Did you know that the top five cities in America with the highest crime rate are, Detroit,Memphis, Miami,Las Vegas, Stockton, all liberal run??

http://www.houstonsux.webs.co...
http://www.cis.org/articles/2...

Yes, you could say so.

Their arms are tied when they cannot combat crimes perpetrated by illegal aliens with law enforcement tools at their disposal.

See how that works?
http://www.kvue.com/home/rela...

The high cost of criminal immigrants in Texas

"...by ANDREW HORANSKY / KVUE News
kvue.com
Posted on May 11, 2011 at 11:00 AM
AUSTIN, Texas -- As Washington refuses to agree on a federal immigration policy, violent illegal immigrants from around the world are committing crimes in Texas. They are putting a strain on both the criminal justice system and the state budget.
“It is the result of poor policies allowing violent illegal immigrants to come into this country,” said Williamson County Prosecutor John Bradley.
Over the past year, Bradley has prosecuted two murders in Cedar Park involving illegal Hondurans. In one case, a man raped and murdered a nine-year-old girl. The second killed his wife.
“We caught these two individuals and punished them,” Bradley said. “But that should never happen again.”
But it is happening. In some cases, Bradley has seen the same offenders returning to Texas to re-offend. ..."

You know what Calli? I'm a lover, not a fighter. I'll APOLOGIZE and take back what I said if you'll read through this post and comment. Deal?

Okay. So....

1) Hazel's argument is that only "Liberal run" cities have high crime rates. She lists five cities to prove her point. Where she cherry-picked them from, I'm not sure. I googled "cities highest crime rate usa" and found dozens of separate lists in separate publications.... All listing different cities as being the "most dangerous." It seems that news editors can read FBI data and filter it according to their bias or whim to make a "top 10" list.


2) I looked up actual FBI data for 2010 (the most recent compliation, as 2011 isn't available yet.) I did the legwork and what did I find? The ten cities with the highest incident of violent crimes have pretty much an equal mixture of Republican and Democratic mayors. That pretty much kills Hazel's assertion right there.

3) But to be charitable, perhaps when Hazel says "liberal run" she doesn't mean the Mayor of that city is a Democrat; perhaps what she means is that the city or locale in question is *culturally* liberal. Okay. Even so, we look at the numbers and see that Texas -- allegedly the most conservative state in the union -- also has the highest incident of violent crime of any state in the union. That should definiitely kill Hazel's argument dead.

4) But then you come in with Special Pleading. You say Texas' high crime rate is not the fault of Conservatives, but caused by a plague of illegal Latin American aliens, who, enabled by LIBERALS, have swarmed over the border to commit all the hideous crimes noted in the anecdotes of your story.

5) So, is it unfair for me to call this observation of yours just a little bit racist? Heck, maybe it is. I am what you would call a "Liberal" which is to say I often stop in my tracks to ponder if what I'm doing is good or evil. I stand ready to wrack myself with guilt at a moment's notice. So here I am wondering if I've done you wrong.

6) Then I look at Hazel's list again. The cities she picked are all cities with a majority African American or Latino population. Perhaps this is a "co-inky-dink" or perhaps she was blowing the dog whistle. It didn't help when she doubled down and brayed that Oakland is another cesspool of crime. She didn't say it in so many words, but the implied message was "And we all know who lives *there*, don't we?"

7) But again, it's not fair of me to lump you in with Hazel. So, maybe you weren't intentionally playing into the longstanding racist trope of "people of color = criminals." And if you weren't, I apologize. But, you have to be aware, when you post something like the story you posted, unqualified, it *does* come with a certain subtext attached, whether you intended it or not.

Does any of this make sense?

I guess it makes sense. You should understand when you post what you did, UNQUALIFIED, I'm going to see your comments in the original vein. I have read and re-read your statement above and will try and be as open as I can and state what irks me in your statement. I speak plainly, I was trained to communicate that way. No equivocation.

1. Why would you harp on Hazel for doing what everyone else on Sodahead does? What every pundit does, what every tea party hater, what every liberal does? Why have a fit when it's a conservative? No where was race mentioned. All you have to do is refute it, write your own, or ignore it.

2. If you do research and find something different - fine. FINE! Post it, publish it, make your own blog on it. But to call me racist? Bringing up BROWN folks and intimating that the only reason this blog exists is to be racist? These were your words "That is the subtext in this whole post, isn't it? That the brown-skinned people are the ones committing all the crimes? Some of us can hear the dog whistle loud and clear." and "Ah of course. It's the brown-skinned people! I knew somebody would come out and say it eventually." Don't call me a racist for providing freely available articles to addend a post.

3. Charitable - No one needs or wants your charity. However, take illegal alien criminals out of Texas = what does that do to the crime rate? The poverty levels? Care to do that research? Numbers are great and the whole point of Soda is to engage in give and take. You call folks racist and boy-howdy you aren't going to get a listen, it's an automatic shut down. I am sick to death of being called a racist. I'm not going to defend myself on it and will indeed cry FOUL and BS when someone calls me racist. REALIST is not RACIST. PRAGMATICAL is not RACIST. You have an opinion? Say it. Call names and blast out with a 'you're a racist' rant and you get what you give.

4. Special Pleading? - You've put a bunch of words into my mouth. I did not say the crime rate was the fault of BROWN people. My opinion was that "Their (the state) arms are tied when they cannot combat crimes perpetrated by illegal aliens with law enforcement tools at their disposal." The federal government under Obama and Eric Holder have elected not to allow cities or states to get rid of illegal perpetrators. I don't give a crap if they are yellow, brown, white, black or red. Get that? I'd be just as pissed off at an Iranian or Turk or Guatemalan OR Mexican here illegally and committing crimes.

5. I don't give a rat's fanny what you call me. Call me names, fine. But don't act all indignant if I call you out on it. And now what? Are you intimating that I am not thoughtful and pondering if I do good or evil? If you are - which is how I read it given your attitude thus far - you don't know me at all. You don't know my life, my people, my experiences so please don't figure you can make such a judgment on me.

6. The point of Hazel's blog seems to be that the BROWN and BLACK skinned among us have gotten a rotten deal by PROGRESSIVES. Progressives have moved the poor into these cites and held them captive with welfare and section 8 housing - at least this is my take - and had you asked without attacking, at least on that point I could have addressed that issue. The folks living in those cities - the poor aren't just black and brown either. THEY are all colors. Used to be immigrants came to the city, learned the language and pulled themselves up working. When you remove incentive by giving housing and money, things break down and upward mobility grinds to a halt.

7. Again, as far as Sodahead goes, I don't care whether you lump me in with Hazel, frankly I find her great company. If you don't like what she's blogged, respond to her and try and cut the attacks. I've never seen her attack anyone unless attacked first, be it in this question or others. Some folks merely by being known to the author of the comment, will not be treated well because of their history. You should realize that about sodahead by now.

I have no personal animus towards you. I don't know you personally and can only know you through your comments. So far, you've seemed kind of arrogant, opinionated, disingenuous and mean-spirited. I responded in kind, something I try not to do unless called 'tea-bagger', 'racist' or other foul personal insult and detest personal name-calling because it causes an immediate stop to an exchange and debate. It means no matter what I say, the person is unwilling to engage. Why waste my time? I may have strong opinions, and I will comment accordingly, but never attack personally until attacked. And if I do, inadvertently, I apologize if someone is good enough to call me on it.

What Hazel blogs is Hazel's business. I'm not her keeper. You are a big boy and can carry your own water, right?

If you aren't the arrogant guy you seem thus far, I will apologize. I do very much appreciate your effort to communicate with me on these issues.