, morals, and even our own mind.
One person, even with a lot of assigned or assumed power is nothing comparing to this forces which are driving our lives.
One can only find freedom and happiness within and no one from outside can do nothing about it.

Okay, I grant you possess freedom and happiness within. Not being snarky, I agree with the sentiment wholeheartedly.

But I think the question is still a fair one. I'm not sure if you're arguing our current political (or societal) system is natural, inevitable state of being or a perverted one.

I think it naturally build as it is. From all societies we observed on the Earth it one of the more successful to date.
Does not mean it is even close to perfection or ever be.
Our individual perceptions are irrelevant because they are always egocentric.
We are a success statistically. And we are still expanding the wealth, security, and stability.
Trend is still positive and this is all that matters.
People all over the world may hate America but many are dreaming to get in and go to all kind of extremes and hurdles for that.
And not many are fleeing if any.
It is paramount who will lead Russia or Syria, but almost irrelevant who will lead US... and this is a huge achievement by itself.

holfresh wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/sevyn/status/791432200608702464

she was paid by the sixers to sing, not demonstrate her 1st amendment rights.
She can record a song about "we matter", but if her deal with sixers was to show up wearing a Sixers jersey, or
some other pre determined dress code, then that's the deal. Right or wrong. Players are paid to play ball. They have to wear their uniform.
If they feel that strongly about it, then can quit their jobs as players.

If I hire someone to work in my office I expect a certain protocol and its written. IM not taking away their freedom as they are free to protest and exhibit self expression outside my office.
Thus, "Sevyn" has no reason to be upset. If she showed up naked she would not be allowed on.

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:You are correct in your explanation of a right to counsel and defense. I am not saying she could have defended the child. She was on the other side and had a job, I get that, but in the end, did she apologize to the girl , a child? As an advocate for children, why not even if it is thirty years later?

I don't know, man. Maybe because she's a horrible, horrible person?

The issue of why or why she hasn't apologized doesn't interest me that much.

What does interest me is observing the fact that if she had (independent on whether she should or should not, wants to or not) she'd almost certainly be killed by her critics for it being a craven political calculation, too little too late.

I can hear Kayleigh McEnany killing her for it on CNN in my head and the fight she's get into with Paul Begala.

yes as she says, "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

So you hit on it, she is a horrible person. Finally!

Seriously though, you did not respond to the question of if you would support Trump as POTUS.

or as I followed up.

Simply accept that he wins, not contest and give him a fair shake to do the job regardless of your opinion of him personally.

Knickoftime wrote:

Vmart wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

Vmart wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Welpee wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:58% of African Americans in this country under the age of 24 unemployed.. FIFTY EIGHT %

If you're an AA parent--you want to END illegal immigration and have jobs for AMERICAN youth. Good jobs that will rise in pay and create opportunities.

Who can deny this fact????

Do you ever do your own fact checking or do you just buy every talking point that sounds good to you and just roll with it?

The political battle is won or lost based on opinions. Facts are overrated, awkward klunky things that seem to greedy in the way.

We have come to the point where fact checking needs fact checking.

Example?

When people are involved even facts get lost or intentionally lost for the purpose of what they believe.

http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/09/28/trump-and-iraq-case-study-whats-wrong-fact-checking

This is what fox concluded I'm sure CNN conclusion was different.

Man, i was actually hoping for a better example.

This one is a lay-up.

Are people trying to exploit what trump said somewhat uncertainly? Yes.

Did he say it? Yes.

Is it fair to derive a particular meaning from his exact words? Yes.

Trump should focus his energy on acknowledging what he said and why he said it, rather than denying it occurred or dismissing its relevance.

The fact checkers are correct. His FIRST known stance on the war was passive support of it.

That there is maybe nuance to this particular fact is also correct.

Here I'll give you another one. More about Obama who I voted for twice.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2013/05/28/study-finds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:She is driven by power and money and has poor ethics.

I get why people hold that POV, but IMO it is also somewhat a selective one and reduces her to a caricature.

Her full biography reveals a person who from a very early age through more than half of her life demonstrated a genuine commitment to public service, particularly in regard to the welfare of children.

If people want to view her full biography as some sort of craven pre-meditated long-term masterplan to rise to the corridors of political power, they can and apparently do.

