« prev   random   next »

« First    « Previous    Comments 99 - 138 of 138    Last »

101   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2012 May 22, 1:21am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Honest Abe says

Bgisby, Ah, "racist" - another liberal catch phrase. Kinda like "gun contol", or "hate crime". They have no real definition and can mean different things to different people. Perfect for liberals living in the world of double standards and undefined terms.

Racism is not a liberal catch phrase. American history is full of racism and nationalism and other forms of bigotry. It's not something to be proud of, but a good society admits its flaws so that it can correct them and stop injustices.

The fact that conservatives shrink at the sound of the word racism just goes to prove that conservatives are still racist. Look, I'm a white guy but I have absolutely no white guilt because my ancestors didn't enslave Africans, torture and rape them, and then terrorize them when forced by other white men to stop enslaving them. But even if I was descendant from southerners, I would still not have any white guilt because I would readily renounce the actions of my ancestors. I would admit that the South was wrong, immoral, unethical, and downright dickish hypocrites. And after renouncing the wrongdoings of my ancestors, I would simply lead a non-bigoted life and would therefore have no reason to be sensitive to the word racist for it would not apply to me.

Now I am part Italian. This means I am almost certainly descendant from both slaves and slave owners from the Roman Empire. I have sympathy for my slave ancestors, even though I don't know who they are, and I renounce the actions of any of my slave owning ancestors. So I have absolutely no guilt over the slavery of the Roman Empire. I am appalled by it, as well as by the Roman Empire itself -- I'm more of a Greek fan even though I have no Greek blood that I know of.

Unfortunately, most people in the South do not have the maturity to simply admit that the South was fucking evil. The South was immoral and wrong on the issue of slavery. And the Civil War was really about slavery, not states rights. The fact that the South can't just own up to its dark -- no pun intended -- history is evident by the fact that on the U.S. citizen test I took (for shits and giggles) it claimed that the Civil War was not about human rights issues, but rather economic issues.

Another example of this inability to deal with the truth is the fact that southerners are always waving that damn Confederate Navy flag and calling it the Confederate flag. It's not. These are the Confederate flags.

Notice that the so-called "Confederate flag" is really the Confederate Navy Jack. It was adopted as a symbol by the KKK to state that they were continuing the Civil War. That's why it's popular in the south. It has nothing to do with southern autonomy and everything to do with the KKK waging war against blacks.

I would have a hell of a lot more respect for modern southerners if they just admit that their ancestors, no matter how attached to them they are, were just fucking immoral bastards who did terrible things. Instead of renouncing that evil and living descent lives in contrast to their ancestors, today's southerners, out of arrogance, have to continue the evil and lie that it doesn't and never existed. And that's why I have zero respect for southerners.

If you go far enough back, we all are descendant from rape babies, rapers, slaves, slavers, murderers, thieves, kings and peasants, heroes and villains. The difference between respectable people and unrespectable people is that the respectable ones decide to part ways with the baser behaviors of their ancestors.

I don't care what your ancestors did. I do care that you whitewash it and continue it as much as legally allowed. That reflects on you.

Honest Abe says

Kinda like "gun contol", or "hate crime".

I'm all for unregistered guns of any type available to the military to be available to citizens. I just want a camera on the gun that sends video to a publicly readable server for at least five minutes before the trigger is enabled. That way guns won't be used in crimes, but will be available to anyone who wants to use them legally.

Now, some of you are probably thinking that the bad guys can always put a towel over the camera. It's so cute when you try to think. You're so analog. You have no idea how sophisticated software is today and what we can do. If you did, you're pants would constantly be full of your own excrement.

Here's the executive summary. We can tell if anything is tampered with. We can tell if anything is obstructed. We can use GPS to tell where the gun is, and we can tell what direction it's pointed. We can know everything. And if we bother to do it right, which isn't that hard -- we've done far harder things already -- then there's no way you can get around our system.

Personally, I want the cops to be afraid that if they pull out their gun they will be dead. It's one of the few things that keeps cops from murdering innocent people. I want the military and the politicians to fear for their lives from a violent uprising. It's one of the few things that keeps government from committing atrocities.

Liberal does not mean anti-gun. Perhaps leftist does, but I'm not even sure about that. Of course, the issue of gun control has no intrinsic bearing to the issues of race.

As for hate crime, I think that such legislation is wrong. The justification for hate crime legislation is that a person is terrorizing an entire community, not just the victim. And that's true, but there are anti-terrorism laws and anti-conspiracy laws already for just those things. If someone is terrorizing a community or ethnic group by targeting individuals, he should be prosecuted under anti-terrorism laws, not hate crime legislation.

Not all liberals are for hate crime legislation. "Conservatives" are all single-minded, but there is tremendous variety in "liberal" politics. Basically, the conservatives are all either Jesus-freaks racists or godless financial parasites who snort coke off a hooker's ass. There is no variety within each of these two groups, and the two groups ignore the other's actions to maintain their unholy alliance.

Liberals are simply the entire rest of the country that does not fall into either of those two groups. As such, liberals have about as much cohesion and agreement with each other as two teenage boys fighting over a single peephole into the girl's locker room.

That's actually the biggest problem with the Democratic Party. It's composed of anyone who isn't a financial parasite or a batshit-crazy Jesus-freak. That's why it can't ever get anything done. I can't wait until the day the Republican Party dies. Soon afterwards the Democratic Party will fragment into at least several pieces and we can start to have real debates on the issues. Ironically, the Republican Party's shit craziness is the only thing keeping the Democratic Party together.

And yes, 80% of the Democratic Party is pure shit. But that leaves 20% of it that's composed of knowledgeable, intelligent people. Compare that to 0% of the Republican Party. And the reason for that is that the lunacy of the Republican Party since Reagan has caused all the intelligent people in it to leave either becoming independents or Democrats. For example, there are far more Democrats than Republicans who actually believe in small government contrary to all the sound bites the conservative press puts out.

Honest Abe says

They have no real definition and can mean different things to different people.

This is true for any word in any natural language. That's why we software developers use real languages.

Toe jam says

Leftism can only exist in a censored environment.

Yes. Liberalism, in contrast to Leftism, requires an uncensored environment. Leftism and righism are essentially the same thing with opposing facades.

Toe jam says

And it's amusing that Leftists always decry the need for 'tolerance', yet when the truth hits them in the face, they can't tolerate it!

Well, I wouldn't say amusing. I'd say hypocritical and despicable. A perfect example of this is the lack of free speech on college campuses. Every place in America should be a free-speech zone, but even more so on college where students should be encourage to discuss and passionately debate controversial issues. Without dialog, there can be no progress, and all good ideas can withstand any questioning.

Toe jam says

The fact that it was censored proves that it was the truth, which hit a nerve deep into the psyche of the Leftist, bringing on a bout of reactive tattletalism. I think it's the word Negro that bothered you the most.

The word "negro", like the word "nigger", is a derogatory term with a history entirely composed of stupid ideas: racism, dehumanization, slavery, etc. As such, there is no respectable reason to call another person that term, except by African Americans to take away the power of the word. I don't think that their approach is the most effective way, but I understand the intent.

It is perfectly acceptable, and even required for mature discussion, to use the word instead of euphemisms when discussing the term and it's historical, present, or future use. To do otherwise is simply childish, and childish discussions yield little fruit.

Personally, I don't believe in censorship with the possible exception of protecting innocent people and troll killing. As I don't see Toe jam's comments that were deleted, I cannot comment on whether or not they were racist.

I can say confidently that racism has certainly risen since Obama took office. It's like all the racists came out of hiding from where they were since 1969. It's a shame because I thought this was ancient history. Besides, there are plenty of wonderful reasons to hate Obama that have nothing to do with his race or bullshit accusations like him being from Kenya or being a socialist, neither of which are remotely true, and quite frankly ridiculous to anyone with half a brain.

Toe jam says

And it's amusing that Leftists always decry the need for 'tolerance', yet when the truth hits them in the face, they can't tolerate it!

