Obama was elected through willful ignorance

1. 61

   tobey100posted 14 years ago

   I don't like Obama.  Oh, he may be a nice enough guy to shoot hoops with.  I don't like his politics.  I don't like what he stands for.  The evidence was right there in front of us the whole time and we willfully ignored it to our detriment.  Based on the philosophy of 'know your enemy' I read his books (Who writes two autobiographies before they've done anything?)  One sentence told me exactly who he was and that we were in big trouble.  After reading it I closed the book, put it in the garbage can and said a prayer for this nation.
   
   From Audacity of Hope: "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
   
   This man was elected President of these United States of America.  That one sentence cannot be misinterpreted.  He did not 'misspeak'.  It is not taken out of context.  I defy any Democrat or Liberal to rationize it or explain it away.

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      To me all he meant was that he would oppose mistreatment or hysterical, ugly persecution of Muslims in this country as was done to Japanese- American citizens who were interned during WWII.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         tobey100posted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Everyone tries to make what he said into something noble.  If you read his book that's not the context.  He was stating his fundamental support of the muslim nation.  Period.

         replyreport
         1. 70

            rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Looking at it in context it shows that he is more concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of Arab and Pakistani Americans than this "muslim nation" you refer to.
            
            What I have a hard time understanding is why you came to that conclusion after Obama prefaced the whole quote explaining the last sentence.
            
            Here is the surrounding text.
            
            "Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
            
            I am still looking for the muslim nation you refer too in that.

            replyreport
            1. 71

               Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               I doubt that he read the book.

               replyreport
               1. 70

                  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Ralph,
                  
                  I didn't read the book either but I found the quote easily enough.  The funny thing is that the whole preface to the quote specifically explained the context Obama was putting the last sentence in.
                  
                  

                  replyreport
         2. 60

            KKalmesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Totally wrong... try fact checking some of your material...
            
            A second false quote has Obama saying he would "stand with the Muslims," words that don't appear in his book. What he actually said is that he would stand with American immigrants from Pakistan or Arab countries should they be faced with something like the forced detention of Japanese-American families in World War II:
            
            Misleading e-mail: From Audacity of Hope: "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
            
            Actual quote from "The Audacity of Hope" [pg. 261]: Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction. 
            Obama did not say he would side with "the Muslims," which could easily be read as meaning he would side with the world's Muslim population even if it meant working outside the best interests of the United States. He said he would side with "them," referring back to his mention of immigrant communities and specifically to "Arab and Pakistani Americans." Furthermore, he was speaking of an "ugly direction" like the mass internment of Japanese Americans. 
            
            This false quote goes hand in hand with the equally false rumor that Obama is a Muslim.
            
            factcheck.org

            replyreport
   2. 61

      optimus grimlockposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with you, he would be good to play ball with and I'm sure hes a cool guy! I think he were after the right democraphic of people that got him in also the change thing. It just proves you give3 people a little bit of hope the fall for it without thinking of the consequences!

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Doesn't it bother you in the least that the quote cited doesn't exist, and it was cited by a man who claims to have read the book, so either he intentionally misquoted or he didn't actually read the book?
         
         Does that bother you at all?

         replyreport
         1. 57

            leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            The quote means nothing, they are only words. It is action that matters and when you consider the actions of the Obama administration in total concerning Muslims it is quite obvious there is a policy of appeasement, tolerance, and political correctness that has the potential for disastrous consequences. It is only by luck that successful attacks in NY and on the plane by the underwear bomber that we have avoided catastrophe and it is the policies of this administration that led to the successful murder of 13 at Fort Hood.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               You're right, the quote means nothing because it is false.
               
               As for the rest of your comment, look up the definition of "willful ignorance."

               replyreport
            2. 70

               rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Sorry Leebertha, words have meaning and Tobey100 missed the meaning completely.
               
               The pathetic thing is that people hear what they want to and expect others to follow along blindly. 
               
               Sarah Palin comes to mind with regards to this.  I wonder when the government is going to set up that "death panel" thingy she espoused to all of us.

               replyreport
               1. 57

                  leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Yes words have meaning and certainly one can make a valid argument that Obama was indeed refering to Muslims in his quote as has been pointed out previously. What you want those words to mean is more a reflection of your politics than anything else. But, in addition to those words you must examine the record in total. You can't rule out that having a Muslim father would tend to make one more sympathetic to their beliefs. The fact that he also said in his book that he identified more with the black man in Africa, or that he sought out the most radical elements on campus and that he continues to have associations with people with extreme left views. You can't simply ignore 20 years in church with reverend Wright. The policy of refusing to mention the term "Islamic extremist" when referring to the terrorists bombers that tried to kill Americans or Hassan that suceeded in doing so. The bows, the apologies, the harder line against Israel, the granting of rights to terrorists captured on the battlefield. I can go on and on. It's not hard to make the case that Obama is more than just tolerant of Muslims, more than interested in protecting their "rights", though I wouldn't go so far as to say he is against Americans, I would be willing to consider that is the result of his policies as a minimum he is at least presenting that view to some.

                  replyreport
                  1. 70

                     rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     You contsrue through assumption much of what you offer in your response.  Maybe a more centerist view of problems does not appeal to you but you make assumptions based on meritless dribble.
                     
                     I don't agree with all of what Obama says or does but I do respect his listening to all sides of something before like going off half cocked invading countries based on assumptions.
                     
                     Obama sets foreign policy and the electorate put him in charge to take us away from the failed policies of the former administration.
                     
                     If you listen to the context rather than the inflamatory speech of Jeremiah Wright you may see a not so complimentry view of America that a few of our citizens believe. Because it is not fed to you in a conciliatory fashion no less invalidates the message. This goes towards listening to more radical and progressive messages as well.
                     
                     If not for the freedom of speech and the press these rights would be trampled upon.  Because I may read Mein Kampf does that make me a Nazi or does it mean that I prefer that type of reading? Maybe I am trying to understand the mentality of such a leader and how he influenced so many to commit the atrocities they did.  Not that I condone their actions.

                     replyreport
                     1. 57

                        leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        No reading Mien Kampf doesn't make you a Nazi, but what does attending white supremacists meetings every Sunday for 20 years make you?
                        
                        Okay maybe you just did it for educational purposes.
                        
                        I can see why you appreciate this administration since your arrogance is on par with the intellectuals running the country now that seem to think opposing views are "dribble" and that they know better but just aren't able to explain it to those of us who just aren't as smart.
                        
                        If there's something I said that you care to refute with facts by all means present it but just because you consider what I presented "dribble" doesn't make it so.

                        replyreport
                        1. 70

                           rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           Did I hurt your little feelings?
                           
                           You merely repeat the dribble you hear from like minded individuals that you think are right.
                           
                           There is no defending inuendo as it has a slippery basis by whch it is founded on, single mindedness and ignorance.
                           
                           This means this and this means that is your only argument.  You sound like the mainstream media with your reports on what somebody meant rather than what they accually said or did.
                           
                           You go on and on about the Reverend Wright said and refuse to take a look at the message.  Did he not put it out there "white" enough for you?  Did he blame the wrong people?  Does he have a different reality of America than you do?  Since it is not your reality I guess he was wrong then.
                           
                           I would offer that a degree of arrogance sheilds you from the learning that you desperately need in order to form informed choices and not of those offered by the ones spoon feeding their opinions as fact to you.

                           replyreport
                           1. 57

                              leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              Oh yes, I'm sure Reverend Wrights message was a good and wholesome one, which explains why Obama left the church and distanced himself from his long time friend.
                              
                              Sorry if I got any "dribble" on you. Let's speak again when you grow up.

                              replyreport
                              1. 70

                                 rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                 As I said if something has to be presented to you so that your arrogance can be placated then I guess you will be awhile figuring out the message.
                                 
                                 Obama left the church for two reasons.  One political and the other location.  People with your grip on the "truth" have a hard time with that.
                                 
                                 Don't worry about the dribble, I am accustomed to it.
                                 
                                 If your opinions and inuendo are the proof of your "maturity" I would rather remain where I am thank you.

