-8 votes

You people are happy that a black kid is dead!

Sorry for the catchy title, but I thought I should start a topic on an issue that I see all over the net and wanted opinions from as many people as possible so that we can come up with a solution. I'm sure the title is going to get some hits.

The left is constantly using tactics to demonize opinions they don't agree with in an attempt to exclude the opinions from the conversation.

I'm using the Zimmerman discussion as an example.

For example, if I were to say "Blacks should learn be less confrontational and teach their children that the thug mentality is dangerous and will get you killed. Trayvon acted like a thug when he attacked Zimmerman and that is what got him killed."; I would immediately be called a racist and attacked relentlessly.

Nothing about what I said above should be considered racist. It is a legitimate comment. It doesn't show hate for blacks and it doesn't promote that whites are better than blacks. If anything, it is sound advice made in an attempt to help black community. I have given the exact same advice to white kids. If Trayvon wouldn't have acted like a thug, he wouldn't have died that night. Sorry everyone but it's that damn simple.

The left continues to call people racist when they aren't being racist in an attempt to demonize them and exclude them from the conversation.

The anti-conspiracy people do the same thing when anyone questions the official stories release by the media. If you question it, you are a conspiracy nutjob and immediately excluded from the conversion that is taking place among the so-called 'civilized, intellectual' community. Even though you may have a perfectly rational argument and the facts support your argument, you have already been labeled as a whack-a-do and in their eyes deserve no say in the conversation.

All the Ron Paul supporters here know what I mean. We have been called racist, nutjobs, kooks, hateful, Paul-bots, and many other things that we are not. It is all an attempt to exclude us from the conversation, because the left can't actually have a rational conversation with us and win. We always win with reason and logic. They are terrified about actually going toe-to-toe with us in a debate. Why do you thinK Ron Paul got so little time in the debates.

If anyone doesn't agree with anything I say above, then feel free to say so.

For those that understand where I coming from, I have to ask:

1. What can we do to counter these types of attacks without sounding desperate to do so?

2. Can we use their tactics to our advantages somehow?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

When I am asked for comment on this case or verdict....

Seems to me you don't understand what "self defense" and "justifiable homicide" are and what proven "innocent" in a trial by a jury of your peers means either.

To accuse anyone of being racist or ignorant because they are not upset with the verdict, when a jury says he is innocent of all charges makes you nothing less than a bigot towards others of a different opinion than one you hold yourself.

Nobody thinks a death is a good thing in most cases, but the evidence showed the jury that this "boy" was the aggressor, attacked Z, and his death was the result of his own actions....not Z's

If you can read this thank a teacher. Because it's in English thank a soldier!

"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."
- Alexis de Tocqueville

I am happy the MSM did not throw this case.

I never followed the Zimmerman case. I figured, if the MSM was so sure Zimmerman was guilty, he was probably innocent. After all, the MSM convicted Jon Benet Ramsey's mother of murder nearly the first day of the investigation. Years later, after Mrs. Ramsey died, the media issued a one line statement that law enforcement no longer considered Mrs. Ramsey a suspect. Likewise, Tonya Harding. I always believed Nancy Kerrigan was behind her own assault; it takes MORE talent to bruise someone's kneecap than break it. Harding would never have been charged as an accessory had she still been married to the so-called "mastermind". Later, CBS as much as admitted the whole thing was a set-up to "throw Harding off her game" so Kerrigan would have a better shot at gold, in a fictional episode of "Diagnosis Murder".

I am more outraged at the 20 year sentence given by a Jacksonville, Florida jury to a black woman for firing warning shots at her abusive husband. Now THAT is a real "miscarriage of justice."

It should be simple....

He was tried by a jury of his peers. He was found not guilty. What else is there to talk about?


I agree 100%. Shouldn't even be news except locally.

MSM pushing this story hard so they don't have to talk about things like state surveillance, Morsi's connection to Al Queda & Syrian 'rebels' and other awkward topics which make them squirm.

