Bloomberg is 5-8. I guess Rand Paul needs to not bother running for re-election because apparently there is now a height limit for men to run for office (I'm 5-9 so I may be too short too, although I'm not planning on running for anything soon).

(02-11-2020 01:51 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Bloomberg is 5-8.

Source?

I have no idea and don’t care, but I’ve heard he’s shorter than that ever since he became Mayor in 2001.

Manlets don't win the presidency. You'd have to go all the way back to the late 1800's to find someone of bloomberg's height, and that was probably above-average back then.

lmfao

The crux of this is that there are minorities who went to prison or otherwise had their lives turned upside down not because of probable cause or constitutionally valid statutes, or systemic racism, it was solely because they were targeted due to their gender, age and skin color due to a mandate by the guy in charge of the city and cops.

That’s not a good look for Bloomberg or New York.

(02-11-2020 02:01 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Manlets don't win the presidency. You'd have to go all the way back to the late 1800's to find someone of bloomberg's height, and that was probably above-average back then.

Probably since the age of TVs in every home. Uphill battle for short men to win POTUS.

I agree that we should focus resources in areas where the situation demands.

I agree that statistics can help us identify areas more prone to various types of crime -- across the spectrum.

But I do believe it is wrong to pinpoint an individual simply because he or she might fit a profile.

This is different, however, than if that individual fit a suspect identified by an eyewitness or a video. At that point you have very specific information which leads you to believe that specific individual IS the individual in question.

I understand this makes law enforcement's job more difficult, but that's just the way it is.


Several years ago when I was in college a friend of mine and I wrote music together. We had just left his parents' house a few minutes prior. I saw a blue light behind us so I pulled over.

The officer (white) walked up to the car and said, "I know what a white guy and a black guy are doing together in this part of town."

That's THE reason why he pulled us over. We had not done anything wrong and there had not been a crime committed recently in which a black guy and a white guy in a red Trans Am had been suspect.

At the time I didn't know any better and consented to let him search the car. We hadn't done anything wrong so it wasn't a problem.

Fast-forward a couple of decades...

We've heard the justification, "If you don't have anything to hide you don't have anything to worry about."

No! You have NO reason to suspect me unless you can build a case based on evidence which was lawfully obtained. PERIOD.

https://www1.nyc.gov/site/nypd/stats/rep...icide.page

2018 6.6% of homicide suspects white.
90% Black or Hispanic
rest seem to Asian

I enjoy a good frisking from time to time.

(02-11-2020 01:51 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Bloomberg is 5-8. I guess Rand Paul needs to not bother running for re-election because apparently there is now a height limit for men to run for office (I'm 5-9 so I may be too short too, although I'm not planning on running for anything soon).

He claims 5'10." This article suggests 5'6" is more like it. From the pictures, there is no way he is 5'8" unless everyone he is standing next to is on platforms.
https://freebeacon.com/politics/mike-bloomberg-height/

(02-11-2020 02:26 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  I agree that we should focus resources in areas where the situation demands.

I agree that statistics can help us identify areas more prone to various types of crime -- across the spectrum.

But I do believe it is wrong to pinpoint an individual simply because he or she might fit a profile.

This is different, however, than if that individual fit a suspect identified by an eyewitness or a video. At that point you have very specific information which leads you to believe that specific individual IS the individual in question.

I understand this makes law enforcement's job more difficult, but that's just the way it is.


Several years ago when I was in college a friend of mine and I wrote music together. We had just left his parents' house a few minutes prior. I saw a blue light behind us so I pulled over.

The officer (white) walked up to the car and said, "I know what a white guy and a black guy are doing together in this part of town."

That's THE reason why he pulled us over. We had not done anything wrong and there had not been a crime committed recently in which a black guy and a white guy in a red Trans Am had been suspect.

At the time I didn't know any better and consented to let him search the car. We hadn't done anything wrong so it wasn't a problem.

Fast-forward a couple of decades...

We've heard the justification, "If you don't have anything to hide you don't have anything to worry about."

No! You have NO reason to suspect me unless you can build a case based on evidence which was lawfully obtained. PERIOD.

(02-11-2020 01:51 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Bloomberg is 5-8. I guess Rand Paul needs to not bother running for re-election because apparently there is now a height limit for men to run for office (I'm 5-9 so I may be too short too, although I'm not planning on running for anything soon).

Yea, that's what he said.

Mini-Mike!

(02-11-2020 02:08 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

lol What a raging fraud.

now, he's running around claiming that California of all places would be a "model" for the Country.

Good plan. Lawless, filthy and filled with people who don't belong here. Sounds great.

Ironic that while I was reading this thread doorbell rings and a Bloomberg worker comes to my door. I said no thanks.

(02-11-2020 01:28 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  The front article on DailyKos right now has a headline of:

"Incredibly Racist Bloomberg comments from 2015 ...."

Quoting statistics is not incredibly racist. Not at all.

Well, it is incredibly racist if you are one who wants to derail Bloomberg and get the Bernie Train moving, of course.

I can't stand President Trump, he acts like a bully and jerk and I want his ass out of office next January 20th. Stuff like this absurd Democratic Party infighting isn't helping that cause.

Funny, but I'm loving it. Let's let them undress each other. Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean he isn't doing his job. That. Is. What. Counts.

Not because he's a meany...in your eyes.

(02-11-2020 02:26 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  I agree that we should focus resources in areas where the situation demands.

I agree that statistics can help us identify areas more prone to various types of crime -- across the spectrum.

But I do believe it is wrong to pinpoint an individual simply because he or she might fit a profile.

This is different, however, than if that individual fit a suspect identified by an eyewitness or a video. At that point you have very specific information which leads you to believe that specific individual IS the individual in question.

I understand this makes law enforcement's job more difficult, but that's just the way it is.


Several years ago when I was in college a friend of mine and I wrote music together. We had just left his parents' house a few minutes prior. I saw a blue light behind us so I pulled over.

The officer (white) walked up to the car and said, "I know what a white guy and a black guy are doing together in this part of town."

That's THE reason why he pulled us over. We had not done anything wrong and there had not been a crime committed recently in which a black guy and a white guy in a red Trans Am had been suspect.

At the time I didn't know any better and consented to let him search the car. We hadn't done anything wrong so it wasn't a problem.

Fast-forward a couple of decades...

We've heard the justification, "If you don't have anything to hide you don't have anything to worry about."

No! You have NO reason to suspect me unless you can build a case based on evidence which was lawfully obtained. PERIOD.

Aaaaand we just spent more than 6 months hearing exactly this repeated over and over and over, both here and by the lemming morons on the DNC media channels.

Also why on earth is Trump sending tweets (and then deleting them) calling Bloomberg racist for stop and frisk? The only more public advocate for stop and frisk than Bloomberg is Trump. What's next is he going to attack Bernie for being a misogynist?

(02-11-2020 04:47 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Also why on earth is Trump sending tweets (and then deleting them) calling Bloomberg racist for stop and frisk? The only more public advocate for stop and frisk than Bloomberg is Trump. What's next is he going to attack Bernie for being a misogynist?

Because that's what librocrites have labeled "racist." Pretty simple. It's not racist but that's what the left made it.
If Trump said it, you can bet it'd be the headline on every left leaning media outlet in the country.