Actually if you look, I didn't quote you, I paraphrased what you've lied for years, barely missing quoting your recent false claims....i accidentally switched the word "crime" and "killing".
Where's the meaningful difference?
It's still a blatantly racist lie of extreme exaggeration....But you're correct, you recently lied that 99% of black homicides are by other blacks and 1% by police...recently you only imply the lie that 99% of crime against blacks is black on black crime.
The real number if I recall topped out at about 91%, about 7% more than white on white crime at the maximum and falling since 2012 or so. In 2018, 81% of white homicides were white on white, 89% black on black. Claiming it was EVER 99% black on black and 1% police (so 0% white or non black on black) is a bold faced racist lie racists tell....you've been telling it for years despite being shown the real crime statistics from the FBI repeatedly. The slight discrepancy is easily explained by higher poverty rates among blacks and redlining, forcing blacks to live only in designated minority areas with other blacks while whites can buy property anywhere.

You never ask why white Karens are so disrespectful, do you.
We know why you think....because you think most black families don't include fathers, because you believe black men don't raise children, they abandon them.

Maybe it's because they've been disrespected, often to death, for 400 years and don't see a reason to respect their bullies....Just a guess.

No I don't, my pair are grown, I don't need to grow a second pair, nor do I need to show them to little girls like you. Funny, you subconsciously know I have a pair so you call me nutboy...because you imagine them so large they're the main focus of my appearance. Thanks for the unintended compliment.

Lyrics and chords:
'I’ve No More Fucks To Give' By Thomas Benjamin Wild Esq

(Uke tuning GCEA)

Intro - Bb C7 F7 Bb

Verse 1

Bb
I’ve tried, tried, tried
F7
And I’ve tried even more
F7
I’ve Cried, Cried, Cried
Bb
And I can’t recall what for
Bb
I’ve pressed, I’ve pushed, I’ve yelled, I’ve begged
C7
In hope of some success

But the inevitable fact is that
F7
It never will impress

Chorus 1

Bb
I’ve no more fucks to give,
C7
My fucks have runneth dry,
F7
I’ve tried to go fuck shopping
Bb
But there’s no fucks left to buy

I’ve no more fucks to give,
C7
Though more fucks I’ve tried to get,
F7
I’m over my fuck budget and
Bb
I’m now in fucking debt

Verse 2
I strive, strive, strive
To get everything done
I’ve played by all the rules
But I’ve very rarely won,
I’ve smiled, I’ve charmed, I’ve wooed
I’ve laughed,
Alas to no avail
I’ve run round like a moron,
To unequivocally fail!

Chorus 2
I’ve no more fucks to give,
My fuck fuse has just blown,
I’ve been hunting for my fucks all day,
But they’ve upped and fucked off home,
I’ve no more fucks to give,
My fuck rations are depleted,
I’ve rallied my fuck army but
It’s been fucking defeated!

Bridge

Eb Bb
The effort has just not been worth
F7 Bb Bb7
The time or the expense
D7 Gm7
I’ve exhausted all my energy
C7 F7
For minimal recompense
Eb Bb
The complete lack of acknowledgement
F7 Bb Bb7
Has now begun to gall
C7
And I’ve come to realise that I
F7
Don’t give a fuck at all!

Chorus 3
I’ve no more fucks to give,
My fucks have flown away,
My fucks are now so fucked off
They’ve refused to fucking stay!
I’ve no more fucks to give,
My fucks have gone insane
They’ve come back round and passed me
While they’re fucking off again!

Chorus 4
I’ve no more fucks to give,
My fucks have all dissolved,
I’ve planned many projects
But my fucks won’t be involved!
I’ve no more fucks to give,
My fucks have all been spent,
They’ve fucked off from the building
And I don’t know where they went!

Outro
E Bb
I’ve no more fucks to give,
F7 Bb Bb7
I’ve no more fucks to give,
E
I’ve no more fucks,
Bb
I’ve no more fucks,
F7 Bb F7 Bb
I’ve no more fucks to give!

Those are decent points, but have absolutely zero to do with the mass abandoning of their positions. It was 100% due to one of their own being charged after beating nonviolent protesters. They originally admitted exactly that, and now that they aren't being supported in their walkout, they are coming up with excuses that didn't matter to them the day before the officer was charged.

I think they should have to pay for the training and equipment they now refuse to use.

What are you talking about? You think budget cuts caused time off to be cancelled?! It costs double to not rotate in other officers, because you pay those on duty overtime, it doesn't make it cheaper. Budget cuts were not the issue when these cops were doing crowd control, only now that they're suddenly called to account for their own actions. No time off temporarily, because of extreme circumstances, was not an issue until one of their own was charged. It's certainly not abnormal, and absolutely not because of budget cuts, it costs more.