Tolerance is a leftist sound bite. The left doesn't have nearly as many sound bites as the right, but this is one of them. Tolerance is putting up with something you hate. As such, it's not really a good thing. I am not tolerant of gays because I don't hate them. There's nothing for me to tolerate. I'm accepting of gays, and I hold the position that it's none of my damn business what goes on between consenting individuals behind closed doors. So I don't tolerate gays. I tolerate idiots; those fucks piss me off big time. OK, maybe I'm not quite as tolerant of idiots as I should be, but they actually do lower the quality of life by fucking up government and starting unjust wars while letting just ones go unanswered even in the face of genocide.

102   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 22, 1:30am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Toe jam says

Bigsby, what IS perfectly clear is that YOU are an INTOLERANT person, a hater. You Leftist females have mental orgasms whenever you get to pull out the 'R' word.

Diversity is Hate.
Tolerance is Hate.
Equality is Hate.

What is the object of this Hate? White males.

Yeah, I'm intolerant. Intolerant of racists. And your post is moronic, rather like all four of your posts, whoever you actually are - why not man up and post under your usual name? And what does all that say about you? I guess that it means you're a moronic racist.

103   clambo   ignore (5)   2012 May 22, 1:36am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Negro is not derogatory, not pejorative. Negro is the Spanish word meaning black. The Spanish were the first to buy slaves and bring them to their farming operations in the New World. So, this word stuck for hundreds of years.
If I used the word "tortilla" instead of "crepe" does that make it racist? They are actually no different except for the recipes.
The reason we hate Obama is not because he's a mulatto (1/2 white), it's because we hate what he says and does.
I sent Herman Cain money when he was getting started after he won the first debate in S. Carolina. I thought he was a super capable and articlate guy. So, I hate Obama the mulatto and I like Cain the African American black descended form slaves. One has real accomplishments and the other is a dilettante.

104   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 22, 1:46am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

His post wasn't offensive solely for the use of the word negro (and you know that that word is offensive in general usage so stop playing dumb about it, or are you telling us that you would happily go up to a black person and use that term?) - his entire post was suffused with racist intent.

105   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 22, 2:06am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Oh, and Clambo, I've never really got a sense of your latino heritage in any of your posts. I have, however, got a very strong sense of your desire to antagonize with your use of the word mulatto at any and every possible opportunity that presents itself.

106   clambo   ignore (5)   2012 May 22, 2:19am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

See?
Mulatto is simply the word that describes Obama, not "black".
I guess I heard this word so often growing up that I assumed all know it.
It's a media lie to call Obama black because of his skin tone, he's actually equally white.
Negro is not offensive, but nigger is. Even so, using the word nigger at first was not intended to be pejorative but later was.
However, perhaps because you are 1. foreign 2. didn't know people from the US south in the 70's you would be surprised that the term negro was common and not intented to be pejorative in any way.
You can read the older issues of the liberal NYTimes and the word negro is quite common.
So is the word mulatto probably.
If it bothers readers that Obama is a mulatto that's their problem, not mine.
I simply believe in truth in advertising.

107   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 22, 2:31am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

You are just deliberately acting dumb here. You know damn well what you are doing using the words negro and mulatto. You can bullshit all you want but it's obvious what the illocutionary force is behind the words you are using. Rather like the fact you spend an inordinate amount of time personally attacking Obama and his wife rather than focusing on the policies of his party that you dislike.

108   rdm   ignore (2)   2012 May 22, 2:37am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Dan8267 says

The word "negro", like the word "nigger", is a derogatory term with a history entirely composed of stupid ideas:

When I was growing up these were two words existed to describe what are now called African Americans. Negro was absolutely not considered derogatory until the late 60's when the word "black" came to be the "correct" word. When I went to school in New York in 1968 coming from the mid west I used the word negro and was corrected fairly gently by a black student. I remember it well because I had been schooled by my parents never to use the "N" word ( it still feels uncomfortable to use it) but to use the word negro. There was a shock to be corrected by the other student, the word had become unacceptable.

109   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 22, 2:39am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

But that's the point. 1968 isn't 2012.

110   clambo   ignore (5)   2012 May 22, 2:40am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

That last phrase in your post was a sentence fragment.
You can edit with this blog however and fix it.
Now you say mulatto is a racist word or what?
This is simply what they called people who were 1/2 white and 1/2 black when I was growing up.
I also had contact with old people from places like Virginia and the word negro was actually not used as a pejorative.

111   clambo   ignore (5)   2012 May 22, 2:41am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Martin Luther King used the word all the time FYI.

112   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 22, 2:43am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Oh good grief, what part of the phrase 'times change' do you not understand?

113   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 22, 2:45am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

clambo says

That last phrase in your post was a sentence fragment.
You can edit with this blog however and fix it.

If you mean the "rather like...' comment, then I'm afraid it's perfectly acceptable English for a forum. But if you're trying to be a clever dick, then I'd suggest you go back and correct the majority of your posts because they aren't exactly glowing examples of correct English usage.

114   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 22, 2:50am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

clambo says

That last phrase in your post was a sentence fragment.
You can edit with this blog however and fix it.
Now you say mulatto is a racist word or what?
This is simply what they called people who were 1/2 white and 1/2 black when I was growing up.
I also had contact with old people from places like Virginia and the word negro was actually not used as a pejorative.

And yet you use the term over and over again. You could almost get the impression you have a problem with Obama's skin color. But of course, it's nothing of the sort, is it?

115   Honest Abe   ignore (10)   2012 May 22, 4:22am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

It seems that over the years its been the conservatives who have embraced the concept of "judging a person by the content of their character and not the color of their skin".

Whereas the liberals still judge, select, and discriminate against others based ON THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN. Thats hypocrisy too blatant to hide. Liberal mantra = do as I say, not as I do.

I USED to be a democrat - until it became so very obvious that double standards, theft and redistribution, political correctness, infantacide, class and race warfare, dependency, the support of unsound currency and the like were things that well adjusted adults could not embrace. Then I changed.

116   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 22, 4:33am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Honest Abe says

It seems that over the years its been the conservatives who have embraced the concept of "judging a person by the content of their character and not the color of their skin".

Whereas the liberals still judge, select, and discriminate against others based ON THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN. Thats hypocrisy too blatant to hide. Liberal mantra = do as I say, not as I do.

I USED to be a democrat - until it became so very obvious that double standards, theft and redistribution, political correctness, infantacide, class and race warfare, dependency, the support of unsound currency and the like were things that well adjusted adults could not embrace. Then I changed.

You have to laugh. Do you have a smile on your face when you are typing your shite or do you really not understand what nonsense you are saying? The whole thrust of this and other threads is that again and again you, Clambo, Cloud, whoever is hiding behind Toethefuckwit etc. do very little but talk about the color of Obama's skin. You talk about the fucking appearance of him and his wife. You then personally attack him with nothing more than the bollocks you pick up second hand on Fox and talk radio. And all the time, it's almost a constant stream of negro, mulatto, Kenyan born, Muslim, blah-bloody-blah. And then you post the sort of shite you wrote above. Utterly lamentable.

117   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2012 May 22, 7:59am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

clambo says

Negro is not derogatory, not pejorative. Negro is the Spanish word meaning black.

In Spanish the word negro is not derogatory. In English the word has been used as a tool for discrimination and keeping blacks "in their place" and thus became derogatory. It's the intended use of a word that makes it become derogatory.

If a white man walked up to a black man and called him negro, I assure you that the black man would take offense. And there is no good motivation to use that word anyway.

118   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2012 May 22, 8:06am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bigsby says

But that's the point. 1968 isn't 2012.

Precisely. A lot has changed in our society since the 1960s.

Quite frankly, I think we'll have to wait until all the Baby Boomers are dead to finally drop this ridiculous baggage. People who lived through the 1960s cannot leave the 1960s. The vast majority of us born after the 1960s never gave a rat's ass or thought about race. I guess you can't transgress from a racial to a post-racial society; you just have to be born in a post-racial society. It's a state of mind.

If it wasn't for all the idiots being blatantly racist like holding signs of Obama as a witchdoctor, we wouldn't even be discussing race today. There are plenty of reasons to criticism Obama that have nothing to do with his skin tone or place of birth, which, by the way is Hawaii.

It's ridiculous that the whole birther bullshit isn't dead already. It's a waste of time that could be used to discuss real issues like fixing the financial sector, reforming the economy, reforming elections, etc.

119   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2012 May 22, 8:52am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Honest Abe says

It seems that over the years its been the conservatives who have embraced the concept of "judging a person by the content of their character and not the color of their skin".

A liberal, by definition, does not. Some leftists do, but so do many rightists. By definition, a liberal believes in liberty, human and civil rights, and equality under law.

Honest Abe says

I USED to be a democrat - until it became so very obvious that double standards, theft and redistribution, political correctness, infantacide, class and race warfare, dependency, the support of unsound currency and the like were things that well adjusted adults could not embrace. Then I changed.

Theft and redistribution

The vast majority of your federal income tax is used to pay the military, not public schools or welfare.

Political Correctness

Political correctness is bad. It's the left equivalent of the right's pseudo-patriotism. However, political correctness is the use of political force to cover inconvenient truths that contract the left's political and social agendas. The right does the exact same thing with denying racism where it does exist, denying climate change, denying evolution, lying about WMDs and terrorism, and promoting the religious takeover of government.

In short, although the left's political correctness is bad, the right's equivalent costs lives and basic human rights.

infantacide

No one supports infanticide. If this is hyperbole for abortion, that issue comes down to the question of when does living tissue become a person. And the fact is, this is a grey issue and there's nothing you can do about that because nature is messy and has no obligation to be convenient to human categorization.

class warfare

The rich have started the class warfare we're experiencing by dismantling all the progressive reforms of the early 20th century. Those reforms created the middle class. Before those reforms, life pretty much sucked ass for 99% of the American population.

The ultra rich have also been pillaging the infrastructure and resources created by generations of working class Americans. That is why the middle class is pissed off at the rich. The rich are presently destroying the middle class -- a point well documented -- and threatens to turn America into a banana republic.

If the ultra rich actually earned their wealth by creating wealth instead of destroying it, no one would be pissed off at them.

race warfare

The whole purpose of the Civil Rights movement was to end race warfare once and for all by providing equality under law for all races and culturing changing America so that race was a non-issue. For almost all Gen Xers and Millennials, race has always been a non-issue.

Unfortunately, when Obama was elected, all the racists got upset and started making a lot of noise after being silent for about three decades. This shocked people like me who never even think about race.

Now, not all republicans are racist by far. The financial parasites at the top of the food chain don't give a rat's ass about race either. They only care about making a lot of money while doing no work, and thus producing no wealth.

However, the gun-toting Jesus freaks are basically racists decedent from slave owners, and they can't admit that their ancestors were assholes so they keep doubling down on the same evil ideas. Those people deserve no respect.

And those people are the same assholes who hate science, want to indoctrinate children with the false dogma of creationism or intelligent design, and have been oppose to every human and civil rights defense in the past 200 years including the right of habeas corpus and freedom from being tortured. In other words, these fuckers are fucking evil motherfuckers and should be treated as such.

Now there are, of course, some rednecks that aren't evil bastards, but they seem either to be a minority or a very silent majority. In any case, they don't denounce the evil bullshit from their neighbors. So it's hard to respect them as well.

Again, you can hate Obama all you want and not be a racist if that hate is based on what he has done and not on his African descent. Anyone who actually thinks that Obama was born in Kenya at this point is just a racist imbecile. There is no rational reason to believe that and there is so much counter-evidence it's transparently racially motivated.

And by the way, I'm one of the people who hate Obama. I just also hate most of the knuckleheads on the republican side too including the asswipe Romney. But the reason I hate Obama is that he has trampled on civil and human rights, not because he's black. I don't give a rat's ass about his race. I only care about his dismal voting record. And really, the issues and diplomacy should be the only thing that do matter when evaluating presidents. Why is this even a controversial issue in the 21st century?

dependency

Neither the left nor the right advocates dependency although they both certainly encourage it through foolish policies. I'm for workfare, not welfare, for those able to work. However, most liberals and most leftists do believe in "teaching a man to fish" instead of "giving him a fish", but that isn't sufficient if he's starving so you still need homeless shelters and soup kitchens to provide for immediate needs.

The right also promotes dependency on the government. The entire military industry is a massive public jobs program for the mid-west and heartland. Only, it's a job program that produces nothing useful for society and in fact destroys wealth, both ours and other nations. Bombs have to be used in order to justify building more, so we wage wars that empty our treasury and motivate terrorism. Meanwhile, we destroy the very infrastructure that would promote trade and stabilize the world economy including our own. So the right is every bit as guilty of promoting dependency on government as the left, if not more, considering the massive military budget.

Liberals, of course, believe in liberty and independence by their very nature. That includes economic independence from both government and corporations.

the support of unsound currency

Both sides support the Federal Reserve and it's debasement of our currency. Ron Paul and Peter Schiff are outcasts of the right. Have you seen Peter Schiff on Fox News. For years he went on Fox News and was laughed at by the hosts, moderators, reporters, and other guests. Even after history has vindicated most of what he said, and certainly the principles he stated, Fox News still treats him like shit. And the republicans and the conservative media have absolutely banished Ron Paul. The right has done more to destroy Ron Paul's electability than they have attempted to attack Obama.

Ironically, Ron Paul receives most of his support from liberals, even leftist liberals. And the main reason liberals support Ron Paul is that he's strong on human and civil rights.

Oh, and supporting sound currency doesn't mean supporting gold as currency. Not that republicans or the right, who are sexually dominated by bankers, at all support going back to the gold standard.

I hope this all clarifies a few things, but just in case, here's the executive summary.

1. The left is bad, but the right is far worse.
2. The truth is orthogonal to the whole left vs. right bullshit.
3. Liberal does not mean the same thing as left.
4. The right is every bit as much for big government and government dependence as the left. The only difference is that the right wants to spend all our money on bombs instead of schools and social safety nets. Neither is correct, but the right's agenda is worse.
5. Both sides lie, but the right's lies are more destructive, transparent, and childish.

One other truth we didn't mention so far. The republican elected officials were more than happy to utterly destroy America's economy in order to prevent Obama from being re-elected. They were willing to and did create massive unemployment to further their chances of taking the White House. No democrat today has done anything so despicable and quite frankly treasonous as that.

And I say treasonous because America's national security is utterly dependent upon it's economic security. We can't maintain our high-tech defenses without a strong economy. So by wrecking our economy, the republicans did give aid to our enemies. And this is the party that pretends that it is patriotic and composed of the only "true Americans". What bullshit.

120   Vicente   ignore (0)   2012 May 22, 8:57am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I've lost track.

IS BARACK OBAMA A KENYAN OR NOT?

121   just someone   ignore (0)   2012 May 22, 9:29am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

confused... in 1991 he was graduating Harvard.
where did he find time to write a book?

122   bob2356   ignore (4)   2012 May 22, 11:30am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Vicente says

I've lost track.

IS BARACK OBAMA A KENYAN OR NOT?

“Eagles are dandified vultures” - Teddy Roosevelt

Same answer as how long does the average female take to achieve orgasm.

WHO THE FUCK CARES.

123   freak80   ignore (4)   2012 May 23, 12:59am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says

Same answer as how long does the average female take to achieve orgasm.
WHO THE FUCK CARES.

I suppose the average female might care...

124   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2012 May 23, 5:15pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Vicente says

I've lost track.

IS BARACK OBAMA A KENYAN OR NOT?

Don't worry, my new book explains it.

125   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2012 May 23, 5:19pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Toe jam says

Do you think Michelle Obama is 'post-racial'? I don't. People that are post-racial don't say they can finally be proud of their country since a BLACK MAN was elected El Presidente.

That's the only true thing you've said. The rest is batshit crazy.

Post-racial people don't give a rat's ass about someone's race and don't even think of it when not discussing racial issues or racism.

Similarly, sane people don't think that Obama was born in Kenya, that the World Trade Center was brought down by a controlled explosion, that the moon landing was faked, or that the pyramids were built by magic.

126   Vicente   ignore (0)   2012 May 24, 3:01am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Dan8267 says

sane people don't think that Obama was born in Kenya,

Define "sane".

In the post-Reagan world, you just about cannot get someone locked up who is very much insane unless they are running through the streets naked carrying an axe.

Back to original point, which was OBAMA BORN IN KENYA, well if race plays no part in it, why was it never a real question for McCain? We can beat the legal specifics to death all day, however the point is Breitbart et al were not one bit interested in pursuing the fact that McCain was born in Panama.