What it demonstrates to me is the capacity for genuine compassion and public service is there, and seen through that lens it becomes more difficult to reduce her to a Bond villain.

Will you acknowledge and support a Trump win?

Acknowledge? Certainly.

Support? I'm genuinely not certain what form that takes?

Which biography are you referring to, when was it written? and by whom?

I AM of the opinion that she has spent much of her adult life to try and be POTUS, so IMO yes, it could have been written for just that case or to create an alternate caricature of her. Alternate to the one that many people do maintain for her and for good reason. Even BO and MO called her out during the 2008 campaign as being dishonest.

Who is to blame for the so-called caricature that you mention?
-Getting kicked off the Watergate commission for bad ethics for instance.
-making thousands on futures trades she had no idea of what to do.
- and countless of other "gates" that follow her literally EVERYwhere ever she goes. The list is staggering. How is that? Is it all a Right wing conspiracy? If so, then I am an idiot. I'll admit it.

I understand that standing up and fighting for children's rights is commendable. However, why then did she defend a guy who raped a 12 year old girl? Why not defend that child or defer from the case? Maybe that was the inspiration for her to be an advocate for children but if so, then reach out and apologize to that girl and now woman!

The latest leaks show her campaign staff to treat "women and brown" people as objects to be used when they need a certain message. The leaked memo that exposes "Bill Clinton Inc" and how they get donations essentially so he can have a salary. Corporations pay for their vacations, plane rides, whatever. The leaks show that her own staff compared WJC to Cosby an admission of equivalence! There is evidence of possible pay for play while SOS. The Podesta-Russia thing that Assange himself was on today talking about!

It seems to be that just as the Trumpsters will support their guy, the HRC supporters will support her regardless of anything that is exposed about her, WJC or the CF.

I simply cannot. To me her entire public image is made up and IMO, bears little or no resemblance to who she is.

DJT's image is who he is and I absolutley accept your argument as to why you cannot support him.

The political establishment in US is a reality show created to entertain the public.
Current set of clowns is fascinating and amusing.
It does not really matter who is the face of the power or if it even has a face.
Our society is self-driving machine oiled by law and fueled by wealth.
The driver just directed to keep a hand on the wheel so passengers will be comforted.
And elections exist to make passengers think that they are in control.
So don't worry, we will have a happy ending regardless.

I'll entertain this premise.

What would you be doing in a genuinely free society?

Freedom is realized necessity.
Being free meaning understand the necessities and be in piece with them.
We as spices are not free of the environment, society, family, traditions, morals, and even our own mind.
One person, even with a lot of assigned or assumed power is nothing comparing to this forces which are driving our lives.
One can only find freedom and happiness within and no one from outside can do nothing about it.

Okay, I grant you possess freedom and happiness within. Not being snarky, I agree with the sentiment wholeheartedly.

But I think the question is still a fair one. I'm not sure if you're arguing our current political (or societal) system is natural, inevitable state of being or a perverted one.

I think it naturally build as it is. From all societies we observed on the Earth it one of the more successful to date.
Does not mean it is even close to perfection or ever be.
Our individual perceptions are irrelevant because they are always egocentric.
We are a success statistically. And we are still expanding the wealth, security, and stability.
Trend is still positive and this is all that matters.
People all over the world may hate America but many are dreaming to get in and go to all kind of extremes and hurdles for that.
And not many are fleeing if any.
It is paramount who will lead Russia or Syria, but almost irrelevant who will lead US... and this is a huge achievement by itself.

Huh...

I feel ya all the way to the last 2/3rds of the last line.

Empathy can coexist with ego, even if not on equal terms.

That last thing is a signal to me empathy is being lost, that ego is swallowing it whole.

Not onboard with that.

I know it is comforting to feel that you are in control of your life, your family, your country...
But no one is. Just enjoy the current moment, the rest is just a bunch of distractions.

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:She is driven by power and money and has poor ethics.

I get why people hold that POV, but IMO it is also somewhat a selective one and reduces her to a caricature.

Her full biography reveals a person who from a very early age through more than half of her life demonstrated a genuine commitment to public service, particularly in regard to the welfare of children.

If people want to view her full biography as some sort of craven pre-meditated long-term masterplan to rise to the corridors of political power, they can and apparently do.

