not my fault you're too dumb to understand simple numbers.
not every dumb person is a racist, but all racists are pretty damn dumb.
Could you explain the graph to me? It really doesnt make sense, negative percentages and some way over 100..
not my fault you're too dumb to understand simple numbers.
not every dumb person is a racist, but all racists are pretty damn dumb.
573% of RIU members agree, Buck is boring.
Could you explain the graph to me? It really doesnt make sense, negative percentages and some way over 100..
then you are for denial of rights.
choose one, you can't have both. human nature is what it is, and the desert rats of the world who would keep blacks away from their supposedly "open to the public" lunch counters do exist.
-41% of people are religious, whereas 243% call on God when in a fox hole.
then you are for denial of rights.
choose one, you can't have both. human nature is what it is, and the desert rats of the world who would keep blacks away from their supposedly "open to the public" lunch counters do exist.
Could you explain the graph to me? It really doesnt make sense, negative percentages and some way over 100..
Nope. At the core, people, all people, have a right to choosing who they will associate with and how they will use their property. Legislation that MAKES people associate potentially deprives at least one party, of that choice. Yes sadly racists do exist. However, does a racist "own" his property? If the answer is Yes.... then THAT person should determine its use, not you, not me, not the government. My recognition of who owns their property, doesn't mean I would make the same choices as others would.
IF a person owns something, then THEY determine it's use...or they don't own it. Choose one, you can't have both.
Nope. At the core, people, all people, have a right to choosing who they will associate with and how they will use their property. Legislation that MAKES people associate potentially deprives at least one party, of that choice. Yes sadly racists do exist. However, does a racist "own" his property? If the answer is Yes.... then THAT person should determine its use, not you, not me, not the government. My recognition of who owns their property, doesn't mean I would make the same choices as others would.
IF a person owns something, then THEY determine it's use...or they don't own it. Choose one, you can't have both.
if 10% of white on white killings were found justifiable, and 40% of white on black killings were found justifiable, then white on black killings would be 400% (or four times) more likely to be found justifiable.
whereas if 10% of white on white killings were found justifiable, but only 5% of black on white killings were found justifiable, the black on white killings would be 100% (or one time) less likely to be found justifiable.
if it is more likely, it is a positive percentage. if it is less likely, it is a negative percentage.
i can't believe i have to explain simple 5th grade math to a bunch of grown adults. this is a perfect demonstration of how stupid righties are (i have noticed bombur is a righty, too).
heck, if the south could, they'd be doing it right now..
Proof that Buck is supercilious ass, and God hangs from his balls:
![]()
everybody please vote 4 stars because desert dude rated me 1 and i need to counteract to bring back to 4 stars
thank you
schuylaar<3
The south is a collective term and fails to recognize that individuals exist. Some people would, some people wouldn't. As long as the person that owns the property confines his choice to his own property, he hasn't initiated aggression against anyone has he? He's just making a choice about his own property. Why do you think others should tell you what you can or cannot do with your own property?
I'm also not stupid, your graph simply did a poor job of explaining what it meant.
i can't believe i have to explain simple 5th grade math to a bunch of grown adults. this is a perfect demonstration of how stupid righties are (i have noticed bombur is a righty, too).