Torturing of mentally disabled boy in Chicago [Archive]

CathyA

1-6-17, 10:33am

What is happening to our culture? 4 black youths (2 guys, 2 girls) tortured a mentally disabled boy......beating him, cutting him, making him drink toilet water.......all-the-while filming it live on Facebook.
I wish we could hang people in the town squares for this kind of behavior.
There's definitely something out of control with many black youth today. What can we do about it? What kind of parents raised kids like this??

iris lilies

1-6-17, 11:37am

There are so many thngs wrong with your ideas as expressed in this post, I wont try to refute them except to say: God Bless America where freech speech is allowed.

ToomuchStuff

1-6-17, 12:01pm

There's definitely something out of control with many black youth today.

There is something out of control with many white youth, hispanic youth, etc. as well. You could have just put Youth, being the point.
The torture is the something different then us/tribe psychology. Did they get caught yet? (or are they being looked for) Do I expect they will try to use the "were black the police are just prejudiced" defense? Yes, but I don't think it will work for any color family who has/knows someone of different mental capacity.
What to do about it, arrest them.

IshbelRobertson

1-6-17, 12:28pm

CathyA

1-6-17, 12:33pm

There are so many thngs wrong with your ideas as expressed in this post, I wont try to refute them except to say: God Bless America where freech speech is allowed.

IL, I'm not sure what you are saying. I'm sure you see this in your neighborhood too. Every single day, people are robbed/shot in the nearby town. It's very rare that it's a white youth. Go ahead and make me a racist. It would be nice to have a conversation about this without people just screaming I'm a racist. I'm pretty perceptive, and I'm just saying what I'm seeing. As far as the hanging comment.........part of our problem with crime of any color is that we are too easy on punishment.....or just put them in prison forever, or they get out early and commit crimes again. We need to hold people very responsible for their actions.

LDAHL

1-6-17, 12:37pm

CathyA

1-6-17, 12:39pm

I am appalled, but not surprised at the OP's often stated views on black people. What earthly difference does skin colour have to do with this frankly, feral behaviour?

They are disgusting by virtue of their deeds, not skin tone.

Well, it's my opinion that, at least in my close city, it IS a skin color problem........whether it goes with poverty or parenting, or anything else. It's just peculiar that everyone refuses to even consider a problem and immediately calls me a racist.
If noticing that there's (in this area and other large cities) an inordinate amount of crime committed by a certain group of people makes me a "racist"......then so be it. At least I'm not pretending everything's cool and there's no problem.
I would feel exactly the same way if it were an inordinate amount of white youth acting this way. And no, the media doesn't leave out talking about white crime....if that's what you're going to say.

CathyA

1-6-17, 12:42pm

Too me, incidents like this illustrate the foolishness of classifying certain acts as "hate crimes". We should focus on the act itself, and the impact on the victims, rather than attempt to divine the motivations of the perpetrators.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. They've been charged with hate crime, kidnapping, and a number of other crimes. Could you give me an example of what you think it should be classified as?

LDAHL

1-6-17, 1:03pm

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. They've been charged with hate crime, kidnapping, and a number of other crimes. Could you give me an example of what you think it should be classified as?

As simply a crime or crimes with no qualifiers added. Kidnapping, assault, etc.

A crime isn't more or less serious depending on what the criminal's reasons for committing it are.

CathyA

1-6-17, 1:10pm

catherine

1-6-17, 1:31pm

As simply a crime or crimes with no qualifiers added. Kidnapping, assault, etc.

A crime isn't more or less serious depending on what the criminal's reasons for committing it are.

Then why do you have 1st, 2nd and 3rd degree murder charges? Why is hitting and killing a person with a car because you are distracted less serious than running them down intentionally? Society already classifies crimes according to motivation, and the legal system supports that in many cases.

jp1

1-6-17, 2:30pm

Maybe they got the idea that this behavior is ok after watching the president elect mock a disabled person in front of a large crowd of people. Admittedly, old orange men don't really fit your preferred narrative.

Teacher Terry

1-6-17, 2:33pm

There has always been poverty but not as much violence. OUR CULTURE IS MORE VIOLENT BETWEEN tv, MOVIES, oops caps on, and video games, absentee parents, etc.

pinkytoe

1-6-17, 2:45pm

I believe many states now spend more money on prisons than education and that might be a contributing factor.

Teacher Terry

1-6-17, 2:50pm

That is true and sad.

bae

1-6-17, 3:04pm

What is happening to our culture?

People read social media/clickbait news too much, and lack ability to engage in critical thinking?

http://cdn.thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/191219.png

LDAHL

1-6-17, 3:10pm

Then why do you have 1st, 2nd and 3rd degree murder charges? Why is hitting and killing a person with a car because you are distracted less serious than running them down intentionally? Society already classifies crimes according to motivation, and the legal system supports that in many cases.

I don't see those examples as differences of motivation so much as differences of intent. If you run me over because you're driving negligently, that's different than you deliberately deciding to kill me. If people knowingly commit an identical crime, but for different reasons, the reasons shouldn't matter. Murdering you because I want your wallet should be treated the same as murdering you because I don't like your accent. Otherwise, what we're essentially doing is policing thought, and weighing whether greed is worse than hatred.

bae

1-6-17, 3:14pm

On hate crimes/motivation/intent:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea#United_States

Mens rea

Model Penal Code

Since its publication in 1957, the formulation of mens rea set forth in the Model Penal Code has been highly influential throughout North America in clarifying the discussion of the different modes of culpability.[13] The following levels of mens rea are found in the MPC:

Strict liability: the actor engaged in conduct and his mental state is irrelevant. Under Model Penal Code Section 2.05, this mens rea may only be applied where the forbidden conduct is a mere violation, i.e. a civil infraction.

Negligently: a "reasonable person" would be aware of a "substantial and unjustifiable risk" that his conduct is of a prohibited nature, will lead to a prohibited result, and/or is under prohibited attendant circumstances, and the actor was not so aware but should have been.

Recklessly: the actor consciously disregards a "substantial and unjustifiable risk" that his conduct is of a prohibited nature, will lead to a prohibited result, and/or is of a prohibited nature.

Knowingly: the actor is practically certain that his conduct will lead to the result, or is aware to a high probability that his conduct is of a prohibited nature, or is aware to a high probability that the attendant circumstances exist.

Purposefully: the actor has the "conscious object" of engaging in conduct and believes or hopes that the attendant circumstances exist.

Except for strict liability, these classes of mens rea are defined in Section 2.02(2) of the MPC.

catherine

1-6-17, 4:03pm

Murdering you because I want your wallet should be treated the same as murdering you because I don't like your accent. Otherwise, what we're essentially doing is policing thought, and weighing whether greed is worse than hatred.

I see your point.

I haven't thought this through, but just thinking out loud, I'm guessing hate crimes have come about because we as a culture at this point in our history wish to discourage crimes that might threaten large segments of the population. If someone murders his/her spouse, chances are that person isn't going to be a threat to the next door neighbor.

But if someone murders a person because they are gay or black or Christian or Muslim, that constitutes more of a threat to a group vs an individual--because if they are murdering on the basis of color, religion or sexual orientation, chances are they may repeat the crime against other members of the same group.

Establishing some crimes as hate crimes tells the citizens that victimizing people on the basis of prejudice is not acceptable. How is that more of a value judgement than "we will not tolerate murder"? After all, we do weigh different types of murder anyway. Murdering a civilian is wrong, unless they are collateral damage in a war. Some feel abortion is murder, others do not. We cheered and acquitted Bernie Goetz for his attempted murder of 4 muggers--after all, they deserved it.

You can't separate out value judgements from the law.

Tenngal

1-6-17, 4:16pm

Too me, incidents like this illustrate the foolishness of classifying certain acts as "hate crimes". We should focus on the act itself, and the impact on the victims, rather than attempt to divine the motivations of the perpetrators.

when a pack of young people kidnap a mentally challenged youth and torture him, how could this not be a hate crime?

CathyA

1-6-17, 4:38pm

bae.........you can show me all the statistics you want, but in the city I live near, homicides last year and this year are at an all time high. Seems like every single night there are at least shootings, if not homicides. Those statistics don't mean anything to people who live near so much of it.

bae

1-6-17, 4:46pm

What city is that?

CathyA

1-6-17, 4:53pm

Indianapolis.

iris lilies

1-6-17, 5:34pm

What city is that?
In my city the number of murders this year equaled the number last year. Yay?

iris lilies

1-6-17, 5:38pm

I see your point.

I haven't thought this through, but just thinking out loud, I'm guessing hate crimes have come about because we as a culture at this point in our history wish to discourage crimes that might threaten large segments of the population. If someone murders his/her spouse, chances are that person isn't going to be a threat to the next door neighbor.

