Zimmerman vs. DMX - Boxing Match?

[AAFitz]

You guys are clowns.

I think you're the one in the circus act here, and I for one, am fully entertained.

but gotta work dammit...Ill try to resume later

you misquoted. #1 Aradhaus said that #2 you should know I do not call people here names.

Sorry I ruined your entertainment

Oh, you're still entertaining, but sorry for the misquote, and it was simply a result of running out and foolishly making a quick addition to the post.

I think you can see that even my response to what I thought was a direct insult was fairly watered down, but in the circumstances, inappropriate.

[thegreekdog]

An Hispanic man was brutally attacked, the obvious victim of a hate crime.

The Hispanic man revealed his gun and his attacker fled.

The Hispanic man pursued the assailant and shot him.

..... OR .....

A WHITE-hispanic (note the emphasis) guy saw a black kid in his neighborhood. He didn't like that (being a racist WHITE-hispanic with a German name).

The WHITE-hispanic guy pursued the black kid.

The black kid hit the WHITE-hispanic guy in the face and head, in self defense, but it was not enough.

The WHITE-hispanic guy shot and killed the black kid - an obvious hate crime.

...

Now remove the racial tags above and it's a story you'd see in a local paper once, and never hear of again.

Had Martin been white, or if they'd both been black, or white, you bet your ass we'd never had heard of a word of it.

... It's pathetic, the way people gulp down this spoon-fed agenda-driven shite from the media.

Until all the evidence is shown, how can anybody comment? Did Martin attack Zimmerman before or after the pursuit? That's key, and at the moment - none of you has a clue.

...

So why are you commenting , why have you concluded that this story is driven only by racial overtones? The fact is that an unarmed man was shot dead , the circumstances of his death ( irrelevent of his race ) require close examination , this will now happen , whats the problem?

Did you ask these same comments of President Obama, Jesse Jackson, and the national media?

[comic boy]

An Hispanic man was brutally attacked, the obvious victim of a hate crime.

The Hispanic man revealed his gun and his attacker fled.

The Hispanic man pursued the assailant and shot him.

..... OR .....

A WHITE-hispanic (note the emphasis) guy saw a black kid in his neighborhood. He didn't like that (being a racist WHITE-hispanic with a German name).

The WHITE-hispanic guy pursued the black kid.

The black kid hit the WHITE-hispanic guy in the face and head, in self defense, but it was not enough.

The WHITE-hispanic guy shot and killed the black kid - an obvious hate crime.

...

Now remove the racial tags above and it's a story you'd see in a local paper once, and never hear of again.

Had Martin been white, or if they'd both been black, or white, you bet your ass we'd never had heard of a word of it.

... It's pathetic, the way people gulp down this spoon-fed agenda-driven shite from the media.

Until all the evidence is shown, how can anybody comment? Did Martin attack Zimmerman before or after the pursuit? That's key, and at the moment - none of you has a clue.

...

So why are you commenting , why have you concluded that this story is driven only by racial overtones? The fact is that an unarmed man was shot dead , the circumstances of his death ( irrelevent of his race ) require close examination , this will now happen , whats the problem?

Did you ask these same comments of President Obama, Jesse Jackson, and the national media?

If the US media has concentrated simply on race rather than the circumstances of the death then I would condemn them yes . Jackson is a disgrace , a professional racist , no time whatsoever for his ilk as I have already stated in another thread.
I read what Obama said and it seemed to me to be an appeal for calm , that in fact was how it was headlined by the British media. When he said '' That could have been my son '' it seemed fairly obvious that he was refering to the fact that it could have been anybodys son.
To me he was negating the race issue not inflaming it , others have chosen to take the opposite view , perhaps that says more about them then it does the president.

[AAFitz]

"Speculate" =/ "invent a scenario that would fit your worldview when we already possess most of the relevant information."

Zimmerman wasn't supposed to have a gun. The dispatcher Zimmerman spoke with was adamant that he not pursue Trayvon, because he wasn't supposed to do that. Zimmerman sounded angry that "they always get away."

Why wasn't he supposed to have a gun? Every law abiding citizen is allowed to have a gun if they choose to. That's why we have the 2nd Amendment.

He was not allowed to have a gun while operating as a Neighborhood Watch member.

How do you know this?

I think I mighta misinterpreted something I read.

