Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Let me see if I have this straight


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Let me see if I have this straight Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:07:51 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

This is the elephant in the room that no one in the US really wants to talk about. It is also the reason why so many are so hardcore against any type of gun control. They are convinced that the evil black Manchurian is trying to take away their guns so that they will be defenseless when he carries out his programming to institute communism in the US. We have politicians and organizations promoting this kind of thinking and for those who believe it, it all makes perfect sense to them. Then they try to convince everyone that this line of thinking has nothing at all to do with the President's race.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

And you are full of it. Adobe acrobat pro???utter bollocks




If you are going to post like the loony left you need to get your insults right. Hell, even moony knows it's "the kenyan", not the "manchurian" and he doesn't even live here.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to MsMJAY)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:11:30 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
- FR -
Generally I don't have high expectations of the looney Right. But even by those generously low standards, bringing up this long-dead-and-buried issue gets a 'Fail".
Guys, you are too late. Way too late. At least 6 years late. The time to question Obama's qualifications was before he got elected, not after he has been in the White House for 6 years.
The only things revealed by your obsessive exhumation of this issue are just how far removed from day- to-day reality your political focus is, and how ill-informed and misdirected the 'thoughts' of the looney Right truly are.

Now, just as a general FYI, the "birthers" were making noise during the 2008 campaign. That is, they were making these claims prior to Obama getting elected. Most of the media didn't report it as credible, or even potentially credible. Candidate Obama didn't put it to rest, either.

Yes, he did. He released his Hawaiian birth certificate. the racist loons refused to accept that it was real.


That didn't put it to rest, though, Ken. There was that veil of secrecy.

And, birthers weren't necessarily racists. But, how wonderful of you to prove thishereboi's assertion in Post#37.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:14:33 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

This is the elephant in the room that no one in the US really wants to talk about. It is also the reason why so many are so hardcore against any type of gun control. They are convinced that the evil black Manchurian is trying to take away their guns so that they will be defenseless when he carries out his programming to institute communism in the US. We have politicians and organizations promoting this kind of thinking and for those who believe it, it all makes perfect sense to them. Then they try to convince everyone that this line of thinking has nothing at all to do with the President's race.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

And you are full of it. Adobe acrobat pro???utter bollocks




If you are going to post like the loony left you need to get your insults right. Hell, even moony knows it's "the kenyan", not the "manchurian" and he doesn't even live here.


As Election Day rapidly approaches, many Americans are wondering why so many of their countrymen reject a genuine war hero with decades of experience, one whose pro-life, limited-government values pretty much reflect those of Middle America. Instead, these same countrymen are enthralled with a man who not only has no experience or qualifications for the job, but who is, in fact, the most radically left-wing major-party presidential candidate of our lifetime, having been mentored and supported for decades by terrorists (Ayers), communists (Davis), America-hating racists (Wright) and criminals (Rezko).

Doesn’t make much sense, does it?

After all, in past presidential contests, Americans have flatly rejected ultraliberal candidates like McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis – and those guys weren’t nearly as radicalized as Obama, who the nonpartisan National Journal rates as having the most left-wing voting record in the entire U.S. Senate – even more so than socialist Bernie Sanders! Moreover, recently it’s been proven, despite his campaign’s denials, that Obama was indeed a member of the socialist “New Party.” And Obama himself confesses that during his college days he intentionally sought out Marxists as friends.

So, how do we explain all this? Why are so many of us eager to turn our nation, the greatest and noblest on earth, over to an angry-at-America, hardcore left-wing “change agent” who will – with the help of a like-minded, Democrat-dominated Congress and a liberal-activist federal judiciary – bring about radical “change” to every area of our lives? Just consider:

Obama is the most pro-abortion presidential candidate in history, having announced publicly: “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.” This would remove all restrictions on abortion, including partial-birth abortion and parental notification laws, making America the abortion capital of the world. Of course, you know what kind of Supreme Court justices he would nominate, which as I have pointed out previously would end all hope of overturning Roe v. Wade in our lifetimes.

He’s hands-down the most pro-homosexual candidate in history, promising to back virtually the entire radical “gay rights” agenda, including the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, essentially throwing open the door to gay marriage in all 50 states. And, as he proclaims in his “open letter to the LGBT community”: “I have also called for us to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” That will allow and encourage overt homosexuality throughout the armed forces, something military experts have long maintained will destroy the very fabric of America’s armed services.
Sounds bad for Judeo-Christian values, you say? Dr. James Dobson’s influential Focus on the Family organization analyzed issue after issue and predicts – are you ready for this? – “hardship,” “persecution” and “suffering” as the fate of Christians if Obama becomes president.

Obama “would be the most anti-gun president in American history,” warns the National Rifle Association, which points out that he has supported a complete ban on handguns, voted to ban most rifle ammunition, and supported increasing the tax on guns by 500 percent.
Obama would devastate an already deeply troubled U.S. economy. Jacking up taxes, as he promises to do, during the worst financial crisis and credit meltdown since the Great Depression is breathtakingly foolish. No wonder three out of four CEOs of American companies say Obama would be a disaster. Apparently Obama, who constantly badmouths “CEOs” and “corporations,” doesn’t realize it is these very companies that create over 120 million of America’s 140 million jobs (the rest being created by government).
In order to throttle the troublesome talk radio truth-tellers who caused him so much trouble during the election season, and to reward his cheerleaders in the elite press, Obama will attempt to muzzle conservative talk radio by resurrecting the horrendous “Fairness Doctrine.”
Obama alone will be able to snatch defeat from the jaws of certain victory in Iraq. He is so weak, inexperienced and narcissistic, he will reflexively appease our nation’s enemies and thereby encourage the growth of evil the world over. Millions will suffer as a direct result.
Then there’s the issue of Obama’s truly disturbing past. It seems that no matter how stunning the revelations – some of which are finally emerging, no thanks to a shockingly irresponsible and infantile “mainstream press” – they don’t penetrate the public mind. Regardless of the evidence against him, people remain entranced by Obama:

Amidst ever-growing evidence of vote fraud in multiple states perpetrated by ACORN – the notorious left-wing group with which Obama, despite his public statements, has long and deep ties – the Obama campaign’s lawyers are now arguing that the Justice Department should not investigate any vote fraud claims until after the election. Instead, say Obama’s attorneys, Justice should investigate those citizens who have brought to light the evidence of voter fraud, for supposedly trying to intimidate poor people into not voting. And no wonder: Thirteen of Obama’s own campaign workers in Ohio have confessed to have fraudulently voted in that crucial swing state.

Despite repeated indignant denials by the candidate and his campaign, Barack Obama was once a Muslim. If you question that fact as just a nasty “Internet rumor,” examine for yourself Obama’s registration papers to the Catholic school he attended in Indonesia, reproduced here by the Associated Press, which clearly indicate his religion at the time as “Islam.” Much more troubling are the radical Islamist ties he maintains today, as respected Islam expert Daniel Pipes documents. Even rabid anti-Semite and leader of the radical Nation of Islam group, Louis Farrakhan, says “the Messiah is absolutely speaking” through Obama.

Which brings us to his most troubling association of all: Obama sat in the church pews for 20 years listening to and absorbing the anti-American, racist, hate-filled sermons of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who claims, among his other lunatic rants, that the United States brought on the 9/11 attacks and deliberately created AIDS in order to commit genocide against black people. Wright’s rage-filled preaching of “black liberation theology” – an anti-American, anti-White, Marxist philosophy disguised as Christianity – filled Obama’s mind and soul for two decades, and they have unquestionably influenced his worldview.
Sitting at the feet of Jeremiah Wright for two decades and being filled each week with such venom against America and white people can fairly be called a form of brainwashing. If you doubt this statement, try spending 30-60 minutes on YouTube and just listen to random video clips of Wright’s “sermons.” Then, imagine swallowing this poisonous concoction, in person, every week for 20 years. It would be transformative.

One can go on and on, it’s dizzying: Obama worked closely – for years – with William Ayers, a criminal and domestic terrorist who once bombed the Pentagon and other government buildings; there’s absolutely compelling evidence – including independent scientific forensic analysis – showing that Ayers wrote all or part of Obama’s best selling book “Dreams from My Father”; Obama received crucial funding and other financial benefits from notorious convicted Chicago criminal Tony Rezko; the Obama campaign refuses to produce a simple birth certificate to dispel persistent claims in multiple lawsuits that question the candidate’s constitutional qualifications to be U.S. president – it goes on and on, and yet inexplicably, none of it seems to penetrate the minds of those entranced with Obama.