The problem is you do not

The problem is you do not know for a fact Martin was acting like a thug. We do know for a fact Zimmerman was. Holding a gun and calling someone a punk before killing them? Hmmm...

Not ruling out Martin was, just saying you don't KNOW that.

Also, you need to realize acting like a thug is not a black thing in real life. On TV, movies, the media it is, but not in reality.

Ron Paul supporters are constantly coincidentally falling on the side of racists on lots of issues. And they fail to just cut them off completely. I don't get it. You'd rather argue the small chance someone was doing something justifiably and not being racist, than just cut off your ties with racism and drop the issue. Ron Paul obviously did a good job of getting away from that label, and Rand Paul with the whole Howard university speech was good. But it's still a problem and for some reason people seem to just want to argue with liberals rather than taking an active stance to not accidentally always side with racists.

We do NOT know...

...that Zimmerman was "acting like a thug."

He was NOT "holding a gun and calling someone a punk before killing them."

You clearly do not know the facts of the case.

And we DO know that Martin was "acting like a thug" - the evidence of a broken nose, lacerations to the head, the closest eyewitness stating that Martin was on top raining down blows, and FORTY seconds of Zimmerman recorded squealing for help on the 911 calls prove precisely that.

if a broken nose is evidence

if a broken nose is evidence someone was acting like a thug, then how is a dead body not?

that's the whole point. only those two know what happened. he gets the reasonable doubt for sure. but its not like people are dumb for questioning the way it was handled.

older guys who dont look like drug dealing rappers are never thugs, and young kids who dress in hoodies are? you have NO evidence trayvon wasn't defending himself just as much as zimmerman was, but just happened to be unarmed, and winning the fight. NO evidence. except for a stereotype.

and i meant carrying, not literally holding, sorry. and he did call him a punk, just not to his face.


where is the evidence that...

zimmerman was holding the gun and calling martin a punk?

quit making things up! this is the same crap all the zimmerman haters roll out. just make things up and claim they are facts.

holding as in carrying. my

holding as in carrying. my bad. called him a punk on the 911 call, not to his face. he didn't actually say anything to his face, including that he was not there to harm him (which yes he did have a whole residential block or three to say to him BEFORE supposedly being caught off guard).

im not a zimmerman hater. he's probably a good guy. the not guilty verdict is perfect because there was a reasonable doubt. but there is no evidence he is someone to automatically defend, the same way there is no evidence trayvon martin is someone to automatically defend like these protesters are doing.


that shit is obnoxious. but so is calling someone a 'zimmerman hater' just because i admit i don't know anything about his motive for killing a kid, the same way i admit i don't know the kid's motive for punching him in the face.

There are numerous similar Zimmerman

type events happening all over this country, every day. If one were to read the local newspapers, police blotters, etc. you would find similar and unfortunately far worse examples of man's inhumanity to man.

This case is being used for some sort of nefarious gain...the media is on board, this administration is on board, and many emotional citizens are on board. I am not sure what the end game is but I really wish people would understand that this event is not unique and only deserved to be tried in court, the verdict accepted with everyone moving on.

Don't feed the monster.

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul



"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

How about this

we STFU about T and Z and get back to things that actually
matter? I'm so sick of hearing about this crap i could vomit.
All these people in the streets for what amounts to a Thug being killed ( happens many times a day! In the case of Blacks, most often by their own race) and you never even hear about it. What makes this one any different? How about all those that were murdered in Chicago, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THEIR NAMES ARE ? All these Morons in the street over this stupid crap and yet you cant get anybody in the streets protesting this government that has f-ked them to their knee's...It baffles the few that still have a mind, it truly does. Stop feeding the system! Ignore this crap.

"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
Samuel Adams


bone up for renewed vigor on 2nd Amendment attacks and subterfuge outta
d c chinese water torture, one bigass drip at a time

One thing that I

would like to point out is that it is not just the left. In fact this tactic was used to try to exclude Ron Paul from being taken seriously in the debates. Neocons Rove, McCain and Graham are still using this tactic to marginalize true Republicans Amash, Cruz and Rand Paul. This will never change as long as the Banksters and special interest groups, that rely on keeping America divided to continue their pillaging, continue to control the major media outlets. Most people in this country are thrown into this argument and tread lightly. I call things as I see them. I believe Zimmerman acted well within his rights. I also believe that if Rodney King had a gun, he would have been well within his rights to open fire on his attackers.