No prosecutions is the norm, if I recall, over 98% of charges levied at protesters have been dismissed nation wide, mostly because police had no evidence to back the charges they brought. You might note, as described in the article, "Mr. Schmidt immediately announced that he would focus on prosecuting cases of violence or vandalism; protesters who simply resisted arrest or refused to disperse after a police order would not necessarily be charged." They are taking a stand against anarchic violent protesters, but not the peaceful protesters with a legitimate gripe about violent, racist, deadly police acting as an anarchist gang that believes rules only apply to you, not them.

There are few prosecutions in large part because police declare riots when all participants are peaceful and not causing damage, and police are almost always the one's giving the orders to remove the people they declared "rioters", and in most cases they have zero evidence to back up their declarations, and are as violent as possible, beating peaceful videographers and reporters who were trapped and could not disperse, then charging them with refusal to disperse and resisting arrest, even violence against police for attacking police batons with their faces.
(Edit: remember the freeway shutdown when they marched on the freeway, and police blocked them from exiting or continuing while a second group of police came from behind, forcing them into a small fenced in area with no exit, then charged them all with refusal to disperse and the few that tried to disperse were charged with attacking police officers who blocked every escape route, violently attacking anyone trying to leave...all on live tv?)
Many peaceful protests became riots only after police moved in to violently disperse protests, fully 1/2 were riots because counter protesters and bad right wing actors like proud and boogaloo boys were planting bombs, shooting crowds, starting fires, driving through crowds, and murdering police in an effort to paint protesters as violent anarchists. That is verified fact directly from the DOJ investigation.

It's not a Portland only thing, police abandoning their communities because, as they indicated to the DA, "“It was like, ‘There’s our team and there’s their team, and you are on their team and you’re not on our team. And we’ve never had a D.A. not be on our team before,’” Police assume they are on a team against citizens, and won't do their jobs if, by doing them wrong with bias and malice, they might be prosecuted. They are used to immunity, and don't know how to do their jobs without it because they are abusers of power.

One day after charges were levied they quit in solidarity with the criminal abusive cop, and came up with fake excuses later.

You seem to have missed "the Justice Department said that the city’s Police Bureau was violating its own use-of-force policies during crowd-control operations, and that supervisors were not properly investigating complaints." part.

The bugs bunny quote was exactly my intent, @JiggaJonson , a mispronunciation of moron. I do not think Bugs was using a racial slur against Taz, but Looney tunes definitely got racist so what do I know?!
This is first I recall that I've ever heard it's a racial slur, although Cimarrón is a term I remember vaguely from history class. Thanks for the education.

I hadn't noticed you'd posted this video to my page until now - thanks! Very chill. Do you happen to recall what that might have been in response to, if anything?

So....anyone recall how Barrett swore she would recuse herself from any case she had a personal interest in? Specifically about abortion cases....she didn't, religious cases, she didn't, and now she's refusing to recuse herself in a case against the Koch brothers PAC Americans for prosperity, that actually spent millions running ads to support her during her confirmation hearing.
This isn't just a blatant conflict of interest, it's pure pay for play bribery of a supreme court "justice". She should be not just removed but disbarred.
At some point this outrageous behavior by the highest court will end in assassination, it's the only way to remove them.

This is why, for every seat filled by Trump's criminal cronies who are all crooked as a pig's penis, we need to add two seats filled with actual judges with integrity, not prejudiced bigoted rapists and liars....add three for the seat stolen from Obama.

And the police departments fight tooth and nail against justice for whistleblowers or accountability for criminal cops. She got her pension back, but only after a 13 year extreme legal battle, crafting new laws herself and pushing them through, and special personal treatment from the courts and governor, and she didn't recover her career, nor the almost 15 years of struggling starting with extended forced unpaid leave followed by unemployment without her earned benefits and with a huge black mark on her record. If I recall, they tried to prosecute her for assault on a police officer for stopping a murder of a handcuffed citizen, and that goes on her employment record.

What on earth are you talking about?
Do you believe the government dictates your vows? What "rules"? You just cannot grasp the concept of no fault divorce or prenuptial, can you?

I guess you never planned on kids or shared assets. If you do, not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives, and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first. Uncle Sam is in your relationship, married or not....without a marriage contract, he makes ALL the rules and you have no say.

My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas that in my state would have cost under $10K and you congratulate him? You are one strange person.

Again, your perception, not based in fact since the 60's. You assume women take off time to raise the kids and take care of parents and assume fathers don't take paternity leave or have obligations outside work. How 50's. You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. It certainly hasn't been my experience, I've seen women in the workplace working harder and longer for less pay, sacrificing just like their male counterparts if not more, putting off having families until it's too late while men can have kids long after normal retirement age, putting themselves in dangerous situations where those with power over them have opportunities to abuse that power and abuse those women in ways that rarely happen to men. These aren't exceptions, they're the norm.

Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that, meaning soon women in most catagories will out earn men and have more to lose, you admit you're wrong in your position now, right? Of course not, I expect you will still start from a point that hasn't been correct since the era and sexual revolution, early 70's at latest.

No, many of the studies I've seen compared people in the same exact positions in the same industries, even same companies, and women consistently get paid less for the exact same job and hours, and women rarely work less today, and just as often out work their male counterparts knowing they are often token hires not valued by the bosses so have less job security. If I recall correctly, 80% of job losses due to Covid were women, and the men are getting rehired faster. I think you are thinking of some studies from the 80's that made those assumptions and accusations. Comparing apples to apples, women still get shortchanged and as often as not overworked.

Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk
Tends to have short relationships? Too much risk
Likes attention? Too much risk
Single mother (non-widow)? Too much risk
Any mental issues (depression, bipolar, narcissist, anxiety, etc)? Too much risk
Older (why you still single...)? Too much risk
Likes to party? Too much risk
Drinks? Too much risk"

And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are? Specify what you expect and agree, and you walk with exactly what you agreed to, no government rules or split involved. Geez. You speak as if you had never heard of them.

Most divorces may be initiated by the woman (if that's true, I expect it's just another assumption) because their husbands are more likely to break their vows first, but are not willing to pay to end the marriage, including penalties for breaking the marriage contract, and we're too dumb to get a prenuptial (or got one that spells out harsh penalties for cheating). Yes, I am assuming men cheat on their spouses more often than the reverse, because men are wired that way.

You are not more likely than not to face a divorce, because it's unlikely any woman meeting your criteria would give you a second thought, and you need to get married to get divorced.

I bet if you show your significant other this thread your 20 year relationship will be in big trouble, or at best enter a long dry dark spell. Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches that take more than they deserve or even could give back and destroy you whenever they think it serves them. It's probably a good thing you aren't married.

Laws and family court aren't as you describe. Maybe when you enter the 21st century you'll recognize that. The rules of your marriage can be whatever you agree to, including the specifics of the split if it ends.

It's a sad thing you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks.....almost always unless one or both of you are total douchebags.

My Pops had a prophet 2000 the mid 80's. The first home digital sampling synth. It had all these options and more to apply to either the basic hum or to any sample. It had reverb, attack, sustain, decay, multiple preset wave forms, speed (of the sample), pitch and tone, and probably 1/2 dozen more I can't recall, all in a keyboard size unit, not a full pipe organ size. The samples came or could be recorded on 3 1/2" floppies, and you could store a huge number of presets to modify them as you wished at the push of one button, not a complete retuning with multiple dials. I had fun remixing James Brown and Prince, but never learned to play well.
Amazing the advancements they made in just 15 years.

Either I am correct or Trump lost due to fraud, not both. (Although in one sense he did....he lost in part due to his own frauds being so blatant that most Americans couldn't ignore them)

Since all those who claimed to have the only evidence of fraud have admitted they were lying, such stupid lies no reasonable person could believe them, it's pretty clear I am correct, there was no significant fraud, only a few verified cases of Trump voters voting twice.

Fox recanted, OANN recanted, even newsmax recanted, now the lawyers who filed the cases claiming fraud admit there never was fraud, it was silly baseless political hyperbole no reasonable person could possibly believe. The only ones still claiming fraud are named Trump or are crackheads with brain damage....or both.

Didn't you ever think it was odd to believe there was massive fraud in one race, but none at all in the rest, even though they were on the same ballot, counted the same way by the same machines and people?

The only court cases still being fought are the criminal cases against Trump, now over 30 of them if I recall correctly, and the multi billion dollar lawsuits against those who spread the election fraud lie you still believe after they admitted it's a lie. There are not any cases left about meaningful election fraud. None that could possibly overturn the results. Where did you get this claim? The same people who said there was massive fraud and now say those claims are so ridiculous no reasonable person could take them seriously? You're really going to let them make you a fool again even as they laugh at your stupidity for believing them in the first place?
Trump lost...bigly...even with all his attempts to disenfranchise millions of voters fraudulently, even with hundreds of thousands of mail in votes gone missing under Dejoy, gerrymandering, grossly unequal access to polls, voter purging of democratic registration lists, etc he lost by millions. It would be nice to see you accept that reality, but I have little hope. As those who inform you have said, you aren't a reasonable adult.

should heed newt on that tangled.

that's the straight dope.

they had folks on tape talking about how they shut down power to the state. they laughed about it.

seriously, it might open yer eyes. if anything, you could read how a DEMOCRAT governor got recalled and was replaced by a REPUBLICAN!!!... due to the evilness of Enron.

so at least, there is an *eye-roll* a happy ending /s.

I haven't watched the hearings. To me it's still a case of bread and circuses. They can't convict, so all of this is just an attempt to burn these images into a voting publics mind that forgets events longer than 6 months ago. This won't even be remembered by the average person by the next votes in 2022. Just like most people don't recall the riots that were sort of incited by liberals in 2017 prior to and during the inauguration. Admittedly, they didn't storm congress, but they did break into buildings, burn cars, and injure people.

Did Trump probably intend for violence? Probably, but proving his thoughts are going to take a lot more than words he used. Thankfully we haven't started putting people away for thoughtcrimes yet or I would be fucked.

Awesome.

I often recall this episode and tell my kids about it, though I've never actually shown them this episode.

I'll have to be sure to play this for them tomorrow.