Black boys punch and stomp on white 6th grader on bus

[Anonymous]

When I was in high school, they integrated the school through bussing. Mind you, there were already local minorities, but they decided to bring in students from the inner city neighborhoods. Know what happened? The girl's room stopped being safe - other girls were robbed of their lunch money and other things. The inner city girls would pull broken glass from their clothing, their hair, and steal from us.

We were used as a social experiment. No one protected us from the fallout of the government's progressive policies. These kids were from unfortunate backgrounds and that was somehow our fault? We were to be put at risk?

Bullshit.

My right to be safe in my school was just as important and their rights to go to a safe school. Except that's not how it worked out. My rights for personal safety turned out to be nullified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Race aside, it clearly is a violent act involving children."

There are instances of violence involving children every day. Would you like the President to comment on all of them? The President commented on the Trayvon Martin killing not because it was violence involving youth, but because it was a national story that proved very divisive.

Please, he contributed to the divisiveness. He didn't just comment.

How, exactly? Because he made a statement of fact ("If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon") that was intended to connect with and demonstrate empathy for the family of a dead teenager? Where ever you came down on Zimmerman's actions, surely we can agree that the family deserved our sympathy, yes? Or was even offering that divisive, part of the "culture war"?

Again, this was a local issue so why comment at all? He commented to create racial divide. If the President had been a white man and had commented similarly on this case, the left would have gone apoplectic. And rightfully so - because it would not be his place.

[Anonymous]

awful, IMO

And no one is telling me that those few bused in weren't racist. They hated you b/c they hated their lives. And everyday - being sent to your school was a reminder of how shitty their lives were.

anger
resentment
hostility
brutal actions

not making excuses for their behavior - But I do see where they're coming from.

But if you were my kid, you'd be in private at that point. No one deserves that treatment - white on black, black on white, hispanic on black, white on Asian - I could go on and on.

Anonymous wrote:When I was in high school, they integrated the school through bussing. Mind you, there were already local minorities, but they decided to bring in students from the inner city neighborhoods. Know what happened? The girl's room stopped being safe - other girls were robbed of their lunch money and other things. The inner city girls would pull broken glass from their clothing, their hair, and steal from us.

We were used as a social experiment. No one protected us from the fallout of the government's progressive policies. These kids were from unfortunate backgrounds and that was somehow our fault? We were to be put at risk?

Bullshit.

My right to be safe in my school was just as important and their rights to go to a safe school. Except that's not how it worked out. My rights for personal safety turned out to be nullified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When I was in high school, they integrated the school through bussing. Mind you, there were already local minorities, but they decided to bring in students from the inner city neighborhoods. Know what happened? The girl's room stopped being safe - other girls were robbed of their lunch money and other things. The inner city girls would pull broken glass from their clothing, their hair, and steal from us.

We were used as a social experiment. No one protected us from the fallout of the government's progressive policies. These kids were from unfortunate backgrounds and that was somehow our fault? We were to be put at risk?

Bullshit.

My right to be safe in my school was just as important and their rights to go to a safe school. Except that's not how it worked out. My rights for personal safety turned out to be nullified.

WTF does this have to do with anything?
I am sorry if you were bullied, but bullies come on in all stripes.
Posters write on this site all the time about their kids being b Everywhere from Bethesda to McLean.
Not all bullies are poor and not all Poor people are bullies.
All kids all people deserve to be kept safe from the people even kids Who are violent.
Do not paint with a broad brush.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was in high school, they integrated the school through bussing. Mind you, there were already local minorities, but they decided to bring in students from the inner city neighborhoods. Know what happened? The girl's room stopped being safe - other girls were robbed of their lunch money and other things. The inner city girls would pull broken glass from their clothing, their hair, and steal from us.

We were used as a social experiment. No one protected us from the fallout of the government's progressive policies. These kids were from unfortunate backgrounds and that was somehow our fault? We were to be put at risk?

Bullshit.

My right to be safe in my school was just as important and their rights to go to a safe school. Except that's not how it worked out. My rights for personal safety turned out to be nullified.

WTF does this have to do with anything?
I am sorry if you were bullied, but bullies come on in all stripes.
Posters write on this site all the time about their kids being b Everywhere from Bethesda to McLean.
Not all bullies are poor and not all Poor people are bullies.
All kids all people deserve to be kept safe from the people even kids Who are violent.
Do not paint with a broad brush.

You don't see any connection?

I work with the violent offenders. They are - in most cases - abused on a daily basis. So when they're around kids who are well adjusted, they become angry and act out. happens all the time - And that's why a regular comprehensive high school doesn't work for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Race aside, it clearly is a violent act involving children."

There are instances of violence involving children every day. Would you like the President to comment on all of them? The President commented on the Trayvon Martin killing not because it was violence involving youth, but because it was a national story that proved very divisive.

Please, he contributed to the divisiveness. He didn't just comment.

How, exactly? Because he made a statement of fact ("If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon") that was intended to connect with and demonstrate empathy for the family of a dead teenager? Where ever you came down on Zimmerman's actions, surely we can agree that the family deserved our sympathy, yes? Or was even offering that divisive, part of the "culture war"?

Again, this was a local issue so why comment at all? He commented to create racial divide. If the President had been a white man and had commented similarly on this case, the left would have gone apoplectic. And rightfully so - because it would not be his place.

By the time Obama responded, it had gone national. There were protests/rallies across the nation. The issue was simmering and went beyond a black/white thing into legitimate questions about police procedures, SYG laws, and the criminal justice system as a whole. Trayvon was shot in February. The President's statement was given in late March. It only proved divisive because conservatives and white supremists were outraged that the President wasn't by default rallying to their side. Obama made a truthful statement: if he had a son, he likely would have looked something like Trayvon. His parents were grieving and looking for the criminal justice system, our government, which is sworn to our and their protection, to protect them. To that point, they felt unprotected. Obama was connecting with them to demonstrate that they were not alone in their grief and in their pursuit of justice, whatever form that justice may take. Is seeking justice divisive? If offering support to the parents of a dead teenager divisive? Is making a statement of fact divisive? Please... tell me what, exactly, what divisive about his initial statements on the matter?

And stop, STOP with the if's. Anyone can construct a hypothetical they aren't required to substantiate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Race aside, it clearly is a violent act involving children."

There are instances of violence involving children every day. Would you like the President to comment on all of them? The President commented on the Trayvon Martin killing not because it was violence involving youth, but because it was a national story that proved very divisive.

Well this would be too if more people had heard about it.

This is the stupidity of the FNC-cultivated bubble. Rather than using their pulpit to tell the news, they use it to talk about the news. How often does FNC (you know, the most watched cable news channel) and other members of the conservative media industrial complex (4 of the top 9 radio shows) bitch about how the media isn't covering something... ignoring that they are the media and they are opting to cover the coverage instead of actually cover the story?

It is self-fulfilling, woe-is-me, self-victimization. "Wahhh... no one listens to us... it's bias... it's a conspiracy." No... no one listens to you because every time you are given a forum, you fill it with whining instead of actual substance.

Um, FNC and other conservative media IS covering those stories - which is why they are wondering why mainstream isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Race aside, it clearly is a violent act involving children."

There are instances of violence involving children every day. Would you like the President to comment on all of them? The President commented on the Trayvon Martin killing not because it was violence involving youth, but because it was a national story that proved very divisive.

Well this would be too if more people had heard about it.

This is the stupidity of the FNC-cultivated bubble. Rather than using their pulpit to tell the news, they use it to talk about the news. How often does FNC (you know, the most watched cable news channel) and other members of the conservative media industrial complex (4 of the top 9 radio shows) bitch about how the media isn't covering something... ignoring that they are the media and they are opting to cover the coverage instead of actually cover the story?

It is self-fulfilling, woe-is-me, self-victimization. "Wahhh... no one listens to us... it's bias... it's a conspiracy." No... no one listens to you because every time you are given a forum, you fill it with whining instead of actual substance.

Um, FNC and other conservative media IS covering those stories - which is why they are wondering why mainstream isn't.