So again, the question: Why, despite a mountain of evidence utterly proving his profound unworthiness to be president, do so many millions of Americans worship Barack Obama? Let’s take a closer look.

The magic of envy

In recent decades, more and more Americans have been conditioned by politicians to depend on government to solve their problems. This is how demagogues have long operated. They demonize “the rich,” implying they obtained their wealth by exploiting the downtrodden; they stir up racial hatreds at every opportunity; they endlessly bash business and CEOs as evil exploiters; they promise “social justice” and universal happiness if only we will elevate them to power over us.

They do all this by appealing to anger and envy. They know instinctively that if they can stir up and ignite these dark, addictive passions in all of us, they will create a large voting bloc of people dependent on them, and thus be rewarded with great power. In its purest form, this phenomenon is called Marxism, communism, socialism – the spiritual core of which is raw envy. This philosophy of cradle-to-grave security and “wealth redistribution” exerts a powerfully seductive grip on people who have not discovered true inner “government.” As William Penn famously said, “Men must be governed by God or they will be ruled by tyrants.”

Communism, of course, is atheistic – where the government is the only true god, the giver of blessings, the solver of problems, the dispenser of justice and mercy. This envy-based, class-warfare-fueled revolutionary system talks always of justice, fairness, progress – but the only progress it delivers is from freedom to slavery.

This is the appeal more and more Americans have been conditioned over the years to respond to, as we have progressively fallen away from the Judeo-Christian values that once animated our culture and institutions. The envy-based system Marx unleashed on the world is alive and well, and in different forms it still dominates large parts of the world. In America, it has taken root in the Democrat Party. Ronald Reagan may have destroyed the “evil empire” of the Soviet Union, but you cannot destroy evil itself. Evil remains, and continues to do its job of tempting and, if possible, corrupting the souls of men.

Even the encouragement of immorality – free sex, abortion, homosexuality, easy divorce and so on – is all part and parcel of the socialist modus operandi, because immoral, dysfunctional people who have crossed the moral line and thus become estranged from God now need the “god” of socialist government.

All of this, my friends, is what we’re poised to elect as president in the person of Barack Obama.

This has been coming for quite awhile. Americans, many of us anyway, have become increasingly corrupted over the years. We’ve been conditioned by our leaders into voting for lying, unprincipled, seductive candidates. We almost elected certified wacko Al Gore as president – someone who seriously wants to outlaw the internal combustion engine. Then we almost elected John Kerry – a super-ambitious, unprincipled and thoroughly unlikable man who first achieved notoriety by betraying his Vietnam soldier colleagues, scandalously maligning them as baby-killers before Congress and the nation.

Now, we’re very close to electing an even worse candidate – and the reasons for this tell us much about ourselves.

The power of guilt

If you’ve ever studied disasters like the explosion of the Challenger Space Shuttle or the sinking of the Titanic, you’ll find there was not just one reason, but a whole series of factors that seemingly conspired to cause the catastrophe.

One of the “aiding and abetting” factors in the current election is the fact that Obama is black. Let’s talk about race.

Americans – even though slavery and segregation are long gone from the national scene – still have a large and understandable reservoir of collective guilt over its past exploitation and mistreatment of blacks.

Guilt is a fantastically powerful factor in all of our lives. It is a very uncomfortable, nagging pain in our conscience, this thing we call guilt. When we’re guilty we try to relieve this inner conflict, and this is often a good thing. If we’re guilty toward God, for instance, then we naturally want to make up for that guilt by finding reconciliation and obedience to Him. If we’ve wronged our neighbor and our conscience bothers us, that guilt is the valuable, redeeming factor that prods us to apologize and make restitution if appropriate. Without being able to experience a guilty conscience, we’d all be amoral psychopaths – literally oblivious to whether or not we had done anything wrong.

However, there’s another side to guilt. Manipulative and unprincipled humans soon discover how to use our guilt to get their way. They can even make us feel guilty when we haven’t done anything wrong – for instance, by way of false accusation, a tactic the left has perfected.

Now, Barack Obama obviously is not to blame for being black – or more to the point, for how people feel about him because of his race. But the fact is, his being black pushes the guilt button in most of us and we simply see him differently than we would if he were white. (Imagine voting for a white guy with such flimsy credentials and ominous associations.) With white voters in particular, there is a strong urge to finally move beyond our collective guilt over slavery and to prove, once and for all, that we’re not a nation beset by racism – by electing a black president.

It’s not an exaggeration to call this guilt-induced way of looking at Obama, this conditioned attitude, a type of trance. We hold him to a different standard, we see and feel differently about him, than we would if he were white. We have a kindliness, a desire for his success, a form of love and admiration and well-wishing toward Obama, all based on guilt. But love based on guilt is not real love. It’s just an unconscious attempt to rid ourselves of guilt. Shelby Steele, author of “White Guilt: How Blacks and Whites Together Destroyed the Promise of the Civil Rights Era,” puts it this way: “[Americans] struggle, above all else, to dissociate themselves from the past sins they are stigmatized with.”

Yet this guilt phenomenon is also why craven race-baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton still command media respect as “black leaders.” We see them through the “white guilt trance,” part of which means we’re really afraid of being regarded as racists, so we don’t criticize these men for their blatant serial demagoguery. Likewise with Obama, there is a great deal of hesitancy to criticize him out of fear of being thought a racist.

You might respond to this by saying: But I don’t have any guilt over slavery or segregation. Fine, but it gets much subtler than that.

Did you ever get angry at your kids – and then find yourself “being nice” to them to make up for the guilt of having been impatient? With that in mind, consider just one of many ways guilt (in this case, racial guilt) can find its way into you: Let’s say you’re walking down the street and a group of black men are walking toward you, and you become fearful (very similar to the story Obama famously told about his white grandmother). That fear has a little resentment attached to it, for that’s the nature of fear. But when you become resentful for any reason at all, you automatically incur guilt, because resentment is a wrong, failing way for mature human beings to respond to the stresses of life. Now, saddled with this new guilt associated with black people, a compulsion rises up from within you to make up for that guilt – which you do by discovering a mysterious affinity for black people that wasn’t there before. But that “love” isn’t real love – it’s all rooted in guilt and resentment (just like when you got impatient with your kids, then suddenly became “nice” to them to compensate for your anger). Although my example here centers on race, this guilt principle is universal. Indeed, guilt-based false love is the basis of the ubiquitous “love-hate relationship” that so vexes the human race; hate easily turns into false love, to make up for the guilt of hating. Do you get it?

It’s subtle, but this is exactly the kind of dynamic that leads to self-destructive relationships – from personal relationships to electing tyrants.

The Obama News Network

A third factor, shaped powerfully by both the secular love of government and the white guilt factor just discussed, is the incomprehensibly unprofessional way the news media have behaved during the 2008 election.

In my estimation, we basically don’t have a free press in America any more, other than the “New Media” – that is, talk radio, the Internet and some cable TV. Most of the rest of the establishment media have pretty much committed suicide this year.

Get David Kupelian’s best-selling exposé, “The Marketing of Evil,” autographed, from WorldNetDaily.

Just imagine that radical activist groups like the ACLU or the strident abortion outfit NARAL decided to start up their own “news organizations,” complete with broadcast “anchor people,” “reporters” and “correspondents,” as well as newspapers and news websites and so on – and with a straight face they called their output “news.” Everybody would laugh. Why? Because, while it would have the familiar form of news, it would of course just have the substance of their radical propaganda. No one would take it seriously.

This is exactly what we have in the so-called “mainstream press” today. The New York Times and NBC News, for example, are not true news organizations any more. They’ve become political and cultural activist organizations pretending to do news. And after having dropped all pretense at fairness this year, everyone knows it. This is why they’re more concerned about Joe the plumber’s tax bill than about the election being stolen by ACORN – because the elite media have become nothing more nor less than the propaganda ministry and attack dogs for Barack Obama.

Obama, the Manchurian candidate

In the classic 1962 movie thriller “The Manchurian Candidate,” a man was programmed by communist handlers, and then emerged into the public arena as a hero, with a largely manufactured history, large parts of which were either obscured or changed. Then he was planted into a position of great influence, having been programmed to usher in tremendous change at the appointed time.

