You’re going to hurt yourself with these contortions.
He’s black man who sodomized and raped a 12yo boy.
Does his being black have anything to do with the crime?
“Cleveland man” is a perfectly benign statement and one that identifies the place where the crime happened. Why would someone see an attack on Cleveland when all it is called out for is having men there, with the statement “Cleveland man”?
“Texas racist” is ENTIRELY different. It is a statement equating Texas with racism - not at all benign Simply Trying quite specifically qualified the racist as a “Texas racist.” when the state that LBJ was from wasn’t an issue of importance for a story - as “Cleveland man” was - or even a necessary qualifier. We all know where LBJ was from.
But he chose to qualify LBJ as a “Texas racist” as if that made sense to link the things in his description.
We get it. We have seen this before.
M
That doesn’t even begin to prove what you’re trying to make it say.
He’s a Cleveland man accused of raping a child.
Does not mean all Cleveland men are Black Child Rapists.
You know…I hear today people asking “What’s going on in America…”
Well I’ll tell you what:
The sore loser Left is so angry they are eating their own and biting their own ass in despair over a lost election.
Keep twisting Lucy, it’s hilarious watching the hypocrites choke.
You’re making up an argument no one else is having.
No one said LBJ was a white racist. He was a Texas racist.
You’re making up an argument no one else is having, and conflating the way newspapers write stories with how people talk on an anonymous message board.
You’re right, you are hilarious. Thanks!
1 Like
LBJ said he’ll have blacks voting D for 200 years.
What do you think he meant with that?
And the implication would be the same in both cases. There was no reason for the statement otherwise.
Hopefully he wasn’t right but so far he has been.
So then not all from Texas are racists.
Just like in 2008 and 2012 huh?
Correct. Thank you.
Exactly!
Char
Nope. You’re the only one that came to that conclusion. The author even explained for you. Why won’t you just stick to the facts of what he said instead of inserting your interpretation?
Because mealy mouthed excuses don’t cut it.
The author realized that he was being called out and backtracked as fast as he could.
AGAIN, we have been to this rodeo many times before.
M
No self-awareness here.
1 Like
Total obliviousness.
No.
It was “Cleveland MAN…” - not Cleveland rapist who is a man.
It was “Texas RACIST” - not Texas man who is a racist.
The qualifyer of location has a distinctly different purpose in each. A MAN is not a harsh subject. A racist is. Cleveland is associated with men, while Texas is associated with racists.
Stop defending this obvious prejudice.
M