THEY ARE THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA!!! THAT IS WHAT YOU DON'T GET! Just because they aren't the only voice doesn't mean they aren't mainstream.

When they first reported the story, they pushed the racial angle. When they interviewed the leading police officer, he repeated that there was no evidence of race being a factor. What'd they do? Ignore him and push the racial angle anyway. That's not news. That's not reporting. That is editorializing. Don't bitch when your unsubstantiated narrative isn't supported by others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:awful, IMO

And no one is telling me that those few bused in weren't racist. They hated you b/c they hated their lives. And everyday - being sent to your school was a reminder of how shitty their lives were.

anger
resentment
hostility
brutal actions

not making excuses for their behavior - But I do see where they're coming from.

But if you were my kid, you'd be in private at that point. No one deserves that treatment - white on black, black on white, hispanic on black, white on Asian - I could go on and on.

Anonymous wrote:When I was in high school, they integrated the school through bussing. Mind you, there were already local minorities, but they decided to bring in students from the inner city neighborhoods. Know what happened? The girl's room stopped being safe - other girls were robbed of their lunch money and other things. The inner city girls would pull broken glass from their clothing, their hair, and steal from us.

We were used as a social experiment. No one protected us from the fallout of the government's progressive policies. These kids were from unfortunate backgrounds and that was somehow our fault? We were to be put at risk?

Bullshit.

My right to be safe in my school was just as important and their rights to go to a safe school. Except that's not how it worked out. My rights for personal safety turned out to be nullified.

Their rights were NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN MINE, or anyone else's in my school. And yet, these feel-good progressive programs make their rights just that.

I'm sorry they are angry and yes, you ARE excusing their behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Race aside, it clearly is a violent act involving children."

There are instances of violence involving children every day. Would you like the President to comment on all of them? The President commented on the Trayvon Martin killing not because it was violence involving youth, but because it was a national story that proved very divisive.

Well this would be too if more people had heard about it.

This is the stupidity of the FNC-cultivated bubble. Rather than using their pulpit to tell the news, they use it to talk about the news. How often does FNC (you know, the most watched cable news channel) and other members of the conservative media industrial complex (4 of the top 9 radio shows) bitch about how the media isn't covering something... ignoring that they are the media and they are opting to cover the coverage instead of actually cover the story?

It is self-fulfilling, woe-is-me, self-victimization. "Wahhh... no one listens to us... it's bias... it's a conspiracy." No... no one listens to you because every time you are given a forum, you fill it with whining instead of actual substance.

Um, FNC and other conservative media IS covering those stories - which is why they are wondering why mainstream isn't.

THEY ARE THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA!!! THAT IS WHAT YOU DON'T GET! Just because they aren't the only voice doesn't mean they aren't mainstream.

When they first reported the story, they pushed the racial angle. When they interviewed the leading police officer, he repeated that there was no evidence of race being a factor. What'd they do? Ignore him and push the racial angle anyway. That's not news. That's not reporting. That is editorializing. Don't bitch when your unsubstantiated narrative isn't supported by others.

According to liberal media and liberals, they are NOT mainstream; they are 'faux news' after all. Isn't that what you call them?

The racial angle to this, as you call it, is that the same voices calling Zimmerman a racist are dead-silent. DEAD silent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Race aside, it clearly is a violent act involving children."

There are instances of violence involving children every day. Would you like the President to comment on all of them? The President commented on the Trayvon Martin killing not because it was violence involving youth, but because it was a national story that proved very divisive.

Please, he contributed to the divisiveness. He didn't just comment.

How, exactly? Because he made a statement of fact ("If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon") that was intended to connect with and demonstrate empathy for the family of a dead teenager? Where ever you came down on Zimmerman's actions, surely we can agree that the family deserved our sympathy, yes? Or was even offering that divisive, part of the "culture war"?

Again, this was a local issue so why comment at all? He commented to create racial divide. If the President had been a white man and had commented similarly on this case, the left would have gone apoplectic. And rightfully so - because it would not be his place.