The truth is that Blacks in this country have been conditioned to be racist. Many believe that past treatment of Blacks entitle them extraordinary treatment from Caucasians and especially from our government. No matter how many inner cities will be destroyed, how many minorities left off the employment ladder, how many poor being made homeless; Polls show that Blacks will vote for a black candidate over 90% of the time just because (s)he is black. This is a strange level of racism, when its existence goes against your own self interest.

I guess I'm not alone

I guess blacks vote for black politicians in the hope that

the politicians will pursue vengeance and advantage for them against other tribes (white, Hispanic), which is exactly what Obama and Holder are doing!

Are you really really really

Are you really really really really really incapable of playing devil's advocate within yourself and seeing why what you said might be wrong?

It's not about whether you think Rodney King would have been well within his rights, its about whether you seriously believe in your heart Rodney King's trial would have gone as smoothly as George Zimmerman's. Let alone the night of the event being allowed to go home.

This conversation needs a heavy dose of empathy

and I'm talking about conversations off the Daily Paul as well. There are a lot of mothers out there reeling with the realization that if their son is approached in a manner they interpret as menacing and get the jump on what looks like a possible attacker, they can be legally shot for it. And don't think for a second it's that many white mothers who have to figure out how to explain that to their sons before sending them walking to the corner store.

Defend Liberty!

You forgot the skittles

You also forgot the skittles and ice-tea. TM was just walking, then out jumped GZ who grabbed TM hands and fists then repeatedly slammed those fists into his own face and jumped under TM. Then, as GZ held TM on top of him, GZ kept slamming his own head into the ground then at the right moment, as TM was just surprised, GZ pulled out a gun and shot him.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

Thank you...

...for providing the transcript of the last hour on MSNBC.

I had missed it.

(A commentator on that disgusting network today actually stated that 1) GZ should have been forced to testify, and 2) the laws providing for self-defense should be abolished.)

I like your example

I like your example, but I'd leave off any kind of racial connotation; every race has "thugs". Even though the trial is over, I still personally try to make people realize that there is no way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Z was guilty. As such, he SHOULD BE presumed to be innocent. He did a better job convincing the jury it was self defense than the prosecution did convincing them it was cold blooded murder.

I also think "thugs" are being treated like hippies and rock-n-roll from times past. It's a trend that will change society and pass with time. I personally think it's due to so many broken homes today and the fact that kids become "tough" to hide their vulnerabilities.

If ignorance is bliss, Washington DC must be heaven.

Here's the way to approach this

Unfortunately, the only way to discuss this with anyone is if that "anyone" allows you to talk, uninterrupted, for a few minutes to make the actual point. So if you're lucky enough that this is your situation, here's my take:

1. It sucks that Trayvon is dead. He was unnecessarily followed (harassed or stalked, maybe) by Zimmerman for, what it appears to be non-racial reasons. Even if it WAS for racial reasons, it doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman stupidly, and unnecessarily followed Trayvon.

2. If Trayvon was not killed by Zimmerman, he could very likely sue Zimmerman for harassment and probably also for physical harm and maybe even for attempted murder.

3. But Trayvon is dead, and the only witness can remember seeing Trayvon beating the crap out of Zimmerman.

4. The jury IN THIS CASE was instructed ONLY to decide whether Zimmerman was defending his life during this confrontation. That's it.

5. If Zimmerman did actually fear for his life, EVEN IF HE WAS THE ONE THAT INITIATED THIS WHOLE FIASCO, he was justified by the law for initiating violence in self-defense.

6. If Trayvon killed Zimmerman, he might also be found not-guilty if a jury of his peers felt that Trayvon truly feared that HE might be killed or seriously injured. In this hypothetical situation, I would not have a problem with the verdict.

