Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PatsFanInMaine, Sep 25, 2010.
Should be some interesting reading.
How Obama Thinks - Forbes.com
Isn't that Ann Coulter's old boyfriend?
Oughta be a totally unbiased read, no doubt.
Who gives a sh!t
How Obama Thinks Page 3 of 5 - Forbes.com
This book makes the elections much more fun now.
Harry's Rage......Who Gives Sh1t :singing: :bricks:
Sheesh ... I told everyone to support Hillary ... everyone laughed.
Nice deflection but do you really want to get into the "you're judged by the company you keep" as it relates to President Obama?
D'Souza isn't the first to make this argument and it explains the issue of the bust of Winston Churchill being returned to the
British embassy rather than being moved to another room in the White House or simply placed in storage. Churchill was the personification of British colonialism and there was no way a bust of this guy was going to be in the Oval Office, let alone anywhere in the WH.
Why not when all Obama has done in his foreign policy is to extend American colonialism? Or do people still think we're in Afghanistan fighting for freedom rather than opening up new markets for American beef exports.
And of course, we all know the real roots of Obama's rage are that he hates white people. Because he's black. And a Communist. I can see the Communism on my street now, and it's all red and full of pictures of farm implements.
Conservative writer writes about angry black man. What's interesting about that? It's practically a meme of the right. Problem of course is that Obama does not appear to have any rage. He's pretty laid back by and large.
The construction of reality. If you can get away with it, it's extremely powerful.
Just said in another one...I can sum it up
Roots...2008 election seeing a black men being elected...constructed as a counter-movement against him
Tea Party=whites who hate blacks
Tea Party=people who don't want those "beneath them" black/poor having access to services (health care) or power (presidenacy).
Nothing but an immature/childish counter-revolt clinging to the "good" ole boy system.
laid back ... yeah right ... that's why he's still puffing the cancer sticks.
The other day was in BJ's and checking out the books, amazed at how many books there are about Obama and how bad he is...
The Case against Obama...
The Audacity of Deceit..
What President Obama does not know about Guantanamo...
Michelle Obama( what's so great about...?)
Barack Obama (What's so great about...?)
"Yes We Can": Barack Obama's Proverbial Rhetoric
Pinheads and Patriots: Where You Stand in the age of Obama
The Manchurian President
All of which employ various states of half truths and faux rage, for the sake of the almighty dollar..
This is just another reason why todays neo-cons need to make their divorce from traditional conservatives official.
True conservatives -at least what we used to know them to be before 1990 -were informed by the beliefs of the Founding Fathers, Ike, Nixon, and Reagan. They would even tap into some of Kennedy's conservative streaks when they needed to. All of these conservatives were VEHEMENTLY anti-colonial, at least in theory (although most of them did allow for foreign military actions and cultural and economic colonialism). In their parting words of wisdom, which we ignored at the behest of the corporate intrests, Washington and Ike were specific in their warnings about veturing abroad and the Military Industrial Complex. Nixon ended the Viet Nam disaster. And Reagan, who every so-called modern conservative uses like they use the American flag, homophobia, and Pentagon worship when they need affirmation from the right, was most famous for supposedly dismantling the Soviet sphere of influence and constantly railed against colonialism.
But in the Bizarro World of neo-con revisionism, the right is laying claim to the twisted notion that colonialism is a good thing and that the Mulatto in the White House is somehow unAmerican becaiuse he is, like the Founders, Ike, Nixon and Reagan- *gasp!* ANTI-COLONIAL!
Time for the neo-conservative "movement" to think of a new moniker so they can officialize the separation from American ideals that we once assumed were sacrosanct. How about "the Neo-Colonial Movement" or Neo-cols, for short.
Ike, Dick, and Ron called. They want their party back.
Capitalism 101 ... why anyone wants the job of President still amazes me.
Especially a married man with young kids ... worst job to have in the country.
IMO since Bill Clinton has gotten exponentially worse... no amount of money, can pay for the sacrificies and invasion of privacy...
I have to laugh at all the bullsh!t that flys around about Racism and "the black man" whenever things don't go right for poor little "poopsie whoopsie jug ears"
RACISM IS WHAT GOT HIM ELECTED, MILLIONS VOTED FOR HIM SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN (they slobbered, gushed, swooned and fainted when he blew his nose)
On "Coronation Day" tears ran down their racist faces as they blubbered.
Here is something they try to forget (Obama Is Half White)
"he only got to where he is because he's black"
Never heard those bitter words before.
Poor white folks an't get a break. Them and the rligious folks are under constant domination and oppression from athiest and brown people. Why, it's getting so bad not that white people are outnumbered by athiests and browns everywhere it matters. Just look at the NFL and NBA! WHAT ABOUT THE GRAMMYS! I'm tellin ya...the religous white people are never gonna have a chance in this country because of abortions and taxes!
The construction of reality. This is why political leaders work so hard to encourage religious thinking.
How about this "what if?" scenario...
If the above were actually true, then Obama never deserved to be voted POTUS.
If this were true and Americans knew about it, NO ONE would have voted for Obama because no American supports this type of view.
just a "what if?"....
All sorts of people support the view that you work to avoid or destroy power concentrated in the hands of too few, benefiting only those few. Especially when it is foreingers yielding undue influence in your country.
Tell you what Strud...let any candidate PUBLICALLY state this is his/her belief/agenda and see how many votes they get.
One word would describe this candidate....
:blahblah::blahblah::blahblah: Politicians score points going after big business all the time.
Like I said, let's see any candidate publically take this position and watch them get embaressed. :rofl:
If it scores points with the electorate, that would mean it is having the opposite effect, yes?
(you forgot reference to the "good ole days," so I can only score this a 9 of 10)
Given that it is a hypothetical, who cares?
Maybe I'm missing your point, PR.
My point is, this quote BETTER be wrong and not what Obama's base beliefs are or he lied his arse off to the people of this country.
Other than that, a side point is that this kind of theocracy is about as far-left as one can get.
Separate names with a comma.