Barack Obama was programmed for years by his atheist, Muslim father, by the communist sex pervert Frank Marshall Davis, by con man Tony Rezko, by domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and others – most of all by black liberation theology screamer Jeremiah Wright. Obama’s resume is largely manufactured. There is a total blackout on his college years. His campaign obscures what he did as a “community organizer.” All his radical associations are denied or minimized. His miserable legislative record (voting “present” over 100 times to avoid taking a stand), his lack of achievement, his radical views and so on – all have been laundered through the magic of public relations into the near-sacred saga of “The One” who has been sent to serve, and to save, America.

Yet, as I have documented previously, John McCain rendered more genuine service to his country each and every day of those five-and-a-half years he endured in a North Vietnamese prison than Barack Obama has in his entire life.

In “The Manchurian Candidate,” several war heroes came back to America from abroad. But one of them harbored a dark agenda, lying in wait, secretly, until it could emerge and transform America.

America has a choice Tuesday between a genuine war hero and a genuine Manchurian candidate.

Choose well.


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2008/10/79411/#tFzvxzl2TJKpejRD.99

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:15:16 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
I have long maintained that the situation here is that Obama is white when he does something to our liking, and black when he does something not to our liking.

LOL. 

Yeah, this thing of scarey black men with guns, it must be rooted in some feeling that you are gonna get us back for slavery eventually.

I would like to point out that there are black men running around with prosthetic legs and arms, and head injuries and all sorts of problems from carrying guns in the service of their country, just like white men.

They carried guns then, and nobody was scared of them over here.  


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to MsMJAY)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:18:16 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
sorry I know how that people refuse to click on links yet pontificate what wasnt mentioned.... had to include the whole thing...

PS DS... Racist loons, is not saying all birthers were, altho oh so many are...by a huge number...but the racist loons...are so far beyond mere birthers...

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:19:15 AM   
MsMJAY


Posts: 515
Joined: 3/17/2013
Status: offline
Google Obama and Manchurian. You will find that there are several right wing conspiracy theories concerning this. The movie "Dreams from My Real Father" promoted this idea. Heck some of these people have even written books calling Obama the Manchurian President... like this one:

The Manchurian President

It was a New York Times Bestseller.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

This is the elephant in the room that no one in the US really wants to talk about. It is also the reason why so many are so hardcore against any type of gun control. They are convinced that the evil black Manchurian is trying to take away their guns so that they will be defenseless when he carries out his programming to institute communism in the US. We have politicians and organizations promoting this kind of thinking and for those who believe it, it all makes perfect sense to them. Then they try to convince everyone that this line of thinking has nothing at all to do with the President's race.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

And you are full of it. Adobe acrobat pro???utter bollocks




If you are going to post like the loony left you need to get your insults right. Hell, even moony knows it's "the kenyan", not the "manchurian" and he doesn't even live here.


(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:20:09 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline
The full original quote concerning the NRA appears to be:

quote:

In the 1960s, the NRA supported gun control. This was partly in response to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and the violent riots that soon followed in the nation’s urban centers. At this time, the NRA and conservative elected officials directly supported a ban on assault weapons in order to maintain order and keep firearms out of the hands of activist groups, such as communist organizations and the Black Panther Party.


And, that's pretty much as I remember it. It wasn't a racist stance... hell, one of the prime reaons the NRA has long supported cheap handguns is that they are the self-defense weapons most affordable to poor (black) Americans.

Our stance has hardened since then, in part because we saw the handwriting on the incrementalism wall.

If you care to do the research there have been other challenges to the eligibility to Presidential hopefuls, all of whom were white.... I can be read herein stating that neither Rubio nor Cruz, both conservative darlings, is eligible, imo, for the White House.

It's just not about his race.

It's about his dishonesty, his arrogance, his disastrous foreign policy, his scandals upon scandals upon scandals, and his God-damned awful spending.

See, now? Not his race.....

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to MsMJAY)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:23:18 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:


It's about his dishonesty, his arrogance, his disastrous foreign policy, his scandals upon scandals upon scandals, and his God-damned awful spending.


Then why are Reagan, Nixon, Bush, and W remembered so fondly by the nutsackers against that very same backdrop?



_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:28:31 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

(Imagine voting for a white guy with such flimsy credentials and ominous associations.)


QFT

0bama0 is the pinnacle of affirmative action, and I mean that in the noblest of ways.
People voted for him because he was (half) black.
I just hope we got that shit out of our collective psyche and can henceforth vote for the best candidate.



_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:28:37 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

Google Obama and Manchurian. You will find that there are several right wing conspiracy theories concerning this. The movie "Dreams from My Real Father" promoted this idea. Heck some of these people have even written books calling Obama the Manchurian President... like this one:

The Manchurian President

It was a New York Times Bestseller.


See, I don't get that, he doesn't look nothing like Denzel (but I am one of those weird white guys that don't think all black folk look alike).

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to MsMJAY)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:29:40 AM   
MsMJAY


Posts: 515
Joined: 3/17/2013
Status: offline
They wanted control as long as Commies and Blacks wanted to carry. Now that conservative white people want to carry they want zero gun control. And note....it was not the assassinations that sparked the gun control support. It was the riots that happened in urban areas after those assassinations. Simply put, they were afraid of black men carrying.

FROM THE ARTICLE:
After 1868, former slaves in America were barred from owning guns for fear that they would retaliate and fight back against their oppressors. In contrast, the founding fathers allowed non-union loyalists who refused to support the revolution to own firearms. Post-Civil War gun laws were created to disenfranchise blacks in America and assure that only their oppressors owned guns and remained in full control. The ban on black ownership of firearms was a direct means to keep minorities from protecting themselves.


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

The full original quote concerning the NRA appears to be:

quote:

In the 1960s, the NRA supported gun control. This was partly in response to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and the violent riots that soon followed in the nation’s urban centers. At this time, the NRA and conservative elected officials directly supported a ban on assault weapons in order to maintain order and keep firearms out of the hands of activist groups, such as communist organizations and the Black Panther Party.


And, that's pretty much as I remember it. It wasn't a racist stance... hell, one of the prime reaons the NRA has long supported cheap handguns is that they are the self-defense weapons most affordable to poor (black) Americans.

Our stance has hardened since then, in part because we saw the handwriting on the incrementalism wall.

If you care to do the research there have been other challenges to the eligibility to Presidential hopefuls, all of whom were white.... I can be read herein stating that neither Rubio nor Cruz, both conservative darlings, is eligible, imo, for the White House.

It's just not about his race.

It's about his dishonesty, his arrogance, his disastrous foreign policy, his scandals upon scandals upon scandals, and his God-damned awful spending.

See, now? Not his race.....


(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:32:41 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

(Imagine voting for a white guy with such flimsy credentials and ominous associations.)


QFT

0bama0 is the pinnacle of affirmative action, and I mean that in the noblest of ways.
People voted for him because he was (half) black.
I just hope we got that shit out of our collective psyche and can henceforth vote for the best candidate.




We have done that several times throughout our history, voted for flimsy credentials and ominous associations.  And both times Obama was the best candidate So, we should assume that the whites voted for white Obama, and the blacks voted for black Obama.........(see?  I told ya)


< Message edited by mnottertail -- 12/30/2013 7:34:14 AM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:32:59 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

FROM THE ARTICLE:
After 1868, former slaves in America were barred from owning guns for fear that they would retaliate and fight back against their oppressors. In contrast, the founding fathers allowed non-union loyalists who refused to support the revolution to own firearms. Post-Civil War gun laws were created to disenfranchise blacks in America and assure that only their oppressors owned guns and remained in full control. The ban on black ownership of firearms was a direct means to keep minorities from protecting themselves.


From what article? Not that 1868 is relevant to my politics, or NRA policies......

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to MsMJAY)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:37:34 AM   
MsMJAY


Posts: 515
Joined: 3/17/2013
Status: offline
You mean imagine voting for Mitt Romney?

Because its impossible that anyone actually believed Obama was the best candidate- TWICE? I have noted that almost anytime someone black achieves something noteworthy (particularly something that was exclusively a white male area) it is always chalked up to affirmative action. "Cause "them darkies" never could have achieved anything on their own merits." (sports being the exception of course.)

And there is nothing to get out of our system. I believe that our country elected who the majority believes to be the best candidate. He just happened to be black. It can (and most likely will) happen again someday.

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

(Imagine voting for a white guy with such flimsy credentials and ominous associations.)


QFT

0bama0 is the pinnacle of affirmative action, and I mean that in the noblest of ways.
People voted for him because he was (half) black.
I just hope we got that shit out of our collective psyche and can henceforth vote for the best candidate.




(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:39:39 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

You mean imagine voting for Mitt Romney?



Hey, my black friend, white people are corporations too.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to MsMJAY)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:44:42 AM   
MsMJAY


Posts: 515
Joined: 3/17/2013
Status: offline
The same one I referenced before. The same one that said this:


In May, 1967, 29 members of the Black Panthers marched on the California Capitol in Sacramento, armed with rifles and assault weapons, to protest against the Mulford Act, a law that prohibited carrying loaded firearms in public. It was signed by then California Governor and future President Ronald Reagan. It’s ironic that Reagan, a supporter of gun rights as president, signed legislation that directly disarmed the Panthers during a time of racial tension in the State of California.

and this:

Once the FBI’s “Cointelpro” operation destroyed the Black Panther Party’s operation nationally, the NRA realized that the federal government might soon wage war against firearm and assault weapon ownership entirely. They strategically allied themselves with Southern voters, encouraging them to advocate on behalf of the Second Amendment and inflaming their distrust of the federal government.


Here's the link again LINK



quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

FROM THE ARTICLE:
After 1868, former slaves in America were barred from owning guns for fear that they would retaliate and fight back against their oppressors. In contrast, the founding fathers allowed non-union loyalists who refused to support the revolution to own firearms. Post-Civil War gun laws were created to disenfranchise blacks in America and assure that only their oppressors owned guns and remained in full control. The ban on black ownership of firearms was a direct means to keep minorities from protecting themselves.


From what article? Not that 1868 is relevant to my politics, or NRA policies......


(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 7:58:56 AM   
MsMJAY


Posts: 515
Joined: 3/17/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

You mean imagine voting for Mitt Romney?



Hey, my black friend, white people are corporations too.


Hey, my brother from another mother! Thanks for your all of your input. But, no discussion is complete until I hear you say "nutsackers." It just turns me on when you say that word!

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 9:49:22 AM   
EdBowie


Posts: 875
Joined: 8/11/2013
Status: offline
Another load of revisionist nonsense. In the real world of that era, the right to carry pistols was on the basis of the Jim Crow 'may issue' laws requiring permission from the local sheriff or other white political figure.
That's the 'gun control' the NRA (and the WCC, etc.) supported.


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

The full original quote concerning the NRA appears to be:

quote:

In the 1960s, the NRA supported gun control. This was partly in response to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and the violent riots that soon followed in the nation’s urban centers. At this time, the NRA and conservative elected officials directly supported a ban on assault weapons in order to maintain order and keep firearms out of the hands of activist groups, such as communist organizations and the Black Panther Party.


And, that's pretty much as I remember it. It wasn't a racist stance... hell, one of the prime reaons the NRA has long supported cheap handguns is that they are the self-defense weapons most affordable to poor (black) Americans.

Our stance has hardened since then, in part because we saw the handwriting on the incrementalism wall.

If you care to do the research there have been other challenges to the eligibility to Presidential hopefuls, all of whom were white.... I can be read herein stating that neither Rubio nor Cruz, both conservative darlings, is eligible, imo, for the White House.

It's just not about his race.

It's about his dishonesty, his arrogance, his disastrous foreign policy, his scandals upon scandals upon scandals, and his God-damned awful spending.

See, now? Not his race.....



_____________________________

Reading for understanding, instead of for argumentation, has its advantages.

(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 9:50:52 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

You mean imagine voting for Mitt Romney?


I certainly do not; Romney had extensive successful experience as an executive; 0bama0 had none.

Never in the modern era- and I doubt ever in the history of our Republic- has a man been elected President with so thin a resume so lacking in both experience and accomplishment.

He had two things (three if you count Miche. I certainly don't).

1. Hope and change, baby; hope and change.
2. He was (half) black.


Th-th-th-that's all, folks!!!!!

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to MsMJAY)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Let me see if I have this straight - 12/30/2013 9:52:50 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline
You are citing an editorial as fact.
I've already dealt with it.
If you see the US as some giant racist conspiracy you have my pity.

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to MsMJAY)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Let me see if I have this straight Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094