Oh, of all people, Im sure Nightstrike can forgive that kind of mistake.

[natty dread]

I can't BELIEVE how many racists there are on this thread.

[comic boy]

I can't BELIEVE how many racists there are on this thread.

I cant believe that those who keep banging on about race are complaining that the medis keeps banging on about race !

[thegreekdog]

An Hispanic man was brutally attacked, the obvious victim of a hate crime.

The Hispanic man revealed his gun and his attacker fled.

The Hispanic man pursued the assailant and shot him.

..... OR .....

A WHITE-hispanic (note the emphasis) guy saw a black kid in his neighborhood. He didn't like that (being a racist WHITE-hispanic with a German name).

The WHITE-hispanic guy pursued the black kid.

The black kid hit the WHITE-hispanic guy in the face and head, in self defense, but it was not enough.

The WHITE-hispanic guy shot and killed the black kid - an obvious hate crime.

...

Now remove the racial tags above and it's a story you'd see in a local paper once, and never hear of again.

Had Martin been white, or if they'd both been black, or white, you bet your ass we'd never had heard of a word of it.

... It's pathetic, the way people gulp down this spoon-fed agenda-driven shite from the media.

Until all the evidence is shown, how can anybody comment? Did Martin attack Zimmerman before or after the pursuit? That's key, and at the moment - none of you has a clue.

...

So why are you commenting , why have you concluded that this story is driven only by racial overtones? The fact is that an unarmed man was shot dead , the circumstances of his death ( irrelevent of his race ) require close examination , this will now happen , whats the problem?

Did you ask these same comments of President Obama, Jesse Jackson, and the national media?

If the US media has concentrated simply on race rather than the circumstances of the death then I would condemn them yes . Jackson is a disgrace , a professional racist , no time whatsoever for his ilk as I have already stated in another thread.
I read what Obama said and it seemed to me to be an appeal for calm , that in fact was how it was headlined by the British media. When he said '' That could have been my son '' it seemed fairly obvious that he was refering to the fact that it could have been anybodys son.
To me he was negating the race issue not inflaming it , others have chosen to take the opposite view , perhaps that says more about them then it does the president.

It's hard not to take the opposite view when the president's supporters react the way they have. As I indicated previously in this thread, there was no reason why the president needed to answer the question or address the issue at all. Numerous acts of violence occur in the United States on a daily basis, so why address this particular issue.

Perhaps I'm cynical when it comes to politics, but I tend to think politicians will use any event as an excuse to rally support. So I saw the president addressing this incident as a political ploy by the president and his supporters. Similarly, when Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Mitt Romney addressed, in great detail, the religious issue with birth control after the president had made it a non-issue, I commented that they were doing this merely for political gain. Can the "other side" on each of these issues take some of the blame for stoking the flames? Yeah, sure. As you pointed out, the conservatives are now all up in arms reacting to the president's comments and his supporter's comments, rallies, and such. The conservatives surely can receive some of the blame for making this non-issue (in the relative sense of the term) into an issue, but blame belongs on the liberal side of the aisle as well.

My take on this (as I've said before) is that it's an unfortunate incident that may or may not have been racially motivated. It's something that happens on a daily basis. There is no reason (other than political) for the president or any other national figure to mention this particular incident.

[Aradhus]

An Hispanic man was brutally attacked, the obvious victim of a hate crime.

The Hispanic man revealed his gun and his attacker fled.

The Hispanic man pursued the assailant and shot him.

..... OR .....

A WHITE-hispanic (note the emphasis) guy saw a black kid in his neighborhood. He didn't like that (being a racist WHITE-hispanic with a German name).

The WHITE-hispanic guy pursued the black kid.

The black kid hit the WHITE-hispanic guy in the face and head, in self defense, but it was not enough.

The WHITE-hispanic guy shot and killed the black kid - an obvious hate crime.

...

Now remove the racial tags above and it's a story you'd see in a local paper once, and never hear of again.

Had Martin been white, or if they'd both been black, or white, you bet your ass we'd never had heard of a word of it.

... It's pathetic, the way people gulp down this spoon-fed agenda-driven shite from the media.

Until all the evidence is shown, how can anybody comment? Did Martin attack Zimmerman before or after the pursuit? That's key, and at the moment - none of you has a clue.

...

