mandela was a terrorist, even more than ayers was, and in the same time frame too. you can find any number of pictures of Bush shaking hands with the old fella. (yes, those two parts of the sentence ARE related).
Other than, say, Palin saying that Obama [color=#FF0000]pals around with [/color]terrorists? In the minds of these unedumacated, Fox News-watching lowlifes, “Terrorists” = “Ayrabs” = “brown people”.[/quote]
So, Ayers wasn’t a terrorist? Obama didn’t attend parties at his house? It seems to me that those are pretty accurate descriptions. They may not be relevant, but they do seem to be pretty accurate.[/quote]
No, not at all accurate. Obama served on the Board of Directors of a respectable organization at the time that another Director was a respectable member of society who had decades earlier, when Obama was a young child, allegedly committed terrorist acts. So, (a) they didn’t “pal around together” (b) he wasn’t a terrorist at any time that Obama knew him, and (c) there was only one such person, not multiple ones as Palin has repeatedly falsely stated (she repeatedly used an “s” after “terrorist”). Her allegation was false, it was a dirty smear tactic, and Palin used it over and over and over.
Yes there are ignoramuses in both parties, but it’s abundantly obvious that the McCain/Palin campaign has, out of desperation because they’re losing so badly, stooped to all sorts of nasty smears, false statements and innuendos, personal attacks and other slime tactics to win at any cost, far more than the Obama campaign has. Palin has been engaging in a nasty, dirty campaign that reflects her vile character and as a result voters have been turning away from her in droves. If you don’t recognize that I suggest you start watching something other than Fox news, because it’s been abundantly documented in the media, not because the media is out to get her, but becuase it’s the blatant truth.
I think he put a few of them into power didn’t he?
BTW where can we get those Palin T-shirts? They are cool!
Yes, he did. I think that statement could probably be made regarding many of the past presidents.
If you go back and read my post, I also stated that I didn’t think that it was relevant.
Obama likes to say, “you can”. or “yes we can”. but if you translate “you can” into Dutch, it comes out as “u kunt”.
What’s he really trying to say?
[quote=“Dr. McCoy”]Obama likes to say, “you can”. or “yes we can”. but if you translate “you can” into Dutch, it comes out as “u kunt”.
What’s he really trying to say?[/quote]
“yes we can” is just a terrorist code word. Rearrange the letters and you’ll get “c new ayes”, which translates to “see, I’m the new Ayers”. Not only does he want to follow in the footsteps of Ayers, he’s also a poor speller.
Aw Christ! I’ve been hood winked by that Obamamessiah Hussein terr’ist!
But seriously, doesn’t this leave anyone else just a little concerned about the guilt or otherwise of the people locked up in Gitmo? I mean if they can keep a straight face while pointing an accusatory finger and screaming terrorist at the guy running for president, who tha fark is safe?
HG
The election is another big advertisement of the fact that Americans are total douchebags by and large. This election is fought on colour. Idiocy. America has severe economoc problems. Old Clinton couldn’t keep his dong under control but he knew a thing or two about limiting the spending of your average American. Where is CURRENT president George Bush in all of this? Is he just having a good old laugh?
And that guy with that monkey is the sort of prick who needs punching. Violence to combat racism. Hatred vs force. Thats my only advocation. Punch the dick out to send a clear message. White America should feel ashamed.
i am sre that some of them do feel ashamed at having lost the civil war, ashamed at having to live with dem nigras and dem spics that they don’t even talk like real Americans, and their churches are all funny an stuff, and they don’t even play decent music or go huntin’. dey’s ASHAMED dear Lord to be havin to share the same state with them folks.
and then there’s a whole bunch of decent folk, for whom colour is not relevant. anyway, the American blacks should turn the tables and diss Obama because he’s half white. that’d force his detractors on the other side of the racial divide to back him.
or not, as was once very well pointed out in a song by Public Enemy:
“white mother, white father, white baby.
black mother, black father, black baby.
black mother, white father, black baby.
white mother, black father, black baby.”
I am sre that some of them do feel ashamed at having lost the civil war, ashamed at having to live with dem nigras and dem spics that they don’t even talk like real Americans, and their churches are all funny an stuff, and they don’t even play decent music or go huntin’. dey’s ASHAMED dear Lord to be havin to share the same state with them folks.
and then there’s a whole bunch of decent folk, for whom colour is not relevant. anyway, the American blacks should turn the tables and diss Obama because he’s half white. that’d force his detractors on the other side of the racial divide to back him.
or not, as was once very well pointed out in a song by Public Enemy:
“white mother, white father, white baby.
black mother, black father, black baby.
black mother, white father, black baby.
white mother, black father, black baby.”[/quote]
Aside from the sheer stupidty of your post I will still play. The whole lot of them should be ashamed. The decent folk as you call them should make their voices heard. An election run on colour in a country purporting to have a democracy is shameful. As bad as the fucker with the monkey is the man who stands next to him and says nothing. There is no place for racism in any society.
i don’t quite think you grokked the implications of my post in all their fullness, mike-rophoneman
or maybe you did, but don’t like it. fair enough.
i don’t like racism either, and i am saying that thankfully some people in america as elsewhere have very different opinions to the monkey man. but then again, many people don’t even think we are apes ourself but descended from God. what could be more crazy than that?
[quote=“urodacus”]I don’t quite think you grokked the implications of my post in all their fullness, mike-rophoneman
or maybe you did, but don’t like it. fair enough.
I don’t like racism either, and I am saying that thankfully some people in America as elsewhere have very different opinions to the monkey man. but then again, many people don’t even think we are apes ourself but descended from God. what could be more crazy than that?[/quote]
I merely check microphones, I am not indeed a microphone myself.
And I didn’t understand your point in your last post. Too muddy. I understand it now.
My posistion is that the witness of the racism should act up. See a man with an Obama monkey doll, smash that cunt in his teeth. That will learn him good. Stand there and smile and do nothing then you are as much of a douche as the racist. Rasicm is stamped out when it is confronted.
And it has little or nothing to do with the creationsim vs evolution debate.
maybe he just liked monkeys, and missed his mommy.
Or maybe he’s a racist.
[quote] Race Remains Campaign Issue, but Not a Clear One
Senator Barack Obama lost the Ohio Democratic primary by 10 percentage points and the West Virginia primary by a whopping 40 points last spring — a sign, to some Democrats and political analysts, that many whites in the Rust Belt would not vote for a black man for president. . .
“What you hear around here is, would you rather have a black friend in the White House, or a white enemy?” said John Schuster, a Republican from Wheeling, W.Va., who joined several thousand people here for a twilight rally led by Ms. Palin.
“Most guys I know are for McCain, and a lot of it’s because of race,” Mr. Schuster continued. “Obama doesn’t have the right friends — that Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers the terrorist. The thing is, Obama may be better for jobs. But a lot of us don’t trust him.”
The candidacy of Mr. Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, once seemed to promise a new national conversation about race, an open dialogue about historical animosities and prejudices and the ways in which Americans have and have not moved beyond them. Yet for the most part, race has remained submerged as an issue, and the Obama campaign never dealt with it directly or in a full-throated way.
Instead, race has erupted as an issue mostly in ways that seem to confirm how deep the divide remains for some voters — those expressing mistrust over Mr. Obama’s ties to his controversial former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., or those describing Mr. Obama as “uppity” or “elitist.” While Mr. Obama’s advisers say they do not think race will be a factor in the election, the actual extent of the racial divide is likely to become clear only on Nov. 4.
“Obama has been running as a post-racial candidate from the start, and he has been doing it very well,” said Douglas Brinkley, the presidential historian, “but the fact of the matter is that some voters — we can’t know yet how many — will not get past his race. And I very much believe that the McCain-Palin ticket is tapping into that.”
On Saturday, Representative John Lewis, the Georgia Democrat and civil rights leader, went as far as invoking George Wallace, the segregationist governor of Alabama, to accuse Senator John McCain, the Republican nominee, of fomenting racial hatred. For Mr. Lewis and many other Democrats, the recent heckling of Mr. Obama at Republican rallies — where he has been called Arab, Muslim, traitor, terrorist, friend of terrorists, Barack Hussein Obama — amounts to code words that reflect latent or overt racism . . .
“The bottom line is, he isn’t one of us, and I’m scared to death of him,” said Lloyd Wood, a Republican and farmer in this rural town in southeast Ohio who came to the local Wal-Mart on Sunday for a campaign visit by Ms. Palin. . .
Asked about race, Mr. Miller said: “I think the country is ready for a black president, but a lot of people around here may not be. . . "[/quote]
nytimes.com/2008/10/13/us/po … ce.html?em
I’ve never understood why somebody who is half white and half black is consistently called a black person, particularly those persons of mixed heritage who look predominantly like their white parents.
My daughter was explaining just the other day what they told her in kindergarten: that the world has 3 kinds of people, white people, black people and people of the sun (she was informed in Chinese and translated to English for me with my wife’s help). I guess the last one is supposed to include brown and yellow people.