I also despise the nonsense of saying "we're not SAYING he's from Kenya, we just find this misprint CURIOUS". This is straight out of Glenn Beck's playbook. If it's just a curious editor mistake from decades ago, why spin it as news we should all talk about and have a bunch of birther nuts latch onto it like ducks on a junebug?

Lastly, there's no doubt racism plays a part here. Nobody was making cartoons of McCain like this one:

127   bob2356   ignore (4)   2012 May 24, 4:16am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

wthrfrk80 says

bob2356 says

Same answer as how long does the average female take to achieve orgasm.

WHO THE FUCK CARES.

I suppose the average female might care...

That was humor son, not analysis.

128   clambo   ignore (5)   2012 May 24, 4:22am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I detest Obama but I think he was born in Hawaii. I can not see why his mother would 1. have the dough 2. have the interest 3. have the time 4. have the motivation to be seriously preggo and want to travel to AFRICA just to have Barry.
Imagine if you will you are many months preggo. I know, it's hard to imagine it. But some people I have talked to about it say it can be a little uncomfortable, and things like long plane trips, travel to dusty, dirty, hot African disease infested locales doesn't sound attractive to them.
What is bad is Obama claiming he was born in Africa to sell some shitty book.

129   Sailor   ignore (0)   2012 May 24, 7:34am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The only person not born in the US was John McCain!!!!!!!!!!!
He was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936, which made him foreign born. In 1937 the law was changed so that individuals born in the Canal Zone to US Citizens would be considered US born, and it was made retroactive so a year after he was born, jOhn McCain became US born

130   Vicente   ignore (0)   2012 May 26, 8:08am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I heard Mitt Romney is a secret polygamist.

Now I'm not saying that *I* believe it, but there certainly are a few people talking about it.

His family had plenty of it going on, his ancestors even were "illegals" living in Mexico to keep doing it. Come to think of it, I've never seen even the marriage certificate to the wife we do see. How do we know she's actually legally married to him? And has he made any effort to prove that he doesn't have other wives? Not that I recall.

Isn't it interesting?

131   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 26, 10:09pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Cloud says

You're a fool if you think the editor made a "mistake" on this blurb about "The One."

Yep, I mean she only came out and said she made a mistake, so of course she's lying.

And since when has being a graduate of Harvard Law School, President of Harvard Law Review, an attorney, Visiting Law and Government Fellow at the University of Chicago Law School, a senator, and finally, the President of the USA meant that a person "is decidedly an under achiever"? Really, you need to explain that one to me.

132   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 26, 10:16pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Cloud says

I made a "mistake" on my resume and called myself an MD.

Do you have a point?

133   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 26, 10:18pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Cloud says

"Mistake" Harvard and she bleed for all it was worth like witch doctors shaking a chicken to the hoards.

Go team go, go team go, push 'em back push 'em back waaaaay back!

Yet another Tribal Lib speaks.

Is that supposed to mean something?

Come on, you said he was an underachiever, so what constitutes run-of-the-mill achievement in your book?

134   Bigsby   ignore (10)   2012 May 26, 10:21pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Cloud says

I made a mistake and went to TWA and told them I fly airplanes...

Hey, it got me a pay check.

I see you don't actually have an answer.

And you do realize that you making a mistake is not the same as a person making a mistake about you. I know that might be hard for you to comprehend, but do us all a favour and try.

135   Vicente   ignore (0)   2012 May 27, 2:48am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Cloud says

I find the Kenya thing boring.

And yet you post frequently on the topic. Strange.

But what do you think about Romney's polygamist past?

136   freak80   ignore (4)   2012 May 27, 1:23pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says

That was humor son, not analysis.

I know. My comment was also meant to be humor...

137   bob2356   ignore (4)   2012 May 27, 4:59pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

wthrfrk80 says

bob2356 says

That was humor son, not analysis.

I know. My comment was also meant to be humor...

I thought that, which is why I replied in what I thought was a a continuation of the light banter.

138   bob2356   ignore (4)   2012 May 27, 5:02pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bigsby says

Cloud says

I made a "mistake" on my resume and called myself an MD.

Do you have a point?

If cloud did have a point it would be the first time.

« First    « Previous    Comments 99 - 138 of 138    Last »


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions