FiredMotorCompany Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) It might be that white republicans will have the chance again to say they hope the first black fails like they did in 2008. (Remove the reference to his race, and it is common sense that every R has wanted a D politician to fail. And the obverse as well. Elementary politics. Rush was only stating the obvious and had the gall to say what EVERY political activist has worked to accomplish.) I've been listening to a lot of political talk and emails coming from African American activists and this simple reality that white conservatives were so open about wanting the first black president to not only fail but to do some sort damage to America that they are driven to get the vote out. (It was the Obama supporters who have made every attack on Obama policies a racial issue. The Republican Party nor it's leaders have made a case for a white over a black, except the democrats have. Paranoia? I think so, though I anticipate the reply that "well, it's justified after all the discrimination we have endured." I don't deny wrongs were done, but regardless of the fringe on both sides, the campaigns were about policy, not race. But Obama supporters cannot get past the past.) It crossed party lines and moved into the reality that they would oppose him openly damaging what was a historic moment for America. (So, in effect, you are saying that voting for Obama because he was the first black candidate is just as racist as those who opposed Obama because is is black. Hypocritical) That this moment when the reality that yes, you really can be anything you want including president was cemented for many of them that it became politically expedient to hope he ruined the opportunity. (Commas would have made that statement a little easier to read. So, no matter WHAT his policies were, it is racist to deny a black man to be president once the first black candidate made it to a party's nominee? THAT is racist. I firmly believe the best deserve to gain from their qualifications. I HAVE NEVER resented anyone who has beat me out of a job, a promotion, a shift preference or a contract as long as they possessed qualifications greater than mine. It is in the best interest of everyone that the best be acknowledged and benefit from their efforts. Just as it is wrong to be required to place people in positions because of their race, sex or sexual orientation or because their racial percentages do not reflect community ratios.) Before the president had even been inaugurated white conservatives took the flame that had been lit and tried to smother it. Many feel it was about race. (They MADE IT ABOUT RACE!!! Smother a flame? Poetic. But When it comes to the word "Chicago" being racist, you have stretched credulity.) That this wouldn't happen to a white liberal because he or she might stand on firmer ground. For them the concept of white liberals voting for and electing this man was potentially sinking sand, that a mistake or two and racial tensions would rush back in and he would be abandoned. That with white conservatives out to get him they didn't have the numbers to protect him. I'm openly glad that it didn't happen that liberals didn't let his color become a sticking point, a reason to abandon him. (No. They have made race his PRIMARY qualification) I can foresee the excitement of Obama's first election opportunity being a high watermark and no matter how much you try, a second term will never pull in the same number of voters. Edited October 23, 2012 by FiredMotorCompany Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Can't read it, other than "Forward". Maybe you saw something else. It says "Foward" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 It says "Foward" Ok. The same as the posters behind him as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Ok. The same as the posters behind him as well. They removed all the "R"'s as a dig at Romney. Nah. Couldn't be something that sneaky. I'm sure a lack of spelling acumen or poor proof reading (or both) is to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 More "phoenetic" spelling. Boyz, Bois, Grlz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 They removed all the "R"'s as a dig at Romney. Nah. Couldn't be something that sneaky. I'm sure a lack of spelling acumen or poor proof reading (or both) is to blame. Hey, she may be the president of the local teacher's union! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Can't read it, other than "Forward". Maybe you saw something else. They removed all the "R"'s as a dig at Romney. Nah. Couldn't be something that sneaky. I'm sure a lack of spelling acumen or poor proof reading (or both) is to blame. More idiots trying to pull the "W" from the White House computers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 No, how dumb YOU are! They are sooooo different, one has to better than the other. If in your opinion it is Obama, then vote for him. But, if you are just a hand wringer, then your opinion is worthless. 1 of 2 men is going to win.....no matter how hard you try and convince anyone else they are both useless. Maybe you should join Mr Cap, or maybe you are a Canadian who doesn't care. In either case, vote for 1 of the two.......if you are eligible, and if you are not eligible, then maybe you should allow Amereicans to decide their own future. Uhh. Not really sure how to respond to this other than to say I hope this was just a misguided attempt at sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Can you just resign from here? I mean seriously, just go fuck yourself and not come back. (sorry for the langauge but he deserved it.) How bout he pull a Thad McCotter ® and resign in July and cost his district $600, 000 for special primaries to get on the Novmber 6th ballot for the last 1&1/2 months. Be a worried about the taxpayer's money republican! Perhaps you need another vacation? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I'm disappointed that the worsing European economy is given no stage in Romney/Obama debates. Neither of their economic plans can work very well with a deepening European recession/crisis. No way is Romney going to create 12 million new jobs when our largest trading partner is struggling so. Third quarter earnngs coming in right now are giving soft guidance going forward because of Europe. So neither candidate is being honest with us by ignoring the problem in their debates. It will affect foreign policy also, and not a word about it last night. Eurpean social unrest is only going to grow and look more like the Arab Spring. Romney/Obama act like they are living in a bubble or in denial. Neither inspire confidence going forward as they act like America is an island unto itself unaffected by growing European crisis. Companies like Ford are going to have to deal with it, and so will America eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 WOW! Talk about predictions. A CBS affiliate runs 2012 Election Results with 99% Precincts reporting. And what does a CBS affiliate show as the results? Obama had won the Nov. 6 election over Gov. Mitt Romney with 99% of the precincts reporting. 43 percent of the vote nationwide to Romney’s 40 percent -– or 40,237,966 votes to 38,116,216. Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/21/cbs-news-affiliate-calls-2012-presidential-race-for-barack-obama-weeks-ahead-of-election/#ixzz2A8Way335 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goinbroke2 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Is that a joke? Castro? Really??? He hasn't been a threat to us since the 60's. 50 years ago he was an issue. We've made peace with all the other communist countries from 50 years ago and formalized relations with China, Russia and even Viet Nam yet somehow that tiny little island scares republicans. Talk about going out of your way to ignore the obvious...but of course you see nothing wrong with communists do you? Funny how the part of cuba that is capitalist (tourist area's etc) is thriving (relatively) but the area's where there is no capitalism, where only the nanny-state controls everything and everybody, all are equal...equal in squalor. But no, communism is great, no rich people (except those in power) no misery (except everybody but those in power) everything is shared equally (yay, one can of beans for you, one for me) yes I can see how this "utopia" is sought after by those who only know the slogans but have never travelled to or lived in a communist country. "everyone is equal, everyone to their ability" Yeah, it works awesome. Here's a personal story for you while I was in a communist country; Hey, how come you fix one truck a day and he fixes three? "Cause he can" But don't you get the same pay? "Yes, he will slow down soon enough, haha" Awesome, everything reduced to the lowest common denominator. Same reason a lot of russians who jumped at capitalism when the wall came down, rushed back towards communism within two years. Yes they were free to do what they wanted, but they failed to realise that the nanny state would no longer be taking care of them. How embarassing must it have been to realise that they couldn't make it on their own and were dependant on the nanny state to take care of them. Like setting a tame lion free and it goes out and starves because it has no idea how to hunt. People really don't understand how bad communism is....just keep chanting their slogans and wearing the "che" t-shirts..."down with capitalism" they type on their computor in their 2500 sq ft home on 2 acres with 2 cars in the driveway. The election should be a simple question; Do you want... 1) to be responsible for your own destiny? 2) the ever expanding nanny state to take care of you from cradle to grave? If you answer (1) then vote Mitt. If you answer (2) then vote Mitt and leave the country for any communist country of your choosing. (cause America was never and will never be communist...unless obama gets a second term) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal50 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Perhaps you need another vacation? Lol. Did you REALLY expect anything different? (time for a new personality or lack of one) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bored of Pisteon Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Can you just resign from here? I mean seriously, just go fuck yourself and not come back. (sorry for the langauge but he deserved it.) How bout he pull a Thad McCotter ® and resign in July and cost his district $600, 000 for special primaries to get on the Novmber 6th ballot for the last 1&1/2 months. Be a worried about the taxpayer's money republican! You have zero class whatsoever. ZERO. PATHETIC! About McCotter...he was a numbskull anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bored of Pisteon Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) Perhaps you need another vacation? YOU ARE NOW ON NOTICE MR. HUGHES. And a permenant vacation at that! :hysterical: (that'll be me laughing when it happens...and a lot of us on here too!) Edited October 23, 2012 by Bored of Pisteon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 YOU ARE NOW ON NOTICE MR. HUGHES. And a permenant vacation at that! :hysterical: (that'll be me laughing when it happens...and a lot of us on here too!) No need to encourage it, you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 No need to encourage it, you know. I have been suspicious of his new membership status with strikingly similar talking points and personal attack M.O. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) I have been suspicious of his new membership status with strikingly similar talking points and personal attack M.O. Oh there's nothing suspicious about it. That would imply doubt. Edited October 23, 2012 by NickF1011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Oh there's nothing suspicious about it. That would imply doubt. I was being generous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 You have zero class whatsoever. ZERO. PATHETIC! If I am judged by you to be less than classy it means nothing. If I cared what you thought of me I wouldn't have addressed you as I did. I do find the whole situation funny and telling. Your post was certainly lacking in logic and class in it's own right and when I respond in kind although with more aggressive wording you act like i'm some sort of heathen. Typical of a conservative to establish that there are rules as to how to act a fool. You can do it like you do but not like I do because the words matter more than the reasons behind them. And I do mean to suggest that while you didn't use foul language your premise showed a serious hatred for someone, while my loud aggressive tone and wording expressed a dislike of you and your position. Which is really worse? To hate in the dark or to dislike in a unacceptable manner? I know your opinion, i know how Nick responded but I'm wondering if other can see the point behind this social standard as an arbitrary construct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goinbroke2 Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 "To hate in the dark or to dislike in a unacceptable manner?" This would imply that someone swore at somebody anonomously compared to someone who eloquently passed a negative judgement. How about "To hate in the dark or to hate in an unacceptable manner" Patayto, pahtahto...or am I a F%^&ing moron for spelling potato wrong? I could of spelled it with an "E"? You could construct a sound argument on occasion, unfortunately those occasions are farther and farther apart now that you are no longer trying to assume a new identity. You will be quite reserved in your next rendition as well, until the familiarity again betrays your true identity in which case you will attack with renewed venom. I too look forward to your absence, which will be soon, given your present course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xr7g428 Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 Langdad, good debate requires effort on both sides. Perhpas you could consider what is being said as constructive criticism rather than taking things personally and dropping F bombs all around? Learn from Mark. When he loses a point, he just steps back from the fray and redirects to a topic that might have more promise. Of course we get it that he was forced to concede the point and so does he, but it makes for a better debate. When you cling to a losing argumnet, you diminish your position going forward. For example: It looks like any defense of the Benghazi situation will be futile. Obama and company just screwed the pooch, and about the best you can chalk it up to will be the fog of war thing... The smart thing ofor Obama would be to really take responsibility and say that they should have done much better, and that the cover story was just wrong. It's called coming clean for a reason. If he doesn't do it soon he just gets dirtier by the day. Being the last guy still defending him on this makes you look like those few Nixon apologists still trying to whitewash Watergate: out of touch with reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted October 24, 2012 Author Share Posted October 24, 2012 More "phoenetic" spelling. Boyz, Bois, Grlz. Gorrilas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_spaniard Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 Wow, look at eh love Obama is getting on these boards. He's a liar, a cheat, he has folks fudge unemployment numbers, didn't do (insert phrase here) in time, etc. My how people get worried in a close race. It's anybodys election, and you can see the wheels coming off the wagon for some people here. Well I think Obama is actually the Super-duper devil. He is here to replace this guy: http://youtu.be/29khjYTOLC8 I even heard hes not human! By the time they count the votes, right-wing people will have "evidence" he is really a lawn chair. Then again, if he wins I want the footage of ultra conservatives of this board finding out. Will it look like this? http://youtu.be/oep4mRpmrkQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal50 Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 Its pretty clear Obama IS a liar on Libya so if you are OK with that you have low standards.....what ever works for ya. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stPcyWzwzXk&feature=plcp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts