O'Malley Gets Cold Response After He Says 'White Lives Matter, All Lives Matter'

[Famous Mortimer]

Jesse Ventura endorsed Gary Johnson in 2012 and now he's endorsing Bernie Sanders in 2016.

Let's not pretend he abides by ideological logic.

[WVdemocrat]

I love how nobody is talking about how Martin O'Malley laid out policy proposals on this, while Bernie Sanders just said "blah blah blah billionaire class blah blah blah if you don't want me to be here, then I can leave...."

Of course not. Everyone is so quick to declare Martin O'Malley somehow a secret conservative. He made a statement under extreme pressure and he was trying to find something to say to satisfy these people, because they kept yelling while he was trying to respond. He laid out some policy proposals and told the crowd that he was working on a document detailing his policies on this, which he will be releasing in the coming days.

This was an absurd demonstration. I support the Black Lives Matter movement, but these people had no plan once they got his attention, they yelled at him after every sentence. It was absurd. It's also unbelievable that they would do this to people on their side. Nobody can say that Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley don't believe that black lives matter.

[Reaganfan]

This is why Democrats are bleeding white voters.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The fact still remains that black people, particularly young black males, are much more likely to be shot, or at least harassed by the police.

And I just pointed out why.

Do you honestly think that Eric Garner would have suffered the same fate if he were white?

I don't know. This is begging the question.

Even if blacks commit a higher percentage of murders, does that really justify police officers specifically stopping unarmed young black men who haven't done anything wrong?

How is that begging the question? If the answer is no, then how can you argue that the police aren't treating black people unfairly?

Michael Brown and Eric Garner don't fall in the category of "haven't done anything wrong".  Brown had just committed a strong-arm robbery of a convenience store.  Garner was selling "loosies" cigarettes, which he well knew to be illegal.

Garner actively resisted arrest.  Whatever you think of the seriousness of Garner's charge, he was being lawfully arrested, and he was resisting arrest.  At that point, he became an obese asthmatic with high blood pressure actively resisting arrest, and there are consequences to that which come about when you resist arrest.  Yes, I know that Garner's death was ruled a "homicide", but the definition of  homicide is a death caused by the intentional actions of another person or persons, which is not necessarily an intentional death or a criminal death.

Do black lives matter?  Of course they do, but not to the point where they are entitled to resist arrest with violence when they are lawfully being arrested.  The issues of "community policing" and the practice of enforcing every minor law to cut down on crime, stop and frisk, etc. are separate issues.  Michael Brown's and Eric Garner's (especially Garner's) advocates are arguing the right fo criminals to resist arrest for no more reason than coming down with a case of "I'm not going to jail today!".  Think of the broader implications of advocating that posture.

[bedstuy]

I don't think the point of "black lives matter" is literally that "black lives matter."  Because, nobody cares if a black person kills a black person.  That's not really a political issue that people care about.

"Black lives matter" applies to situations where blacks are killed by white police officers.  There is no similar situation with white people.  If a white person gets shot by the police, there is no automatic suspicious of racism.

[Thunderbird is the word]

Jesse Ventura endorsed Gary Johnson in 2012 and now he's endorsing Bernie Sanders in 2016.

Let's not pretend he abides by ideological logic.

He just goes wherever the anti-establishment winds of the moment are. He's also a 9-11 truther of course.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Jesse Ventura endorsed Gary Johnson in 2012 and now he's endorsing Bernie Sanders in 2016.

Let's not pretend he abides by ideological logic.

He just goes wherever the anti-establishment winds of the moment are. He's also a 9-11 truther of course.

He had to make a real choice between Sanders and Trump, though.

[Famous Mortimer]

Jesse Ventura endorsed Gary Johnson in 2012 and now he's endorsing Bernie Sanders in 2016.

Let's not pretend he abides by ideological logic.

He just goes wherever the anti-establishment winds of the moment are. He's also a 9-11 truther of course.

He had to make a real choice between Sanders and Trump, though.

You don't realize just how true this is. When Trump ran for the Reform Party nomination in 2000, he ran with the backing of the Ventura faction of the party. Lots of people even assumed he was a placeholder.

[publicunofficial]

Source

He then walked back and apologized pathetically. Is this what liberal activists have become. Saying 'all lives matter' is now racially insensitive?

yes, because it is literally always used to derail conversations about anti-black violence.

when martin o'malley, in response to black people saying that the police shouldn't be murdering black people, asks "well maybe but also what about us white people," despite the fact that white people are orders of magnitude less likely to be murdered by police, it's at best terrifyingly out of touch.

it's the equivalent of someone asking you to help because their house is on fire, and you respond "house fires are bad, but also the fact that i stubbed my toe is bad"

Martin O'Malley clearly didn't mean it that way. We all know black people are disproportionately subject to police shootings, that should certainly be part of the conversation.  I don't see how during discussing it, saying that all lives matter, not just black lives, is insensitive.

Also, police killing blacks unjustifiably is a house on fire, while police killing whites unjustifiably is stubbing a toe? Its about quantitative difference here, not qualitative. The fact that the left has taken a serious issue (police brutality) and made it about identity politics and race more than the brutality itself is what is turning people like me away from your ideology even further.

A more apt comparison would be your house is on fire, and when you call for help you are told "Sir, we can't just worry about your house, we have to save ALL the houses" when yours is the only one burning.

[Famous Mortimer]

Source

He then walked back and apologized pathetically. Is this what liberal activists have become. Saying 'all lives matter' is now racially insensitive?

yes, because it is literally always used to derail conversations about anti-black violence.

when martin o'malley, in response to black people saying that the police shouldn't be murdering black people, asks "well maybe but also what about us white people," despite the fact that white people are orders of magnitude less likely to be murdered by police, it's at best terrifyingly out of touch.

it's the equivalent of someone asking you to help because their house is on fire, and you respond "house fires are bad, but also the fact that i stubbed my toe is bad"

Martin O'Malley clearly didn't mean it that way. We all know black people are disproportionately subject to police shootings, that should certainly be part of the conversation.  I don't see how during discussing it, saying that all lives matter, not just black lives, is insensitive.

Also, police killing blacks unjustifiably is a house on fire, while police killing whites unjustifiably is stubbing a toe? Its about quantitative difference here, not qualitative. The fact that the left has taken a serious issue (police brutality) and made it about identity politics and race more than the brutality itself is what is turning people like me away from your ideology even further.

A more apt comparison would be your house is on fire, and when you call for help you are told "Sir, we can't just worry about your house, we have to save ALL the houses" when yours is the only one burning.

Jesus, your willful blindness. Clearly some white people's "houses are on fire" too. The cops are overly aggressive with EVERYONE. Yes, it's worse in the Black community but it's bad with everyone. I don't know why people on the left are so terrified to acknowledge this. It actually helps the case for police overhaul.

[ElectionsGuy]

Source

He then walked back and apologized pathetically. Is this what liberal activists have become. Saying 'all lives matter' is now racially insensitive?

yes, because it is literally always used to derail conversations about anti-black violence.

when martin o'malley, in response to black people saying that the police shouldn't be murdering black people, asks "well maybe but also what about us white people," despite the fact that white people are orders of magnitude less likely to be murdered by police, it's at best terrifyingly out of touch.

it's the equivalent of someone asking you to help because their house is on fire, and you respond "house fires are bad, but also the fact that i stubbed my toe is bad"

Martin O'Malley clearly didn't mean it that way. We all know black people are disproportionately subject to police shootings, that should certainly be part of the conversation.  I don't see how during discussing it, saying that all lives matter, not just black lives, is insensitive.

Also, police killing blacks unjustifiably is a house on fire, while police killing whites unjustifiably is stubbing a toe? Its about quantitative difference here, not qualitative. The fact that the left has taken a serious issue (police brutality) and made it about identity politics and race more than the brutality itself is what is turning people like me away from your ideology even further.

A more apt comparison would be your house is on fire, and when you call for help you are told "Sir, we can't just worry about your house, we have to save ALL the houses" when yours is the only one burning.

No, a lot of people's houses are burning. Black people's houses are burning more often then their share of the population would suggest, but a lot of people's houses are still burning. That (I believe) is the accurate analogy. Again, I'll say its misleading that many think this has become more of a racial problem than a policing problem.

[Leinad]

The fact still remains that black people, particularly young black males, are much more likely to be shot, or at least harassed by the police.

And I just pointed out why.

Do you honestly think that Eric Garner would have suffered the same fate if he were white?

I don't know. This is begging the question.

Even if blacks commit a higher percentage of murders, does that really justify police officers specifically stopping unarmed young black men who haven't done anything wrong?

How is that begging the question? If the answer is no, then how can you argue that the police aren't treating black people unfairly?

I think police, and really the government in general, are treating everyone unfairly. It does often seem to be more so blacks than whites, but I think it's probably more of a class divide than a racial divide.

The police system needs to be reformed BADLY. No more "shoot first, ask questions later." No more jailing people for non-violent "crimes." No more lying to suspects. No more "thin blue line" mentality where the bad apples are protected.