By the time Obama responded, it had gone national. There were protests/rallies across the nation. The issue was simmering and went beyond a black/white thing into legitimate questions about police procedures, SYG laws, and the criminal justice system as a whole. Trayvon was shot in February. The President's statement was given in late March. It only proved divisive because conservatives and white supremists were outraged that the President wasn't by default rallying to their side. Obama made a truthful statement: if he had a son, he likely would have looked something like Trayvon. His parents were grieving and looking for the criminal justice system, our government, which is sworn to our and their protection, to protect them. To that point, they felt unprotected. Obama was connecting with them to demonstrate that they were not alone in their grief and in their pursuit of justice, whatever form that justice may take. Is seeking justice divisive? If offering support to the parents of a dead teenager divisive? Is making a statement of fact divisive? Please... tell me what, exactly, what divisive about his initial statements on the matter?

And stop, STOP with the if's. Anyone can construct a hypothetical they aren't required to substantiate.

And he added fuel to the fire by stating that if he had a son, he'd look like Trayvon. That implied Zimmerman shot Trayvon simply because he was black, which is absolute horseshit.

Plenty of parents are grieving. The parents of the four men slain in Benghazi were grieving and they got lies and cover-ups. So don't give me the "Obama sympathy card" BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:awful, IMO

And no one is telling me that those few bused in weren't racist. They hated you b/c they hated their lives. And everyday - being sent to your school was a reminder of how shitty their lives were.

anger
resentment
hostility
brutal actions

not making excuses for their behavior - But I do see where they're coming from.

But if you were my kid, you'd be in private at that point. No one deserves that treatment - white on black, black on white, hispanic on black, white on Asian - I could go on and on.

Anonymous wrote:When I was in high school, they integrated the school through bussing. Mind you, there were already local minorities, but they decided to bring in students from the inner city neighborhoods. Know what happened? The girl's room stopped being safe - other girls were robbed of their lunch money and other things. The inner city girls would pull broken glass from their clothing, their hair, and steal from us.

We were used as a social experiment. No one protected us from the fallout of the government's progressive policies. These kids were from unfortunate backgrounds and that was somehow our fault? We were to be put at risk?

Bullshit.

My right to be safe in my school was just as important and their rights to go to a safe school. Except that's not how it worked out. My rights for personal safety turned out to be nullified.

Their rights were NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN MINE, or anyone else's in my school. And yet, these feel-good progressive programs make their rights just that.

I'm sorry they are angry and yes, you ARE excusing their behavior.

It's either work with these kids by finding out what makes them tick, or send them out into the world to become Trayvons and the three kids on the video.

Which would you prefer? to be mugged (or worse) by some angry kid or know that s/he can function in society

not saying YOU'RE the right one for the job -Clearly you're too hostile and resentful yourself to see straight. But someone's got to do it.

no excuses - just figuring out WHY people become such shitty humans

And it's easier to save a kid than it is to save an adult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:awful, IMO

And no one is telling me that those few bused in weren't racist. They hated you b/c they hated their lives. And everyday - being sent to your school was a reminder of how shitty their lives were.

anger
resentment
hostility
brutal actions

not making excuses for their behavior - But I do see where they're coming from.

But if you were my kid, you'd be in private at that point. No one deserves that treatment - white on black, black on white, hispanic on black, white on Asian - I could go on and on.

Anonymous wrote:When I was in high school, they integrated the school through bussing. Mind you, there were already local minorities, but they decided to bring in students from the inner city neighborhoods. Know what happened? The girl's room stopped being safe - other girls were robbed of their lunch money and other things. The inner city girls would pull broken glass from their clothing, their hair, and steal from us.

We were used as a social experiment. No one protected us from the fallout of the government's progressive policies. These kids were from unfortunate backgrounds and that was somehow our fault? We were to be put at risk?

Bullshit.

My right to be safe in my school was just as important and their rights to go to a safe school. Except that's not how it worked out. My rights for personal safety turned out to be nullified.

Their rights were NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN MINE, or anyone else's in my school. And yet, these feel-good progressive programs make their rights just that.

I'm sorry they are angry and yes, you ARE excusing their behavior.

It's either work with these kids by finding out what makes them tick, or send them out into the world to become Trayvons and the three kids on the video.