7. For this reason, I do not have a problem with the verdict in this situation. Zimmerman is guilty of being a vigilante, perhaps guilty of being a wanna-be cop, guilty of following Martin, and (in my opinion) of making some really stupid decisions.

8. But the jury was not asked to rule on these issues. Did Zimmerman, at the time of the confrontation, fear his life? Yes? Then it's self-defense.

9. The whole situation sucks, but that's the law.

That's my view on this case. Let me know what you think.

Show me in the law where it

Show me in the law where it is considered a crime to follow someone without a court order saying you cannot follow said person? I am glad you were there to see that what Zimmerman was doing was stupid and unnecessary. In light of the recent problems with burglaries in his neighborhood and little being done by the police, he had a legitimate reason to follow any stranger in the neighborhood and find out his intent. I would have done the same and would have been armed also but I would have questioned Trayvon from a distance so he could not attack me. If Zimmerman did anything stupid it was losing sight of Trayvon before engaging him.

If Trayvon were alive today

He would be in jail for assault hopefully.

I understand...

...your point in 1, and I largely agree, but Trayvon's behavior was so over-the-top aggressive (Zimmerman was recorded screaming for help for some forty seconds) that I can't help but wonder if he would have targeted another, or someone else's property, violently.

Regarding point 2, if Trayvon has survived then Zimmerman would've had a slam-dunk assault (or attempted murder) charge against Trayvon. Trayvon might very be in prison today if he had survived.

Regarding point 6, if the gun had remained holstered, then I would have a huge problem with a verdict acquitting Trayvon of murder.

the difference is that

the difference is that zimmerman has a position of authority. he also was told directly by law enforcement to stay away from Trayvon. people who have positions of power need to be held accountable when they abuse their power. maybe zimmerman did fear for his life and felt justified in the moment (i personally think all evidence and sense points against that), but even if he did, he still needs to be held accountable for overstepping his bounds and violating an order.


Z was NOT told by police not to follow!

It was a mere dispatcher, who will say that to ANY civilian who calls to report such things..... but Z was an appointed "security" captain of the local neighborhood watch, sanctioned, monitored and trained by police on a regular basis to keep that title.

If you can read this thank a teacher. Because it's in English thank a soldier!

"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."
- Alexis de Tocqueville


a 911 dispatcher is not a law enforcement officer. What is the penal code law for not following a direct "order" via the 911 operator?

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."


That dispatcher didn't say not to follow him... he asked IF GZ was following him and when he replied yes the dispatcher said "we don't NEED you to do that."

That's a bit different than being ordered not to do something...

Ron Paul convert from the Heart of Dixie

you are supporting overreaching authority!

i'm sorry who was following whom? zimmerman was the thug. and he disobeyed a direct order. people in authority need to be held accountable! i know you guys like to think racism doesn't exist anymore, but discrimination against blacks is all over our judicial system. and ron paul acknowledges it. that's why he came out against the use of the death penalty, and constantly states that it is another reason to oppose the drug war. http://io9.com/disturbing-chart-shows-rise-in-justified-kill...

Neighborhood Watchmen are Thugs?

So you are saying that we do NOT have the right to patrol our own neighborhood which was plagued by (black) young men who steals and breaks into houses and robs people? If we do that, trying to protect our property we are thugs? Are you kidding me?

Zimmerman was doing a reasonable thing. Checking out a unfamiliar young man walking in your gated neighborhood that is acting suspicious! It is completely moral and necessary for him or someone else in his position to do so.

Even if Zimmerman was following him and observing him on the public side walk, still he broke no law in doing that. Same for Martin, he broke no law until he assaulted Zimmerman and threatened to kill him verbally. That's when self defense comes in.

If Zimmerman's action broke the law prior to their fight and it results in Martin's death, then manslaughter would be the correct verdict. However, because all evidences and facts points to no wrongdoing on Zimmerman's part prior to the fight, it was a pure self-defense case.