your initial post was about the duality of media coverage. i responded with an aside that there is a duality as well within one side of the media's audience (the right). i didnt add, but believe, that there's also a duality in the left's audience, as they're not willing to admit that that cop saved a woman and prefer to only focus on the fact that he killed her would be stabber.

my hood rat comment was from the perspective of the two minded right wing media audience. we see such posts in PARD any time a black criminal is killed at the hands of police in justified and unjustified cases alike.

you're starting off angry today pal. maybe less coffee lol.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Apr 23 2021 07:58am

You're still projecting. When you characterize "the right" as not caring if people are murdered, you're completely ignoring that it's "The Right" who have been going on and on nonstop for decades over violent crime rates in places like Chicago and Baltimore. It turns out, "The Right" is 100% against violent crime. Doesn't matter who the victims or perpetrators are.

The primary difference, as exemplified by this case specifically: The LEFT media EDITED the shoulder cam footage to remove the knife and make it appear as though the officer shot the suspect for... Pushing the other woman? Now, why, other than sparking a riot, would the LEFT media wish to perpetuate such a lie?

This is not a case of, "Well, the right is just as bad!" This is a case of, "The video evidence is very clear, and the LEFT lied in an attempt to CAUSE riots."

There's no shifting of blame here. The girl was attempting to commit murder. The cop prevented her from committing murder. Unfortunately, the girl died. The leftist media clipped the shoulder cam footage in an attempt to spark riots. Why should I NOT be angry, exactly?

do you typically in conversations need to be explicitly told when someone is making a generality?

because as far as context clues go, the ones i laid out was "what i find funny" and "the usual suspects", the latter indicating i was talking about a subsect.

specifically i can say i think there is a subsect of the right that is happy with black crime stats, both for feelings of superiority and a general lack of caring for black lives, a small subsect. and i think theres a larger subsect that waves around black crime stats on instinct just to lazily use them as a counter to small minded hardcore BLM types, a larger subsect. and then a subsect that truly doesnt support violence and doesnt have malicious nor lazy motivations for caring about black crime stats, even if some of it is self preservationist it is not malicious, and this is the largest subsect.

lastly, you should be angry about the media manipulation, i am. but i'd say their real motivation is $$$, not to "cause riots". that is happenstance to them, or honestly just more $$$ as they can then cover riots. but its all $$$$.

Always find it hilarious when those on the left expect to be taken seriously when it comes to their categorizations of the right.

You don't know what conservatives think. And attempting to claim there's no malicious intent on behalf of the leftist media, that it's just money? That's laughable at best. "Sources" such as CNN, NBC, MSNBC, ABC, etc. have all devolved into open activism. They are not journalists. They push the narrative of their activism. Riots proved effective in the Floyd case. Why not spark further riots?

calling me a leftist is absurd and offensive. apologize.

i was a libertarian with fairly lib-right views until college when i shifted to lib-left on the spectrum tests just a pubey hair off center in that quadrant.

in any case open activism makes more money than centrist reporting with a high journalistic standard. im sure some are more earnest in that activism, the Maddow types, but from a network executive perspective which i was referencing its all about the Benjamins baby.

You're a leftist outright. No question. You're in no way centrist, and certainly not conservative.

Your claims of libertarianism are a lie as well, and we both know it. In the end, you favor taxation for things other than mutual defense, you favor public education to the exclusion of the parents' will, you favor gun control, you favor big federal government, as opposed to local government.

You're not a libertarian. It's just a buzz word. If you're a "libertarian" it's the big L Gary Johnson type, who only utilized the platform to push outsourcing US jobs to slaver China, open the borders to make cheap foreign labor legal, and push the privatization of policing, so only the wealthy ever live in a modicum of safety.

And once again, the leftist media doesn't care about money. Their ratings tank every time they push for more riots, or try to redefine riots as "peaceful". They're pushing the activist narrative because they are activists. Not for money.

I was told there would be riots. Has anybody seen some riots?

Yes. Every day for the last year. Also, the GFAZ is here to stay. They're refusing to allow the autonomous zone to once again be US soil until after all 4 officers are charged, Chauvin's not enough.

Good times.

you made quite a few errors in your assessment, but this is by FAR you largest. perhaps you have me mixed up with another user, idk.

but i trust political assessment tests where i test consistently as i said more than someone who makes such a glaring error in their judgement of me.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Apr 23 2021 08:42am

Um, all four have been charged.