Which would you prefer? to be mugged (or worse) by some angry kid or know that s/he can function in society

not saying YOU'RE the right one for the job -Clearly you're too hostile and resentful yourself to see straight. But someone's got to do it.

no excuses - just figuring out WHY people become such shitty humans

And it's easier to save a kid than it is to save an adult.

Shut up alresdy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Race aside, it clearly is a violent act involving children."

There are instances of violence involving children every day. Would you like the President to comment on all of them? The President commented on the Trayvon Martin killing not because it was violence involving youth, but because it was a national story that proved very divisive.

Well this would be too if more people had heard about it.

This is the stupidity of the FNC-cultivated bubble. Rather than using their pulpit to tell the news, they use it to talk about the news. How often does FNC (you know, the most watched cable news channel) and other members of the conservative media industrial complex (4 of the top 9 radio shows) bitch about how the media isn't covering something... ignoring that they are the media and they are opting to cover the coverage instead of actually cover the story?

It is self-fulfilling, woe-is-me, self-victimization. "Wahhh... no one listens to us... it's bias... it's a conspiracy." No... no one listens to you because every time you are given a forum, you fill it with whining instead of actual substance.

Um, FNC and other conservative media IS covering those stories - which is why they are wondering why mainstream isn't.

THEY ARE THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA!!! THAT IS WHAT YOU DON'T GET! Just because they aren't the only voice doesn't mean they aren't mainstream.

When they first reported the story, they pushed the racial angle. When they interviewed the leading police officer, he repeated that there was no evidence of race being a factor. What'd they do? Ignore him and push the racial angle anyway. That's not news. That's not reporting. That is editorializing. Don't bitch when your unsubstantiated narrative isn't supported by others.

According to liberal media and liberals, they are NOT mainstream; they are 'faux news' after all. Isn't that what you call them?

The racial angle to this, as you call it, is that the same voices calling Zimmerman a racist are dead-silent. DEAD silent.

Show me a mainstream media source that called Zimmerman racist. One with at least half the audience of Fox.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Race aside, it clearly is a violent act involving children."

There are instances of violence involving children every day. Would you like the President to comment on all of them? The President commented on the Trayvon Martin killing not because it was violence involving youth, but because it was a national story that proved very divisive.

Please, he contributed to the divisiveness. He didn't just comment.

How, exactly? Because he made a statement of fact ("If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon") that was intended to connect with and demonstrate empathy for the family of a dead teenager? Where ever you came down on Zimmerman's actions, surely we can agree that the family deserved our sympathy, yes? Or was even offering that divisive, part of the "culture war"?

Again, this was a local issue so why comment at all? He commented to create racial divide. If the President had been a white man and had commented similarly on this case, the left would have gone apoplectic. And rightfully so - because it would not be his place.

By the time Obama responded, it had gone national. There were protests/rallies across the nation. The issue was simmering and went beyond a black/white thing into legitimate questions about police procedures, SYG laws, and the criminal justice system as a whole. Trayvon was shot in February. The President's statement was given in late March. It only proved divisive because conservatives and white supremists were outraged that the President wasn't by default rallying to their side. Obama made a truthful statement: if he had a son, he likely would have looked something like Trayvon. His parents were grieving and looking for the criminal justice system, our government, which is sworn to our and their protection, to protect them. To that point, they felt unprotected. Obama was connecting with them to demonstrate that they were not alone in their grief and in their pursuit of justice, whatever form that justice may take. Is seeking justice divisive? If offering support to the parents of a dead teenager divisive? Is making a statement of fact divisive? Please... tell me what, exactly, what divisive about his initial statements on the matter?

And stop, STOP with the if's. Anyone can construct a hypothetical they aren't required to substantiate.

And he added fuel to the fire by stating that if he had a son, he'd look like Trayvon. That implied Zimmerman shot Trayvon simply because he was black, which is absolute horseshit.

Plenty of parents are grieving. The parents of the four men slain in Benghazi were grieving and they got lies and cover-ups. So don't give me the "Obama sympathy card" BS.

If you interpret an expression of sympathy as "fuel to the fire", you are a petty, angry person.