To bring this back to politics, we need a President who will focus on criminal justice reform. Seriously, if some nobody just came out of the woodwork and said nothing but things that I agree with on this issue, I'd probably consider voting for them just for that.

The fact still remains that black people, particularly young black males, are much more likely to be shot, or at least harassed by the police.

And I just pointed out why.

Do you honestly think that Eric Garner would have suffered the same fate if he were white?

I don't know. This is begging the question.

Even if blacks commit a higher percentage of murders, does that really justify police officers specifically stopping unarmed young black men who haven't done anything wrong?

How is that begging the question? If the answer is no, then how can you argue that the police aren't treating black people unfairly?

Michael Brown and Eric Garner don't fall in the category of "haven't done anything wrong".  Brown had just committed a strong-arm robbery of a convenience store.  Garner was selling "loosies" cigarettes, which he well knew to be illegal.

Garner actively resisted arrest.  Whatever you think of the seriousness of Garner's charge, he was being lawfully arrested, and he was resisting arrest.  At that point, he became an obese asthmatic with high blood pressure actively resisting arrest, and there are consequences to that which come about when you resist arrest.  Yes, I know that Garner's death was ruled a "homicide", but the definition of  homicide is a death caused by the intentional actions of another person or persons, which is not necessarily an intentional death or a criminal death.

Do black lives matter?  Of course they do, but not to the point where they are entitled to resist arrest with violence when they are lawfully being arrested.  The issues of "community policing" and the practice of enforcing every minor law to cut down on crime, stop and frisk, etc. are separate issues.  Michael Brown's and Eric Garner's (especially Garner's) advocates are arguing the right fo criminals to resist arrest for no more reason than coming down with a case of "I'm not going to jail today!".  Think of the broader implications of advocating that posture.

Michael Brown is a little bit different of a scenario, because IIRC he was actually committing a crime, but he didn't deserve to die. But Eric Garner was arrested for a victimless crime and Freddie Gray was arrested for...running? I don't care how much they resisted their wrongful arrests, THEY SHOULDN'T BE DEAD!!!


The media needs to stop spinning it. Especially towards race. What we don't need is more of this racial tension that we've had in America since forever. If anything, talking about this issue for what it is, unneeded police violence against people, we can band together and combat the real enemy of any notion of equality or a better society: tyrannical authority. I have no ill will towards anyone, except the unrestrained police, the imperialistic military, and the corrupt politicians running it all.

O'Malley's whatever-you-call-this is a distraction. Nothing great, nothing terrible, nothing shocking, nothing depressing. All lives obviously matter. This includes black lives, white lives, and whoever else. That's not a left vs. right issue, that's a healthy, functioning person vs. psychopath issue. The key is with messaging, and people looking for racial undertones when I don't think there are any.

[Kingpoleon]

The fact still remains that black people, particularly young black males, are much more likely to be shot, or at least harassed by the police.

And I just pointed out why.

Do you honestly think that Eric Garner would have suffered the same fate if he were white?

I don't know. This is begging the question.

Even if blacks commit a higher percentage of murders, does that really justify police officers specifically stopping unarmed young black men who haven't done anything wrong?

How is that begging the question? If the answer is no, then how can you argue that the police aren't treating black people unfairly?

Because they are. The point is that black crime ratios per capita is about equal with blacks killed per capita by police.

This is a police problem. This is a racial problem. As blacks act worse than the rest of the population on average, they also are treated worse. It's a multi-side issue.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I don't think the point of "black lives matter" is literally that "black lives matter."  Because, nobody cares if a black person kills a black person.  That's not really a political issue that people care about.

"Black lives matter" applies to situations where blacks are killed by white police officers.  There is no similar situation with white people.  If a white person gets shot by the police, there is no automatic suspicious of racism.

There is if it is a black or minority officer that shoots a white kid.

In my home county, a white inmate with a criminal past died in custody, and the fingers are being pointed already.  People are "just sure" something "illegal" happened, although no one can say what.

I don't deny that Law Enforcement Brutality has been a problem, and will always be a problem as long as you give human beings badges and guns and tell them to control the criminals.  And I don't deny that some of the problem is fueled by racism.  But some suspect/inmate deaths are the results of the suspect/inmate's actions; indeed, the overwhelming majority of such deaths are the result of that the suspect//inmate's actions were. 

And let's not forget that there is a big business of suing law enforcement, and the families of these suspect/inmates who seek "justice" in the form of a big payout.  Which is not to say that Law Enforcement should not face civil liability.  I'm just not willing to assume good motives on the part of all of the "families" of the "victims" here.  I prefer to wait and see the facts of all of these situations.