So why are you commenting , why have you concluded that this story is driven only by racial overtones? The fact is that an unarmed man was shot dead , the circumstances of his death ( irrelevent of his race ) require close examination , this will now happen , whats the problem?

Did you ask these same comments of President Obama, Jesse Jackson, and the national media?

If the US media has concentrated simply on race rather than the circumstances of the death then I would condemn them yes . Jackson is a disgrace , a professional racist , no time whatsoever for his ilk as I have already stated in another thread.
I read what Obama said and it seemed to me to be an appeal for calm , that in fact was how it was headlined by the British media. When he said '' That could have been my son '' it seemed fairly obvious that he was refering to the fact that it could have been anybodys son.
To me he was negating the race issue not inflaming it , others have chosen to take the opposite view , perhaps that says more about them then it does the president.

It's hard not to take the opposite view when the president's supporters react the way they have. As I indicated previously in this thread, there was no reason why the president needed to answer the question or address the issue at all. Numerous acts of violence occur in the United States on a daily basis, so why address this particular issue.

Perhaps I'm cynical when it comes to politics, but I tend to think politicians will use any event as an excuse to rally support. So I saw the president addressing this incident as a political ploy by the president and his supporters. Similarly, when Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Mitt Romney addressed, in great detail, the religious issue with birth control after the president had made it a non-issue, I commented that they were doing this merely for political gain. Can the "other side" on each of these issues take some of the blame for stoking the flames? Yeah, sure. As you pointed out, the conservatives are now all up in arms reacting to the president's comments and his supporter's comments, rallies, and such. The conservatives surely can receive some of the blame for making this non-issue (in the relative sense of the term) into an issue, but blame belongs on the liberal side of the aisle as well.

My take on this (as I've said before) is that it's an unfortunate incident that may or may not have been racially motivated. It's something that happens on a daily basis. There is no reason (other than political) for the president or any other national figure to mention this particular incident.

What political reasons? getting the black vote? I think he's got that locked up, mate.

[thegreekdog]

What political reasons? getting the black vote? I think he's got that locked up, mate.

And the Republicans have the religious vote locked up too. The point is to get more people in your base out to vote. And you do that by bringing up what looks like a hot button issue.

For example - one of the reasons that Chris Christie won the gubenatorial race in New Jersey was because more conservatives went out and voted by and large than liberals did. One article I read speculated that if Christie would have been up for election in 2008, when Barack Obama was running for president, he would have lost handily (because more libearls went out in the 2008 election than in the 2010 elections).

[Aradhus]

I'm pretty sure the point was juding people by their skin colour is stupid. It only leads to problems.

[thegreekdog]

I'm pretty sure the point was juding people by their skin colour is stupid. It only leads to problems.

You're not as cynical as I am apparently. I always look for the self-interested reason in anything political.

[Aradhus]

so, if this story happened in 2009, Obama woudl've ignored it because it wasn't an election year for him?

I am cynical, what I'm not is paranoid.

okok, I'm paranoid too, but I am more skeptical about your paranoia than I am cynical about your skeptisism.

[AndyDufresne]

...but I am more skeptical about your paranoia than I am cynical about your skeptisism.

This is probably one of my favorite phrases I've read in the Off Topics for a while. Kudos.


--Andy

[thegreekdog]

so, if this story happened in 2009, Obama woudl've ignored it because it wasn't an election year for him?

I am cynical, what I'm not is paranoid.

okok, I'm paranoid too, but I am more skeptical about your paranoia than I am cynical about your skeptisism.

I think he would have ignored it, yes. I'm not paranoid (unless thinking that politicians are doing something for political gains only is paranoia, in which case I am).

[Aradhus]

so, if this story happened in 2009, Obama woudl've ignored it because it wasn't an election year for him?

I am cynical, what I'm not is paranoid.

okok, I'm paranoid too, but I am more skeptical about your paranoia than I am cynical about your skeptisism.

I think he would have ignored it, yes. I'm not paranoid (unless thinking that politicians are doing something for political gains only is paranoia, in which case I am).

So everthing a politician does is thought out, predetermined and executed all with the intent of political gain?

Yeah I'd call that paranoia. Do you keep a copy of Catcher in the Rye within 5 feet of you at all times?

[thegreekdog]

so, if this story happened in 2009, Obama woudl've ignored it because it wasn't an election year for him?

I am cynical, what I'm not is paranoid.

okok, I'm paranoid too, but I am more skeptical about your paranoia than I am cynical about your skeptisism.

I think he would have ignored it, yes. I'm not paranoid (unless thinking that politicians are doing something for political gains only is paranoia, in which case I am).

So everthing a politician does is thought out, predetermined and executed all with the intent of political gain?

Yeah I'd call that paranoia. Do you keep a copy of Catcher in the Rye within 5 feet of you at all times?

I think most everything a politician does is thought out, predetermined and executed with the intent of political gain. I suppose I'm therefore paranoid. I would except President Bush (II) from that thought... some of the stuff he said was clearly not thought out.

[Doc_Brown]

Quick question: I've seen the claim that Zimmerman was 250lbs. Is there anything to corroborate that? After the white line morphed into white-Hispanic, and the information about Zimmerman being injured surfaced, I'm no longer willing to make a judgement either way.

I do think Florida's "Stand your ground" law is problematic (speaking as someone that favors broad gun rights), and I think that's really the source of the problem. An attorney from Florida noted that there have been a number of cases in Florida that appeared to be manslaughter either ended up with no arrests or no convictions because that law is so broad. Let's set emotions and racial rhetoric aside for a few minutes. If the police had reasonable doubt that Zimmerman was at fault and arrested him anyway, they could be liable for claims of false arrest should Zimmerman be found innocent. It's very possible that Zimmerman intentionally engaged Martin and escalated the situation, in which case, he may be guilty of manslaughter or negligent homicide or something (I'm not a lawyer). On the other hand, I've heard a claim that he was approached by Martin as he was getting back in his car. Doubtful? Perhaps. I don't have all the facts, and neither does any member of the general public. The people that have access to all known facts have so far declined to make an arrest.

[comic boy]

Quick question: I've seen the claim that Zimmerman was 250lbs. Is there anything to corroborate that? After the white line morphed into white-Hispanic, and the information about Zimmerman being injured surfaced, I'm no longer willing to make a judgement either way.

I do think Florida's "Stand your ground" law is problematic (speaking as someone that favors broad gun rights), and I think that's really the source of the problem. An attorney from Florida noted that there have been a number of cases in Florida that appeared to be manslaughter either ended up with no arrests or no convictions because that law is so broad. Let's set emotions and racial rhetoric aside for a few minutes. If the police had reasonable doubt that Zimmerman was at fault and arrested him anyway, they could be liable for claims of false arrest should Zimmerman be found innocent. It's very possible that Zimmerman intentionally engaged Martin and escalated the situation, in which case, he may be guilty of manslaughter or negligent homicide or something (I'm not a lawyer). On the other hand, I've heard a claim that he was approached by Martin as he was getting back in his car. Doubtful? Perhaps. I don't have all the facts, and neither does any member of the general public. The people that have access to all known facts have so far declined to make an arrest.

Yes I would agree that the application of this law needs looking at closely , it may well have been a motivating factor .

[spurgistan]

so, if this story happened in 2009, Obama woudl've ignored it because it wasn't an election year for him?

I am cynical, what I'm not is paranoid.

okok, I'm paranoid too, but I am more skeptical about your paranoia than I am cynical about your skeptisism.

I think he would have ignored it, yes. I'm not paranoid (unless thinking that politicians are doing something for political gains only is paranoia, in which case I am).

So everthing a politician does is thought out, predetermined and executed all with the intent of political gain?

Yeah I'd call that paranoia. Do you keep a copy of Catcher in the Rye within 5 feet of you at all times?

I think most everything a politician does is thought out, predetermined and executed with the intent of political gain. I suppose I'm therefore paranoid. I would except President Bush (II) from that thought... some of the stuff he said was clearly not thought out.

Politicians public stances are generally public for a reason. I wouldn't call it cynical or paranoid to look for who politicians are appealing to when they come down on one side or another of an issue. For all we know, Obama doesn't think Zimmerman didn't do anything wrong in his pursuit and murder of Trayvon Martin (I highly doubt this, because Obama isn't a flippin' moron) but he keeps this private. And maybe Rick Santorum isn't a virulent homophobe in his personal life, but, given that his public persona is a virulent homophobe, we vote for or against him using this information.

