Here is more BASE for you:

More Obama legacy and effect in the community he "organized":
Chicago murder rate declines but still alarmingly high

This is what a place looks like under Democrat control. I tried to take a walk in San Francisco, got off the train at 16th and Mission. Poverty was like Calcutta in the 1970's. Was warned not to wander around there. Quickly got back on the train to Embarcadero.

I'd be glad to get rid of other traces of Obama's presidency as quickly as possible, lest it continues to spread like an infectious disease.

So the headline of the source you quote is it went down under him, and you criticise this. Wowza.

Actually no - you're diametrically wrong there - Trump took office on Jan 20 , 2017 so over 11/12ths of the decline in the violence in Chicago (although that itself is inaccurate - it's confined to a few areas within Chicago) was under Trump rather than Obama.

What was that about subtleties again ??

The Obama-organized community in Chicago accounts for 30% of the rise in murder in the US.

Question for you is where is Black Lives Matter and Obama when black people are killing black people disproportionately to law enforcement incidents?

Murder is now the middle ground?

Fields now faces a charge of first-degree murder.

Source

Stoop back down to your own level :

What does "shurely" mean?
Might be a good moment to get back to the thread title subject?

see here

Fake news.

Fake news.

You are mixing two different topics together.

1. It is agreed by the authorities that the sad death in Charlotsville was murder so my post "Murder is now the middle ground" was correct.

2. I posted "Fields now faces a charge of first-degree murder." which is also correct; he may be found to be guilty or not guilty in a subsequent court case so far he was only charged.

Speaking of poverty, Alabama, a rigorously Republican part of the US, has the worst poverty in the developed world:

http://www.newsweek.com/alabama-un-p...-racism-743601

Also hookworm has returned there, a parasitic infection due to poor water quality.

Lowndes County in Alabama, the most impoverished part of the state, represented by Democrats. Its the usual ghetto story in the US:

http://www.legislature.state.al.us/a...ID_PERSON=7697
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_Sewell

I merely held you to your own remarkably low standards. Keep wriggling.

Help me out here - that lady looks to have pretty good credentials - what am I missing ??

I'm not exactly sure, but it is a pattern repeated everywhere, all the way to coastal urban areas. The Democrats garner lots of votes from minorities, yet they never elevate their standard of living, generation after generation. I assume it is the false promise of identity politics, which is racist in its own rite.

The ones who elevate their lives are those who get an education, learn about self-sufficiency and move out, typically to republican neighborhoods, and inevitably become republicans. Go figure.

Would you care to explain your post for those of us poor libtards who have no clue what your point was?

It reminds me of Buenos Aires. There are tin shack ghettos where no police would venture to go - areas that are completely neglected by city planning officials, housing authorities, etc. and that receive virtually no public funds. Yet the people who live in these slums have the right to vote...


And so the politicians arrive before the elections and try to out-do eachother with the handouts to the poor ghetto dwellers. A big turkey to eat in exchange for a vote, for example.


Here in the US, they hand out welfare checks instead of turkeys. The end goal is not to elevate people out of poverty, but to secure their allegiance and their vote. If they were no longer dependent on the welfare system, they would have no reason to continue voting for politicians who promise welfare benefits.


edit/add: welfare system dependency and abuse is embedded and glorified in the culture.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwI-a1LjpiA


for those who don't know, the '1st of the month' is the day the welfare checks arrive.

__________________
you are being programmed

One senator doesn't set the entire policy for the county. The problem usually starts at the state legislature level, and then the county boards/commissions. Perhaps these voters chose this democrat in hopes of getting things to change. Some people get into office not because of the party they belong to but because the voters think the person would do a good job.

Look at Trump. Most people didn't vote for him because he aligned himself with the Republicans. They voted for him because A) they thought he'd do a good job and/or B) they thought Hillary would be far worse.

Thomas Sowell does an excellent job of explaining the phenomenon: