Wednesday, March 11, 2015

When Black Lives are More Important

Hi, Locke here. The term "Black Lives Matter" has sparked this opinionated speech.

Sometime ago there was this African America boy,  Michael Brown, who attacked a police officer and was shot. When the police officer was not put on trial, they burned their town down. So, when a black kid gets killed in self defence it is a crime and a town burns down. In contrast when Dillon Taylor, an unarmed white person, was shot by black officer, nothing happens. Where is Dillon's town?

Really look at the cases, they are almost the same. Washington Times says that "the cases are nearly identical". Where is Taylor's front page article? Where are his riots? Does he not deserve them? Rosh Limbaugh explains that the current world view is that Whites are the oppressors and African Americans are the saintly victims. His exact words are, "In the current climate in the United States, a black person can never be an oppressor, and a white person can never be a victim."

Where are the MSNBC head lines? Well they never wrote a story on it. If you look up Michael Brown on MSNBC there are 30 pages of stories (there are actually 30 pages of stories). On CNN, for Taylor there is one video. For Michael Brown on CNN there are 2790 results.

Dillon isn't the only one. The media is incredibly liberal and ensures that everyone else believes these views. Minorities are treated as if they are better than everyone else. This "minority rule" only applies if you are the "right minority" i.e. African American, hispanic, Native American etc..

The media and people, believe these fallacies to be self evident, only African Americans can be victims and White people are always the oppressors, and "right minorities" are superior to "normal minorities".

7 comments:

  1. DAVID THE MEDIA IS NOT LIBERAL
    IN FACT THE MEDIA IS EITHER VERY STUPID OR GENERALLY CONSERVATIVE
    AND PROOF WAS NOT GIVEN
    OH MY GOSH DAVID SIGH SIGH SIGH

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sorry, you have mistaken me for someone else. The truth is self evident. There isn't that much that I have to prove. The Washington Post has an article on this http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/10/21/lets-rank-the-media-from-liberal-to-conservative-based-on-their-audiences/
    It proves that most media outlets are liberal.
    Thank you for commenting.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Another website says that there are more liberal media outlets. So far there are none disproving the media bias.
    http://www.journalism.org/2014/10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/

    ReplyDelete
  4. I would almost believe you except that you sound way too much like him, write like him, share his EXACT opinions, have the same arguments, like Orson Scott Card's books, and he is uncharacteristically promotive of your blog. So I'm looking at *you*, David, even this Locke here isn't you. Plus your blog came into existence *after* David's extremely...INTERESTING opinions. So, it is with my better judgement that I disregard your denial. Locke/David, your arguments (and facts and sources) are still about as holey as Swiss cheese. So carry on. I will think what I will and you will protest to no avail. Good day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is very nice that someone is supportive of my amazing blog. Do you truly believe that I must self promote to get people to read what I write?

      The arguments I present before the general public are similar to ones already spoken by others. If a person has the same arguments as me, they could easily be someone else.

      Blogs come into existence all the time. After getting promoted, I have now more time to do other things. For example writing a blog.

      How are his opinions interesting? More importantly, how are my arguments full of holes?

      Good day to you, as well.

      Delete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. You know you've been beaten when you remove a comment

    ReplyDelete