What it demonstrates to me is the capacity for genuine compassion and public service is there, and seen through that lens it becomes more difficult to reduce her to a Bond villain.

Will you acknowledge and support a Trump win?

Acknowledge? Certainly.

Support? I'm genuinely not certain what form that takes?

Which biography are you referring to, when was it written? and by whom?

I AM of the opinion that she has spent much of her adult life to try and be POTUS, so IMO yes, it could have been written for just that case or to create an alternate caricature of her. Alternate to the one that many people do maintain for her and for good reason. Even BO and MO called her out during the 2008 campaign as being dishonest.

Who is to blame for the so-called caricature that you mention?
-Getting kicked off the Watergate commission for bad ethics for instance.
-making thousands on futures trades she had no idea of what to do.
- and countless of other "gates" that follow her literally EVERYwhere ever she goes. The list is staggering. How is that? Is it all a Right wing conspiracy? If so, then I am an idiot. I'll admit it.

I understand that standing up and fighting for children's rights is commendable. However, why then did she defend a guy who raped a 12 year old girl? Why not defend that child or defer from the case? Maybe that was the inspiration for her to be an advocate for children but if so, then reach out and apologize to that girl and now woman!

The latest leaks show her campaign staff to treat "women and brown" people as objects to be used when they need a certain message. The leaked memo that exposes "Bill Clinton Inc" and how they get donations essentially so he can have a salary. Corporations pay for their vacations, plane rides, whatever. The leaks show that her own staff compared WJC to Cosby an admission of equivalence! There is evidence of possible pay for play while SOS. The Podesta-Russia thing that Assange himself was on today talking about!

It seems to be that just as the Trumpsters will support their guy, the HRC supporters will support her regardless of anything that is exposed about her, WJC or the CF.

I simply cannot. To me her entire public image is made up and IMO, bears little or no resemblance to who she is.

DJT's image is who he is and I absolutley accept your argument as to why you cannot support him.

The political establishment in US is a reality show created to entertain the public.
Current set of clowns is fascinating and amusing.
It does not really matter who is the face of the power or if it even has a face.
Our society is self-driving machine oiled by law and fueled by wealth.
The driver just directed to keep a hand on the wheel so passengers will be comforted.
And elections exist to make passengers think that they are in control.
So don't worry, we will have a happy ending regardless.

I'll entertain this premise.

What would you be doing in a genuinely free society?

Freedom is realized necessity.
Being free meaning understand the necessities and be in piece with them.
We as spices are not free of the environment, society, family, traditions, morals, and even our own mind.
One person, even with a lot of assigned or assumed power is nothing comparing to this forces which are driving our lives.
One can only find freedom and happiness within and no one from outside can do nothing about it.

Okay, I grant you possess freedom and happiness within. Not being snarky, I agree with the sentiment wholeheartedly.

But I think the question is still a fair one. I'm not sure if you're arguing our current political (or societal) system is natural, inevitable state of being or a perverted one.

I think it naturally build as it is. From all societies we observed on the Earth it one of the more successful to date.
Does not mean it is even close to perfection or ever be.
Our individual perceptions are irrelevant because they are always egocentric.
We are a success statistically. And we are still expanding the wealth, security, and stability.
Trend is still positive and this is all that matters.
People all over the world may hate America but many are dreaming to get in and go to all kind of extremes and hurdles for that.
And not many are fleeing if any.
It is paramount who will lead Russia or Syria, but almost irrelevant who will lead US... and this is a huge achievement by itself.

Huh...

I feel ya all the way to the last 2/3rds of the last line.

Empathy can coexist with ego, even if not on equal terms.

That last thing is a signal to me empathy is being lost, that ego is swallowing it whole.

Not onboard with that.

I know it is comforting to feel that you are in control of your life, your family, your country...
But no one is. Just enjoy the current moment, the rest is just a bunch of distractions.

Not sure what that has to do with what I said about empathy, but okay!

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/sevyn/status/791432200608702464

she was paid by the sixers to sing, not demonstrate her 1st amendment rights.
She can record a song about "we matter", but if her deal with sixers was to show up wearing a Sixers jersey, or
some other pre determined dress code, then that's the deal. Right or wrong. Players are paid to play ball. They have to wear their uniform.
If they feel that strongly about it, then can quit their jobs as players.

If I hire someone to work in my office I expect a certain protocol and its written. IM not taking away their freedom as they are free to protest and exhibit self expression outside my office.
Thus, "Sevyn" has no reason to be upset. If she showed up naked she would not be allowed on.

Sixers org has ever right to do what they like, but just imagine if she wore a more provocative slogan, like "The Troops Matter".

Or maybe "Yes, Black People Exist" or "We Should Be Proud of the Civil Rights Era".

'We Matter' is some charged, controversial language, all right.

Maybe she should have wore a bag over her head and gloves. Then no one could assume what she meant by "we".

Problem solved.

But not a hoodie, that would have been a giveaway.

You want to vote for Hillary who called black people "super predators"--you get what you pay for. Hispanics AA get shoved aside for another 4 years--played like sckers--but the sad part is they cant see it and accept it. Its tragedy--not funny.

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:She is driven by power and money and has poor ethics.

I get why people hold that POV, but IMO it is also somewhat a selective one and reduces her to a caricature.

Her full biography reveals a person who from a very early age through more than half of her life demonstrated a genuine commitment to public service, particularly in regard to the welfare of children.

If people want to view her full biography as some sort of craven pre-meditated long-term masterplan to rise to the corridors of political power, they can and apparently do.

What it demonstrates to me is the capacity for genuine compassion and public service is there, and seen through that lens it becomes more difficult to reduce her to a Bond villain.

Will you acknowledge and support a Trump win?

Acknowledge? Certainly.

Support? I'm genuinely not certain what form that takes?

Which biography are you referring to, when was it written? and by whom?

I AM of the opinion that she has spent much of her adult life to try and be POTUS, so IMO yes, it could have been written for just that case or to create an alternate caricature of her. Alternate to the one that many people do maintain for her and for good reason. Even BO and MO called her out during the 2008 campaign as being dishonest.

Who is to blame for the so-called caricature that you mention?
-Getting kicked off the Watergate commission for bad ethics for instance.
-making thousands on futures trades she had no idea of what to do.
- and countless of other "gates" that follow her literally EVERYwhere ever she goes. The list is staggering. How is that? Is it all a Right wing conspiracy? If so, then I am an idiot. I'll admit it.

I understand that standing up and fighting for children's rights is commendable. However, why then did she defend a guy who raped a 12 year old girl? Why not defend that child or defer from the case? Maybe that was the inspiration for her to be an advocate for children but if so, then reach out and apologize to that girl and now woman!

The latest leaks show her campaign staff to treat "women and brown" people as objects to be used when they need a certain message. The leaked memo that exposes "Bill Clinton Inc" and how they get donations essentially so he can have a salary. Corporations pay for their vacations, plane rides, whatever. The leaks show that her own staff compared WJC to Cosby an admission of equivalence! There is evidence of possible pay for play while SOS. The Podesta-Russia thing that Assange himself was on today talking about!

It seems to be that just as the Trumpsters will support their guy, the HRC supporters will support her regardless of anything that is exposed about her, WJC or the CF.

I simply cannot. To me her entire public image is made up and IMO, bears little or no resemblance to who she is.

DJT's image is who he is and I absolutley accept your argument as to why you cannot support him.

The political establishment in US is a reality show created to entertain the public.
Current set of clowns is fascinating and amusing.
It does not really matter who is the face of the power or if it even has a face.
Our society is self-driving machine oiled by law and fueled by wealth.
The driver just directed to keep a hand on the wheel so passengers will be comforted.
And elections exist to make passengers think that they are in control.
So don't worry, we will have a happy ending regardless.

I'll entertain this premise.

What would you be doing in a genuinely free society?

Freedom is realized necessity.
Being free meaning understand the necessities and be in piece with them.
We as spices are not free of the environment, society, family, traditions, morals, and even our own mind.
One person, even with a lot of assigned or assumed power is nothing comparing to this forces which are driving our lives.
One can only find freedom and happiness within and no one from outside can do nothing about it.

Okay, I grant you possess freedom and happiness within. Not being snarky, I agree with the sentiment wholeheartedly.

But I think the question is still a fair one. I'm not sure if you're arguing our current political (or societal) system is natural, inevitable state of being or a perverted one.