I promptly informed her that her teacher may have meant well, but she was wrong. For example, I explained, there are Chinese/Taiwanese people and there are American people. “Which are you?” I asked her. “Both,” she replied. “Right,” I continued. And there are African/Chinese people and Indian/Chinese people and German/Chinese people, etc. There are infinite types of people. She understood immediately. Now maybe she can instruct her teacher.
[quote=“BroonAle”][quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]Whoa! The Brady effect is getting shot, innit?
HG[/quote]
Bradley…not Brady.[/quote]
Damn, who’da thunk Broonale would’ve been right?
[quote] Sen. Barack Obama has a sizeable lead over Sen. John McCain, polls show, but those numbers could be deceiving if the “Bradley effect” comes into play.
The Bradley effect is named after former Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, an African-American who ran for California governor in 1982.
Exit polls showed Bradley leading by a wide margin, and the Democrat confidentially thought it would be an early election night.
But Bradley and the polls were wrong. He lost to Republican George Deukmejian.
The theory was that polling was wrong because some voters, who did not want to appear bigoted, said they voted for Bradley even though they did not.
“People will usually tell you how they voted after the election, but we found in the Bradley campaign … that people were actually not telling us who they voted for,” said Charles Henry, who researched Bradley’s election.
The Bradley effect is also called the “Wilder effect,” after Douglas Wilder, Virginia’s former governor. He won by just one-tenth of a percent, but as he pointed out to CNN, “people forget – in the exit polls, I was still double-digits ahead.”
According to CNN’s latest poll of polls, Obama is leading McCain by 8 percentage points, 50 to 42.
Some analysts say the race could be much closer or even tied if the Bradley effect is factored in.
“It leaves a question mark over this race, and we won’t have the final answer until the votes are counted,” said David Gergen, a senior political analyst for CNN.
But there could be an opposite effect, Wilder said.
“There’s going to be a reverse Wilder or Bradley effect. … There are some Republicans who are not going to say out front that they’re going to be voting for Obama, but they’re going to be, because the economy is what’s driving people to consider what’s in their best interest,” he said.
Some analysts say the Bradley effect can account for 6 percentage points against an African-American candidate.
Michelle Obama told CNN’s Larry King that a lot has changed since Bradley lost.
“That was several decades ago, and I think there’s been growth and movement,” she said. “I just believe that the issues are going to weigh in people’s hearts more so as they go into the voting booths this time around.” . . . [/quote]
cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/13/ … ey.effect/
Well I would for one.
HG
[quote]The one-drop rule is a historical colloquial term in the United States that holds that a person with any trace of African ancestry is considered black unless having an alternative non-white ancestry which he or she can claim, such as Native American, Asian, Arab, or Australian aboriginal.[1] It developed most strongly out of the binary culture of long years of institutionalized slavery.
This notion of invisible/intangible membership in a racial group has seldom been applied to people of Native American ancestry (see Race in the United States for details). The concept has been chiefly applied to those of black African ancestry. As Langston Hughes wrote, “You see, unfortunately, I am not black. There are lots of different kinds of blood in our family. But here in the United States, the word ‘Negro’ is used to mean anyone who has any Negro blood at all in his veins. In Africa, the word is more pure. It means all Negro, therefore black. I am brown.”[2]
During the Black Pride era of the Civil Rights Movement, the stigma associated with sub-Saharan ancestry was turned to a socio-political advantage.[/quote]
Outdated and no longer used, but still applies as it’s hard to legislate mentalities…
[quote]The one-drop rule is a historical colloquial term in the United States that holds that a person with any trace of African ancestry is considered black unless having an alternative non-white ancestry which he or she can claim, such as Native American, Asian, Arab, or Australian aboriginal.[1] It developed most strongly out of the binary culture of long years of institutionalized slavery.
This notion of invisible/intangible membership in a racial group has seldom been applied to people of Native American ancestry (see Race in the United States for details). The concept has been chiefly applied to those of black African ancestry. As Langston Hughes wrote, “You see, unfortunately, I am not black. There are lots of different kinds of blood in our family. But here in the United States, the word ‘Negro’ is used to mean anyone who has any Negro blood at all in his veins. In Africa, the word is more pure. It means all Negro, therefore black. I am brown.”[2]
During the Black Pride era of the Civil Rights Movement, the stigma associated with sub-Saharan ancestry was turned to a socio-political advantage.[/quote]
Outdated and no longer used, but still applies as it’s hard to legislate mentalities…[/quote]
Interesting. Thank you for that. How should we refer to Barack Obama then in a way that’s accurate without being a vestige of our racist past?