But if someone murders a person because they are gay or black or Christian or Muslim, that constitutes more of a threat to a group vs an individual--because if they are murdering on the basis of color, religion or sexual orientation, chances are they may repeat the crime against other members of the same group.

Establishing some crimes as hate crimes tells the citizens that victimizing people on the basis of prejudice is not acceptable. How is that more of a value judgement than "we will not tolerate murder"? After all, we do weigh different types of murder anyway. Murdering a civilian is wrong, unless they are collateral damage in a war. Some feel abortion is murder, others do not. We cheered and acquitted Bernie Goetz for his attempted murder of 4 muggers--after all, they deserved it.

You can't separate out value judgements from the law.

Hate crime legislation amd sentencing guidelines came about because crimes against minorities were traditionally not prosecuted/tried/convicted at rhe same rate as those against people n the dominant culture, in some jurisdictions anyway.

Alan

1-6-17, 7:24pm

Hate crime legislation amd sentencing guidelines came about because crimes against minorities were traditionally not prosecuted/tried/convicted at rhe same rate as those against people n the dominant culture, in some jurisdictions anyway.
I'm all in favor of ensuring that all crimes are prosecuted equally, however hate crime legislation generally enhances penalties. If it's wrong to under prosecute due to race, gender, etc., it's also wrong to over prosecute. Lets keep Lady Justice's blindfold on and scales balanced.

rosarugosa

1-6-17, 7:56pm

We had a really appalling rape/abuse of a severely inebriated minor by her "friends" that was recorded and posted on Snapchat in our town about a year ago. A schoolmate saw it and went to her parents who called the police. These were all white teenagers in a primarily white suburban town. Apparently one of the perpetrators (a young female who held the victim down) came from a really dysfunctional family, and that probably has a lot to do with it. The male perpetrator probably did too, but the female's aunt spoke at the trial, so I'm more aware of her circumstances.
I hadn't given it much thought before, but I'm inclined to agree that categorizing a crime as a hate crime doesn't have much value.

bae

1-6-17, 7:58pm

Indianapolis.

Hmm. Tricky to look at the data there, as the FBI warns us that Indianapolis' submissions to the UCR since 2014 have been not comparable to previous years because of how the city has chosen to reclassify/report crimes, when the city has been able to report data at all. In particular, the city seems to be lumping in legitimate self-defense activity with crime.

It looks though like your risk in Indianapolis isn't particularly bad if you aren't involved in drug trafficking or living a thuggish lifestyle.

In general, violent crime in America continues to trend downwards, while people seem to *feel* it is increasing.

I blame Facebook and Twitter.

Ultralight

1-6-17, 8:23pm

I wish we could hang people in the town squares for this kind of behavior.

They do this crap in some Islamic theocracies. Perhaps your next vacation should be to one of them. Don't forget your full hijab and to leave all your rights behind!

Ultralight

1-6-17, 8:26pm

Too me, incidents like this illustrate the foolishness of classifying certain acts as "hate crimes". We should focus on the act itself, and the impact on the victims, rather than attempt to divine the motivations of the perpetrators.

I think that this crime was likely fueled by hate.

And I think it is fine to express this -- I have been doing some with friends and acquaintances. But I think that the prosecution should be for what these perps did and not what they were thinking.

Ultralight

1-6-17, 8:32pm

when a pack of young people kidnap a mentally challenged youth and torture him, how could this not be a hate crime?

Those perps hated and they committed a crime. The crime is punishable but the hate (the thoughts) is not something someone should be punished for, in my opinion.

rosarugosa

1-6-17, 8:42pm

Those perps hated and they committed a crime. The crime is punishable but the hate (the thoughts) is not something someone should be punished for, in my opinion.

Agree - thought policing is undesirable and futile.

Tradd

1-6-17, 9:45pm

Frankly, I was wondering if there were going to be hate crime charges because of the current environment with regards to race (BLM, "white privilege," etc.). The new Cook County State's Attorney (prosecutor) is a black woman, the first in the job. She replaced the first Hispanic woman to hold the position. Even though disabilities are mention in hate crime law, you really don't know when it comes to Cook County. The local black leadership has been making much of the fact that urban "youths" are jailed at a disportioncate rate, seeming to ignore they're there because they actually committed crimes.