I think it naturally build as it is. From all societies we observed on the Earth it one of the more successful to date.
Does not mean it is even close to perfection or ever be.
Our individual perceptions are irrelevant because they are always egocentric.
We are a success statistically. And we are still expanding the wealth, security, and stability.
Trend is still positive and this is all that matters.
People all over the world may hate America but many are dreaming to get in and go to all kind of extremes and hurdles for that.
And not many are fleeing if any.
It is paramount who will lead Russia or Syria, but almost irrelevant who will lead US... and this is a huge achievement by itself.

Huh...

I feel ya all the way to the last 2/3rds of the last line.

Empathy can coexist with ego, even if not on equal terms.

That last thing is a signal to me empathy is being lost, that ego is swallowing it whole.

Not onboard with that.

I know it is comforting to feel that you are in control of your life, your family, your country...
But no one is. Just enjoy the current moment, the rest is just a bunch of distractions.

Not sure what that has to do with what I said about empathy, but okay!

The ability to understand and share the feelings of another is not an issue to me.
I do not believe in "another". We all are one. There is no duality.
Love yourself means love others and all the way around.
When you look in the eyes of any person you see God and you see self.

Knickoftime wrote:

Vmart wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

Vmart wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Welpee wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:58% of African Americans in this country under the age of 24 unemployed.. FIFTY EIGHT %

If you're an AA parent--you want to END illegal immigration and have jobs for AMERICAN youth. Good jobs that will rise in pay and create opportunities.

Who can deny this fact????

Do you ever do your own fact checking or do you just buy every talking point that sounds good to you and just roll with it?

The political battle is won or lost based on opinions. Facts are overrated, awkward klunky things that seem to greedy in the way.

We have come to the point where fact checking needs fact checking.

Example?

When people are involved even facts get lost or intentionally lost for the purpose of what they believe.

http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/09/28/trump-and-iraq-case-study-whats-wrong-fact-checking

This is what fox concluded I'm sure CNN conclusion was different.

Man, i was actually hoping for a better example.

This one is a lay-up.

Are people trying to exploit what trump said somewhat uncertainly? Yes.

Did he say it? Yes.

Is it fair to derive a particular meaning from his exact words? Yes.

Trump should focus his energy on acknowledging what he said and why he said it, rather than denying it occurred or dismissing its relevance.

The fact checkers are correct. His FIRST known stance on the war was passive support of it.

That there is maybe nuance to this particular fact is also correct.

Not to mention that he has lied repeatedly about the source proving he was against the war before the invasion. First he said there was an Esquire magazine article (false), then he referenced Neil Cavuto (false), now he's claiming he privately told Hannity and people should ask him for confirmation (because he's such an objective source with no bias in his DNA).

He said he loudly and strongly opposed the war before it happened. I doubt very seriously if he were that adamant about his opposition there would be zero documentation of it, unlike the Central Five situation where there's no doubt where he stood and there's plenty of documentation.

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/sevyn/status/791432200608702464

she was paid by the sixers to sing, not demonstrate her 1st amendment rights.
She can record a song about "we matter", but if her deal with sixers was to show up wearing a Sixers jersey, or
some other pre determined dress code, then that's the deal. Right or wrong. Players are paid to play ball. They have to wear their uniform.
If they feel that strongly about it, then can quit their jobs as players.

If I hire someone to work in my office I expect a certain protocol and its written. IM not taking away their freedom as they are free to protest and exhibit self expression outside my office.
Thus, "Sevyn" has no reason to be upset. If she showed up naked she would not be allowed on.

Sixers org has ever right to do what they like, but just imagine if she wore a more provocative slogan, like "The Troops Matter".

Or maybe "Yes, Black People Exist" or "We Should Be Proud of the Civil Rights Era".

'We Matter' is some charged, controversial language, all right.

Maybe she should have wore a bag over her head and gloves. Then no one could assume what she meant by "we".

Problem solved.

But not a hoodie, that would have been a giveaway.

You want to vote for Hillary who called black people "super predators"--you get what you pay for. Hispanics AA get shoved aside for another 4 years--played like sckers--but the sad part is they cant see it and accept it. Its tragedy--not funny.

So Briggs, why do you think the vast majority of black and hispanic people can't see or accept it?

They not as smart as you?

But he thinks the Chinese get it.