[BigBallinStalin]

so, if this story happened in 2009, Obama woudl've ignored it because it wasn't an election year for him?

I am cynical, what I'm not is paranoid.

okok, I'm paranoid too, but I am more skeptical about your paranoia than I am cynical about your skeptisism.

I think he would have ignored it, yes. I'm not paranoid (unless thinking that politicians are doing something for political gains only is paranoia, in which case I am).

So everthing a politician does is thought out, predetermined and executed all with the intent of political gain?

No, he outsources that job to his political marketing team.

Success/profit is gained by winning votes. Like everyone else, politicians are profit-driven.

[Timminz]

I will speculate a little bit. Zimmerman is a neighborhood watchman. He saw a stranger (Trayvon did not live there) walking through the closed community. The watchman asked Trayvon if he lived there and maybe where he was going. Trayvon told him to go f*ck himself. Zimmerman got out of the car and told Trayvon to show him how someone fucks themselves. They got into a fight, Trayvon was getting the best of Zimmerman, and Zimm pulled out the gun and shot him.

Even in your speculative fantasy, Zimmerman is obviously at fault.

"He told me to go f*ck myself", is not a valid reason to confront someone physically. Also, losing a fight to and unarmed person half your size (a fight that you initiated), is not a valid reason to shoot someone to death.

lmao

Ah yes, that makes much more sense. Thank you for clarifying.

[bedub1]

I do find it amazing how this story started out as "White vigilante hunts down and murders black angel" to a more reasonable statement as more facts come out. Initially I was appalled and figured it was open season in Florida and somebody should just start hunting Zimmerman, but now as I hear more and more of the story I'm not so sure anymore.

Just goes to show:

Wyclef: yeah, exactly my point. Don't believe the hype.

[Phatscotty]

I will speculate a little bit. Zimmerman is a neighborhood watchman. He saw a stranger (Trayvon did not live there) walking through the closed community. The watchman asked Trayvon if he lived there and maybe where he was going. Trayvon told him to go f*ck himself. Zimmerman got out of the car and told Trayvon to show him how someone fucks themselves. They got into a fight, Trayvon was getting the best of Zimmerman, and Zimm pulled out the gun and shot him.

Even in your speculative fantasy, Zimmerman is obviously at fault.

"He told me to go f*ck myself", is not a valid reason to confront someone physically. Also, losing a fight to and unarmed person half your size (a fight that you initiated), is not a valid reason to shoot someone to death.

why is the neighborhood watchmen asking a stranger if he lived there fantasy?
why is speculating that words were exhcanged fantasy?

the fight and the shooting are facts, and I think I covered all my "wild" speculation.

[Phatscotty]

"Speculate" =/ "invent a scenario that would fit your worldview when we already possess most of the relevant information."

Zimmerman wasn't supposed to have a gun. The dispatcher Zimmerman spoke with was adamant that he not pursue Trayvon, because he wasn't supposed to do that. Zimmerman sounded angry that "they always get away."

LMAO! Any American can have a gun if they get one legally and meet certain requirements.

You are lying or misinformed about the dispatcher. The dispatcher said "You don't need to do that..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/us/91 ... nager.html

Funny how what the dispatcher suggested is the lynchpin for fault.

Like the OP says, FULL of lies

[Phatscotty]

Found out what Trayvon's 10 day suspension was for.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/Trayvon-Ma ... 30505.html

A bag of drugs at school , according to a family spokesman. I wonder if this is the same spokesperson who originally shared with us that suspension was only 5 days? The record on why he was suspended is sealed by law, but it makes perfect sense that "actually, there were no drugs in the baggie"

Meanwhile, John Schuster, the spokesman for the Miami-Dade Public Schools, said the school district has not released any student records in accordance with federal law.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/us/91 ... nager.html

“This guy looks like he’s up to no good or on drugs or something,”

Zimmerman's quotes and the story keeps on checking out. Especially the part about being attacked and almost killed by Trayvon.

...authorities revealed that Martin took down George Zimmerman with one punch then climbed on top of him and slammed his head into the sidewalk several times before the 17-year-old was shot to death by the community watch volunteer, according to a report in the Orlando Sentinel.

How can this be? "He ONLY weights 140 pounds?" Aradhaus, step into the real world and join us, really.....

I guess a lot of people were played for a fool on this one. I wonder why most of them were liberals?