But there has been enough outcry over this that Kim Foxx (Cook County SA) probably would have faced a substantial backlash if she had NOT included hate crime charges.

creaker

1-6-17, 10:34pm

I'm all in favor of ensuring that all crimes are prosecuted equally, however hate crime legislation generally enhances penalties. If it's wrong to under prosecute due to race, gender, etc., it's also wrong to over prosecute. Lets keep Lady Justice's blindfold on and scales balanced.

What about terrorism, then? Isn't that just another flavor of "hate crime"?

Ultralight

1-7-17, 8:41am

What about terrorism, then? Isn't that just another flavor of "hate crime"?

The hate in a "hate crime" is a problem -- a huge problem! And the criminal should be punished for their crime. But the way to defeat ideologies of hate is not by punishing the thinker for their thoughts or ideas. The way to defeat ideologies of hate is with better ideas, better thoughts. Free speech in public is the coliseum where ideas do battle. We as citizens need to engage in this battle. Our best public intellectuals need to engage in this battle. All hands on deck!

catherine

1-7-17, 8:51am

The hate in a "hate crime" is a problem -- a huge problem! And the criminal should be punished for their crime. But the way to defeat ideologies of hate is not by punishing the thinker for their thoughts or ideas. The way to defeat ideologies of hate is with better ideas, better thoughts. Free speech in public is the coliseum where ideas do battle. We as citizens need to engage in this battle. Our best public intellectuals need to engage in this battle. All hands on deck!

Thanks to UA and LDAHL for raising this as a discussion point, because it got me thinking. I see your point.

But UA, it's hard for me to imagine that the intellectual discourse route would be an effective change agent. Too many have been raised on hate.

Ultralight

1-7-17, 8:56am

But UA, it's hard for me to imagine that the intellectual discourse route would be an effective change agent. Too many have been raised on hate.

Yeah... just call them "super predators" or irredeemable deplorables. They are lost causes, right?

Ultralight

1-7-17, 8:58am

catherine

1-7-17, 9:11am

Also, for the record, I don't like (more or less) agreeing with LDAHL or Alan about this. As a good liberal, I know I am not toeing the line here.

But punishing people for their thoughts is the very essence of totalitarianism.

Yes, I'm starting to agree with you on that. And hey, if Glenn Beck can agree with Michael Moore about Donald Trump, there's no shame in your agreeing with your conservative friends here on hate crime legislation.

Regarding the former comment, I just think that the intellect takes us just so far. If someone sees a video about the inhumane treatment of animals in industrial feedlots and feels really bad about it but continues to eat meat, that doesn't make them deplorable. It makes them human. If someone doesn't "see the light" about their alcohol or drug abuse, that doesn't make them deplorable. It makes them human. And when people do "see the light" and change their behavior for good, it's almost never a strictly intellectual exercise. It's multifactorial, and sometimes inexplicable. Thinking you can talk someone intellectually out of hating disregards the role of emotion in changing people.

Ultralight

1-7-17, 9:18am

Yes, I'm starting to agree with you on that. And hey, if Glenn Beck can agree with Michael Moore about Donald Trump, there's no shame in your agreeing with your conservative friends here on hate crime legislation.

Regarding the former comment, I just think that the intellect takes us just so far. If someone sees a video about the inhumane treatment of animals in industrial feedlots and feels really bad about it but continues to eat meat, that doesn't make them deplorable. It makes them human. If someone doesn't "see the light" about their alcohol or drug abuse, that doesn't make them deplorable. It makes them human. And when people do "see the light" and change their behavior for good, it's almost never a strictly intellectual exercise. It's multifactorial, and sometimes inexplicable. Thinking you can talk someone intellectually out of hating disregards the role of emotion in changing people.

Good ideas won't totally erase the bad ideas. But which ideas become dominant is what matters, I think.

You cannot crush an idea, even a really bad one. Think about the Flat Earth nutjobs.

But good ideas can truly crest bad ideas.

Get your metaphorical sword and shield. It is time to enter the coliseum! haha

creaker

1-7-17, 10:27am

Also, for the record, I don't like (more or less) agreeing with LDAHL or Alan about this. As a good liberal, I know I am not toeing the line here.

But punishing people for their thoughts is the very essence of totalitarianism.

So the person who who accidentally runs down a person and one who does it intentionally should be prosecuted and punished the same way? And the circumstances and motivations of committing the crime should be irrelevant? A crime cannot be more heinous based on intent?

iris lilies

1-7-17, 10:48am

Also, for the record, I don't like (more or less) agreeing with LDAHL or Alan about this. As a good liberal, I know I am not toeing the line here.

But punishing people for their thoughts is the very essence of totalitarianism.
You really arent a very good liberal and you know it. That's why you said that. Haha, we'll get you yet, my pretty. Logical thinking leads to conservatisivm

rosarugosa

1-7-17, 12:15pm

creaker

1-7-17, 2:36pm

Creaker: I think folks here are agreeing that accidental vs. deliberate should be treated differently, but "I ran you down because I hate you" and "I ran you down because you're gay and I hate gays" should not.

So presenting the Holocaust as a unique sort of war crime wasn't really a valid thing to do? Isn't this really the definition of genocide (I killed because this person was X)? Is treating genocide as a separate crime instead of simply murder invalid?

Not trying to be difficult - I just find feeling around the edges helps validate or invalidate a concept.

rosarugosa

1-7-17, 3:25pm

Alan

1-7-17, 5:01pm

So the person who who accidentally runs down a person and one who does it intentionally should be prosecuted and punished the same way? And the circumstances and motivations of committing the crime should be irrelevant? A crime cannot be more heinous based on intent?
I guess it could be said that all victims are equal, but some are more equal than others.

Teacher Terry

1-7-17, 6:33pm

I have never liked the enhancements for hate crimes either. It does not make sense to me. I am agreeing with Alan-xmas miracle:))

creaker

1-7-17, 7:34pm

Creaker: I've never given the subject a lot of thought before, so I think it's great to explore it from all angles. Concerning the holocaust, wouldn't it be just as horrible if the Nazis had targeted random victims in Europe instead of a specific group?

That is a hard question. I would have to say yes. My mother is from northern Italy, her father was taken on a train to a concentration camp and never came back. He was not a victim of the Holocaust - but I would have to say it wasn't any less horrible.

This discussion has me questioning now - maybe "hate crime" is not appropriate. However, intent is still often taken into account when sentencing for a crime. Historically we've had situations where if the intent of the crime was racially motivated, it was not considered as much of a crime, or possibly not a crime at all. Maybe the intent of defining "hate crimes" was to fill this hole?

Another reason for punishment for specific crimes is deterrence - maybe it was thought these crimes require greater deterrence?

iris lilies

1-8-17, 12:16am

Crimes like this should unite us in the horror of it. Instead, hate crime charges cause us to parse out various pieces of a victum's identity (is he gay? Muslim? Disabled?) swamping us with stupid details that separate us.

The horror of the Nazi extermination program lies with the huge swift machinery of it, how efficient and successful it was. Nazis targeted many groups who they determined not worthy to live in the Reich. There just were a lot of Jews. There were far fewer mentally retarded, crippled, etc. people. Nazis were out to eliminate "the other" like all other genocide programs.

ToomuchStuff

1-8-17, 3:46am

LDAHL

1-8-17, 12:10pm

Crimes like this should unite us in the horror of it. Instead, hate crime charges cause us to parse out various pieces of a victum's identity (is he gay? Muslim? Disabled?) swamping us with stupid details that spearate us.

That's very true. Lawmakers want to show us they share our revulsion against such crimes, and draft legislation to "do something about it". But in reality, it's a fairly meaningless abstraction at street level, and creates all sorts of "intersectionality" issues when we try handicapping justice based on identifiable traits of perpetrator and victim, and attempt to identify interior motivations of the perpetrator. Sometimes we even name a law after a particular victim. It feels good, but in essence merely adds new labels to ancient crimes.

LDAHL

1-8-17, 12:27pm

Also, for the record, I don't like (more or less) agreeing with LDAHL or Alan about this. As a good liberal, I know I am not toeing the line here.

But punishing people for their thoughts is the very essence of totalitarianism.

Wasn't there a time when objecting to punishing peoples' thoughts was the very essence of what it meant to be a liberal?

We seem to have stretched the meaning of "liberal" and "conservative" over the past few generations. It must be very puzzling to people from other countries.

Zoe Girl

1-8-17, 2:20pm

Wasn't there a time when objecting to punishing peoples' thoughts was the very essence of what it meant to be a liberal?

We seem to have stretched the meaning of "liberal" and "conservative" over the past few generations. It must be very puzzling to people from other countries.

I always get confused, I believe in social support but first in ways that build ways for people to support themselves. That puts me on a liberal side. As far as who you love or what you think, that is your business until it becomes an action that affects others. That includes thoughts that I find horrible. I consider that socially liberal. My issue with conservative has to do more with the ideas that have failed, like trickle down economics and charter schools. I am sure I am not as informed as I should be and someone will call me out on this.

LDAHL

1-8-17, 3:13pm

I always get confused, I believe in social support but first in ways that build ways for people to support themselves. That puts me on a liberal side. As far as who you love or what you think, that is your business until it becomes an action that affects others. That includes thoughts that I find horrible. I consider that socially liberal. My issue with conservative has to do more with the ideas that have failed, like trickle down economics and charter schools. I am sure I am not as informed as I should be and someone will call me out on this.

it's probably near impossible to find a reasonable, objective comparison of what "liberal' and "conservative" mean, both because they cover so much diverse territory and the writer usually can't resist making his own inferences about what other people believe.

Conservatives sometimes will say conservatism is more of a temperament while liberalism is more of an ideology, which I think is somewhat unfair to both sides. I make no secret I find the conservative perspective more realistic for the "crooked timber of humanity". I base this on the many tragic failures of social engineering we have seen.

I really like what Yuval Levin (well worth reading, even if you despise conservatives root and branch) said on the topic:

"To my mind, conservatism is gratitude. Conservatives tend to begin from gratitude for what is good and what works in our society and then strive to build on it, while liberals tend to begin from outrage at what is bad and broken and seek to uproot it."

Despite my beliefs, I can certainly see a certain nobility in both outlooks. Our current national tragedy seems to stem from an inability to reconcile contradictory opinions.

Teacher Terry

1-8-17, 6:18pm

There are some great books written from survivors of the camps. Night, Man's Search for Meaning and All but My Life. It really gives you an inside look at the horror. I cried when I read all 3. I read them over 30 years ago and never forgot the stories or the names of those books. I read all the time and can't say that about many I have read. IL: I agree that the term hate crimes takes us down a path we don't need to go. It just distracts us from the horror of a situation.

rosarugosa

1-8-17, 8:47pm

Ultralight

1-9-17, 7:53am

You really arent a very good liberal and you know it. That's why you said that. Haha, we'll get you yet, my pretty. Logical thinking leads to conservatisivm

I appreciate the sentiment. haha

I am merely more of an issued-based liberal. Universal single payer healthcare? Yes. Public transit? Yes. Better public schools? Yes, mostly. A more progressive tax structure? Yes. Separation of church and state? Heck, yeah!

See, not that conservative at all really.

Though I am a moderate supporter of the 2nd Amendment and a hardliner when it comes to my advocacy of free speech and free thought.

I think that where I really deviate from my fellow liberals is regarding individual responsibility.

Alan

1-10-17, 2:13pm

Conservatives sometimes will say conservatism is more of a temperament while liberalism is more of an ideology, which I think is somewhat unfair to both sides. I make no secret I find the conservative perspective more realistic for the "crooked timber of humanity". I base this on the many tragic failures of social engineering we have seen.

And on top of that, it appears that conservatives are better looking, not just here, but in Europe and Australia too. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272716302201
It's no wonder liberals seem angry all the time.

IshbelRobertson

1-10-17, 2:37pm

C'mon, Alan! Without even clicking the link, I submit Mr Trump as evidence to the contrary. In which universe could he be considered attractive? :cool:

razz

1-10-17, 2:49pm

C'mon, Alan! Without even clicking the link, I submit Mr Trump as evidence to the contrary. In which universe could he be considered attractive? :cool:

Remind me never to give you an opportunity like the one that Alan did. :~)

IshbelRobertson

1-10-17, 3:00pm

Remind me never to give you an opportunity like the one that Alan did. :~)

Sometimes, jut sometimes, ah cannae resist an open goal. !Splat!

iris lilies

1-10-17, 3:03pm

TooMuchStuff: My apologies, you are certainly correct that there were several groups targeted, but it did seem the Nazis targeted the Jews as the ultimate enemy. They certainly didn't show much tolerance for the Roma or Jehovah's Witnesses or gays or handicapped people, either.

Sometimes, jut sometimes, ah cannae resist an open goal. !Splat!

haha.
but Trump isnt that bad looking, it is his stuling choices that are bad.

LDAHL

1-10-17, 3:13pm

C'mon, Alan! Without even clicking the link, I submit Mr Trump as evidence to the contrary. In which universe could he be considered attractive? :cool:

In which universe could he be considered conservative?

The man's all about using the arbitrary power of a big central government as a cudgel. National Review was right to call him out for his many heresies in the famous "Against Trump" issue.