                                 replyreport
      2. 71

         Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         What consequences are you worried about--his historic health care reform bill, the finance reform bill passed by the Senate and House, now in reconciliation, his efforts to allow gays to serve openly in the military, or his efforts to bring the country out of the Bush recession?

         replyreport
      3. 62

         omi saideposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         What did we have to pick from-Tweedle dee or Tweedum dee. We pick tweedle dee. Next time you pick tweedle dum-Palin and the teabag party okay?

         replyreport
   3. 61

      KFlippinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Glad to find your bravely proposed topic this evening.  The discourse should prove interesting, and chock full of accusations of lying and no doubt as well trashing of Republicans in an effort to Distract.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         So, KFlippin is going on record that the truth doesn't matter, lies and distortions are okay, and bravery consists of making up stories in forum threads then disappearing when called on it.
         
         Unbelievable.  Truly.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            KFlippinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I completely agree!  Your point has been extremely well made.  Unbelievable.  Truly. 
            
            ?Going on the record.....whose record?  And if you wish to put words and positions in my mouth and in my stance of your own liking, you should check first.  With whom?   

            replyreport
            1. 0

               PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Yeah, I drew conclusions based upon your support of Tobey's "brave" topic.  We obviously disagree on the definition of "brave."
               
               I will concede that my conclusions could be wrong...but for now, they're my conclusions.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  KFlippinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Well, that's good to hear. It is not wise to jump to conclusions.

                  replyreport
   4. 60

      Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      yeah, even though me and mr. deeds almost always disagree, i'm gonna have to agree here: i'm pretty sure that Obama just means he's going to fight off government oppression of muslims if the tides turn that way.
      
      that's one thing i can agree with obama on

      replyreport
      1. 71

         Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Good to see somebody take an honest approach contrary to the magpies!

         replyreport
   5. 71

      pylos26posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Obama was elected in  rebuttal to the total idiot that previously occupied the white house.

      replyreport
   6. 60

      KKalmesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Excuse me? Whose willful ignorance... those of you who can't get a single fact straight even when you know you are willfully misrepresenting, distorting and lying?
      
      I am not ignorant and I am offended by this... I voted for President Obama and will do so again... and if he could run for a third term I would vote for him again.
      
      Also, note my response above to your ridiculous misquote and try factcheck.org before you willfully show your ignorance again.

      replyreport
2. 57

   leebertteaposted 14 years ago

   The Muslim religion involves the conversion of all into the faith, as do all faiths, but also includes the effort to transform society into rule by sharia law. This is the essence of Jihad. The two philosophies for accomplishing this are through violence and through peaceful means. Make no mistake, the intent is clear and there are two fronts on this attack on western values and law. Ignore this truth at your own risk, and realize Obama may not be Muslim, but his father was and he no doubt feels more welcoming to their message, or at least more tolerant of it than most Americans.
   
   This theory is explained in the book, The Grand Jihad.
   
   http://www.heritage.org/Events/2010/05/ … ge-America

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Obama is a devout Christian, tolerant of other religions.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I never said otherwise, though I doubt he is "devout".

         replyreport
   2. 85

      donotfearposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      
      Very good point!!

      replyreport
3. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 14 years ago

   If you really did read his book, why are you quoting him inaccurately?  Here is the exact quote:
   
   Actual quote from page 261 of "The Audacity of Hope":
   
   "Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
   
   He is specifically talking about Arab and Pakistani Americans in this paragraph.  Muslims are not even mentioned.
   
   So, which is it, did you read the book and intentionally misquote him, or did you find your information somewhere else and assume it was correct?

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks, PrettyPanther. You're better than FactCheck and Snopes. Perhaps Tobey can provide a page,paragraph and line reference. Or maybe he heard it on Limbaugh or Beck.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I have the book in my library.  Of course, Tobey won't be able to provide a reference because he threw the book in the garbage.

         replyreport
         1. 64

            Wendy Krickposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            

            replyreport
         2. 59

            Bill Millerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Garbage seems to be a perfect place for the autobiography of a college graduate, I would write mine but modesty and the knowledge that I haven't done anything prevents me.
            
            Good thing it didn't stop the anointed one.

            replyreport
   2. 60

      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You really had to ask that question?  Conservative pundits feed misinformation to their ignorant (willfully or not) lackeys who then regurgitate it accross the internet.  These wingnuts then cry foul when you catch them in thier deceptive practices and call them out for it.
      
      These people are a frickin joke.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I know, I'm just trying to get him to admit it. 

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            It's not really a fair fight.  You should try chugging a six-pack of Billy Beer before posting to even the odds.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Do they even make that stuff anymore?  Will a more elitist brew work, like Full Sail Amber?

               replyreport
               1. 75

                  Jeff Berndtposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Oooh, now I'm intrigued. I like a good amber ale, Bell's being my favorite. Tell me more of Full Sail, please...
                  
                  (Trying to get something worthwhile out of this otherwise so far worthless thread.)

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Here you go:
                     
                     http://www.fullsailbrewing.com/beers/amber.cfm

                     replyreport
                     1. 75

                        Jeff Berndtposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        Ta very much!

                        replyreport
               2. 60

                  Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  If you really wish to be elitist, you'll have to sip on a nice Belgian ale, but Billy Beer would be more appropriate for the situation.

                  replyreport
                  1. 71

                     Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Stroh's is the best recession beer. $16 for a 30-can pack at my local store.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        It's funny how the old time "retro" beers are making a comeback.  I thought Pabst had ceased to exist, but among the college crowd in Flagstaff, PBR rules.

                        replyreport
         2. 70

            Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Hey Pretty Panther, please stop and think about what you are saying. I mean, think it through. Did you find any way that you can "make" him do anything? Especially, when you are in a forum?
            
            Just a thought.
            
            P.S. If you want to prove him wrong, then DO IT and stop talking about it or trying to make him admit when he is wrong.
            
            Bring the quote "exactly as it is in the book". That solves the problem, without going through what you are.
            
            Just another thought.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               I did provide the quote exactly as it is in the book.  Did you miss that?
               
               I know I can't make him do anything.

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  You led the horse to water!

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Tiu can lead a wingnut to truth, but you can't make him think.

                     replyreport
      2. 85

         donotfearposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         
         .......as do the Liberal....
         
         So you see it goes both ways.

         replyreport
   3. 59

      Bill Millerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I would stand side by side with Arab and Pakistani Americans if what they stood for was the preservation of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness!
      
      Is that what Obama was talking about?

      replyreport
4. 59

   Seakayposted 14 years ago

   I don't understand his entire political agenda.  Israel has been our ally for a long time.  He has snubbed Netanyahu.  Our space program has been handed to the Russians.  It seems everything past presidents have done is slowly being disassembled.  He is not a good orator and seems more concerned with the show than the content. I must admit, my prayers have turned to "Please just let this term be over quickly and without incident."

   replyreport
   1. 72

      CaribeMposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You are entitled to "don't understand his political agenda" after all, political principles affiliation and policy making are a matter of personal "taste" and ideals. But  on the other hand, if someone truly wants to understand Obama's "agenda", is necessary to learn and inform oneself about the history, the roots and complexities of the current economic, political and diplomatic challenges of the USA.
      
      I will strive to reflect about certain matters you number as your evidence for your incomprehension of Obama's "political agenda". I will not presume to know it all, many people here may also provide another details, angles and opinions, but I will certainly provide an informed position on the issues that you mentioned.
      
      1. "Israel has been our ally for a long time.  He has snubbed Netanyahu."
      Yes, Israel have been an ally, or much better, the USA have been a long time ally of Israel. Actually, the USA (along with the UK, the USSR and several Western powers)  helped, through the UN, to create the Israel state in 1948.  Back then, UN's  resolution for the partition of the Palestine not only advocated the creation of a Jewish State (Israel) but also the creation of an Arab State (Palestine). Even as the story of the Arabs and Jewish in the Palestine territory is VERY complex, the main point is that up until this date, the Palestine State have not been recognized by Israel, neither the boundaries of the Gaza strip and the West Bank (both territories that should be under a Palestine state) have not been respected by Israel. The State of Israel, depending on how moderate of aggressive its President, have deployed a project of re-population of Arab occupied lands and communities in order to claim them as part of the Israeli territory. This is one of the main reasons for the violent outbreaks in both territories.
      
      Obama's "snub of Netanyahu" came after the announcement of new settlement projects in east Jerusalem while the Vice-President  Biden was in a State visit in Israel. Biden was there to offer Israel a deal: US support of Israel against  Iran, keeping "all options on the table", in return for Israeli flexibility in the West Bank, which is an immediate  cause of violence between Palestinians and Jews. Certainly, Netanyahu's settlement policies will make even harder to stabilize and to forge a better working environment for the peace in that part of the Middle East. Hence, Obama's alleged "snub" of Netanyahu was a message that deals made between both countries must be respected, also, that USA is behind Israel  as long as Israelis maintain a fair game, and adopt measures to secure a peace agreement with the Palestinians.
      
      USA support of Israeli State should  not be unconditional, must meet the objective to stabilize the zone, and to avoid the creation of  an inflammatory scenario that will enhance the already tense and violent political environment in the Middle East and on the international community.
      
      2. "Our space program has been handed to the Russians." This is not an accurate statement. Where is the evidence?
      
      3. "It seems everything past presidents have done is slowly being disassembled. "  This is a relative argument and an unhealthy  generalization. It is not fair to paint with a wide brush past presidents' policies, as they can't be reviewed and criticized, and also understood in their own political, economic, social, and ideological contexts. Can you provide several specific Presidential  policies that where beneficial to the country that Obama have undone?
      
      4. "He is not a good orator and seems more concerned with the show than the content." This is also a statement that is about "taste" and maybe your definition of what is "a good orator". Can you provide a definition for that concept and some specific contexts and examples of the bad rhetoric  of the current President of the USA? I would like to understand your opinion.
      
      I think he's a pretty good orator.  Although I haven't read or hear of all of Obama's speeches, IMHO, some of the best examples of his command of oratory are: the speech called "A more Perfect Union" (March 2008) , the one at Fort Hood (Nov 2009), the Health Care speech at the joint session of Congress (September 2009) and the Inaugural Speech. There are several others but I think this are probably the best examples. If you haven't seen those, you can find the full texts and videos on the internet. If you have study those speeches we can chat about the flaws of them in terms of what a "good oratory" means, because that is your original point.
      
      Take care.

      replyreport
      1. 71

         Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         For some time Israel has been a millstone around our neck.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            KFlippinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Well how about having Pakistan weighing down our neck, or Iran, or Iraq, or India, or Korea, or how about Venezuela.  Does the USA need new BFF's?

            replyreport
   2. 71

      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You got it backwards--Netanyahu dissed Obama and the United States.

      replyreport
5. 61

   tobey100posted 14 years ago

   I love watching poeple fall all over themselves to defend this clown.  It's better than arguing with a Cubs fan.  (No offense to Cubs fans, them I respect.)
   
   And of course he never said he just wanted to spread the wealth around.  He never said he wanted to fundamental change America.  He never said there comes a time when you have enough money.  This goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on........................................................

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I didn't defend Barack Obama; I merely pointed out that there is no such quote in his book, then provided you with a reference to the exact page and paragraph that most closely resembles your supposed quote.
      
      Now, stop trying to change the subject, and please explain to us how it is you came upon this quote. Did you actually read Barack Obama's book?  If so, then you intentionally misquoted him to suit your purposes.
      
      Did you find the quote somewhere else and assume it was correct?  If so, you are displaying "willful ignorance," while accusing others of it.
      
      Either way, your credibility is, to put it mildly, screwed.

      replyreport
6. 59

   watchyaposted 14 years ago

   He is specifically talking about Arab and Pakistani Americans in this paragraph.  Muslims are not even mentioned.
   
   Arab And Pakistani Americans are Muslims.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, you are absolutely right that most Arab and Pakistani Americans are muslims.  However, Tobey misquoted Obama for the purpose of "proving" that Obama will side with Muslims should things get ugly.  That clearly is not what Obama said in his book, if you read the actual quote.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         watchyaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         But if he says he will stand by them, I think you can read between lines.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            It's all about context, isn't it?

            replyreport
            1. 59

               watchyaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Not everything is about context in life.
               Anyway it's not you or me who can do anything about.
               Seat comfortably in your couch and watch the news . LOL

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Actually, my whole point in entering the thread was to call Tobey out on his intentional misquoting.  After all, if he had stuck to the actual quote, it wouldn't have bolstered his argument about the "willful ignorance" of people who voted for Obama.
                  
                  Either Tobey lied about reading the book, or he lied about the quote, then had the nerve to call others "willfully ignorant."
                  
                  

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     watchyaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Maybe he read between the lines, and simplified the quote for everybody to understand ?

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        Funny.  I think you're just playing devil's advocate so I'll leave it at that. 

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           watchyaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           I'm a devil. I don't know about the advocate.

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              THAT I can believe.  lol

                              replyreport
                           2. 57

                              leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              With that Avatar I'd say you're more than devilish!

                              replyreport
      2. 57

         leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Knowing that Pakistani and Arab Americans are Muslims and that Obama's own father was Muslim and in view of the policies of Obama to use politically correct terms and not to refer to Islamic terrorists as "Islamic Fundamentalists" is essentially ignoring evidence to the fact of Obama's sympathies towards Muslims.
         
         
         
         I looked it up for you.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            So, you're saying that the evidence is crystal clear, yet Tobey felt the need to alter the facts to bolster his argument.  Okay.

            replyreport
            1. 57

               leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               I'm not suggesting anything is crystal clear, I'm merely pointing out evidence to support Tobey's claim. At the very least we need to consider this evidence, whether it's important or not and whether it matters or not. My personal feeling is, it definitely matters and is important.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Well, legitimate evidence is one thing; intentional distortions are another.

                  replyreport
                  1. 57

                     leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     I think the evidence I presented is legitimate don't you?

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        I wouldn't call what you presented "evidence," but I understand that you believe differently.

                        replyreport
                        1. 57

                           leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           What would you call it then?

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              "Knowing that Pakistani and Arab Americans are Muslims and that Obama's own father was Muslim and in view of the policies of Obama to use politically correct terms and not to refer to Islamic terrorists as "Islamic Fundamentalists" is essentially ignoring evidence to the fact of Obama's sympathies towards Muslims."
                              
                              I would call it a characterization of Obama's beliefs that is partially correct, but I would not call it evidence of anything more than that.
                              
                              I also have sympathies toward Muslims, as I do toward Jews, southerners, children, kittens, and even conservatives who have to make up stuff to support their beliefs.  Sympathies does not equal unequivocally siding with Muslims against Americans, unless the Americans are doing something "ugly," which is what he was referring to in his book (i.e., internment of the Japanese during WWII).

                              replyreport
                              1. 57

                                 leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                 Perhaps so but the refusal to refer to Hassan or Fasasd as a terrorist, Jihadist, or Islamic fundamentalist is more than a display of tolerance and a conscious effort to appease those of a Muslim persuasion and a mis-characterization of the facts as most Americans view them. Though this might not be disturbing, it is a source of concern for many Americans.

                                 replyreport
                              2. 85

                                 donotfearposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                 Very touching. I'm glad you have sympathy toward me....!!!!! I feel much better now.
                                 
                                 (See, I JUST took this statement out of context! I didn't use the whole quote.) Golly gee.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 0

                                    PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                    Truth be told, I have sympathies toward almost everyone, crazy liberal that I am.  lol

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 85

                                       donotfearposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                       LOL!! 
                                       "We all are, hon....!"

                                       report
         2. 70

            rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            You been watching Beck again haven't you?

            replyreport
   2. 75

      Jeff Berndtposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      "Arab And Pakistani Americans are Muslims."
      
      Uh, that's not always the case. Some aren't. There are Arab Christians, Arab Sikhs, Arab atheists, etc. Same with Pakistanis.

      replyreport
7. 59

   watchyaposted 14 years ago

   Most Pakistani Americans are Muslims. Religion figures prominently in the life of Pakistani American families, and the Quran and the teachings of Muhammad serve as the guidelines that Pakistani Muslims are supposed to follow throughout their lives
   
   Source: Wiki

   replyreport
8. 61

   optimus grimlockposted 14 years ago

   All the efforts he's made just seem for nought. Hos medicare bill isnt historic, it might be if it destroes healthcare or revitalizes it. He's just goin to make the resesotion were but atleast he's trying!

   replyreport
   1. 60

      bschrodtposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Hey, Optimus, I know I am not the greatest speller and have actually got a name wrong on a reply. But, one I don't think you have any facts to back up your hurried boasts nor do you know how to pronouce the words you misspelt. For if you did you would provide where a person could check the claims you made; other then a town or national newspaper, which normally gets things wrong or just point blank leaves out anything that may show that the person they want you to hate is not that bad. So, where did you find the drafts of these items might I ask.

      replyreport
9. 59

   Bill Millerposted 14 years ago

   "Obama was elected through willful ignorance"
   
   
   That statement is true, I don't know about the Muslim stuff but certainly a lot of people voted for him who were clearly ignorant!
   
   If you recall African Americans voted for him in droves, 96% to be exact.
   
   Howard Stern sent one of his people into Harlem to ask people about what they thought of Obama's and McCain's policies. Sterns rep twisted things by assigning McCain's policies to Obama and vice versa, he even asked if they were ok with Obama's running mate Sara Palin.
   
   The answers were interesting. The information was out there for people to gather to make an educated decision, that clearly did not happen with these voters, they chose who they voted for on ethnicity alone. That's certainly their right but it doesn't help in electing the best among us.

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Obama won in a landside. Sure, a lot of ignorant people preferred him over 4 more years of GOP disaster--two wars and a cratered economy.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Bill Millerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         You hit the nail right on the head "a lot of ignorant people" at least you can admit it.
         
         Why you would want ignorant people with you is beyond me, no, wait, it makes perfect sense, never-mind.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            watchyaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            

            replyreport
         2. 72

            CaribeMposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Certainly, in any day and twice on Sunday, I will prefer a 66,882,230 "willfully ignorant"  people, than a handful of willfully smarties lightweights that twist and spin with the sound of Beck's, Palin's, Limbaugh's and other of their kind's music.
            
            I have a question though,  if people who voted for Obama are "willfully ignorant", why Palin and her friends hate smart and intellectual people? That means she truly hates Conservatives and its fringe?

            replyreport
         3. 71

            Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            You missed my point. The people weren't ignorant at all for deciding they didn't want four more years of Bush policies.

            replyreport
10. 75

    Jeff Berndtposted 14 years ago

    Certainly some of the people who voted for Obama are willfully ignorant, just like some of the people who are so vocally opposing everything he says or does are willfully ignorant.
    
    Lots of people like to ignore stuff that doesn't fit their world view. They either pretend that facts that don't match their worldview don't exist, or they pretend that the facts aren't true. Both red-staters and blue-staters are guilty.
    
    Seems to me, though, the Obama-haters are more willfully ignorant as a group. I could be wrong, of course. But really, I wish Obama's detractors would concentrate on the stuff that is actually worth complaining about, or else argue their disagreements on an intellectual, rather than an emotional, plane.
    
    I mean, take healthcare reform. Sure, I can understand that some folks might disagree about the way it was done, or that it won't really help, or that it was the wrong thing to do entirely. But to throw around words like "fascist" or "communist" or "socialist"
    (and in many cases using them interchangeably) just makes them look silly to me.
    
    Again, though, Obama is a Socialist is easier to wrap your barin around than something more nuanced and considered, like, "The healthcare reform bill ought not to have these provisions in it, for these reasons, and it ought to have had these other provisions, for these other reasons." It's hard to get people riled up over something like that. Plus, it's harder to fit on a sign.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Ah, a thoughtful, nuanced post.  Thank you.

       replyreport
       1. 75

          Jeff Berndtposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Aw, crud, my career as a demagogue is over.

          replyreport
11. 85

    donotfearposted 14 years ago

    Look, any person in this world can take a statement out of context & twist it whatever way they want. You see it done in all religions, all denominations, all organizations. When a statement is lifted out of context, it creates controversy.
    
    I haven't read the book nor do I want to. The only point I'm trying to make is that text may be twisted & manipulated any way that either side wishes to mishandle it.  The problem is, should we continue to make statements to see where the words may splatter?

    replyreport
    1. 59

       Bill Millerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I think the best evidence that we are dealing with a narcissist is the fact that he had an autobiography before he had ever done anything! That was pointed out early in this thread by someone else.
       
       Maybe someone who knows more about this can help, but wouldn't narcissism be a form of mental illness or a trait in someone mentally ill?
       
       I ask just for my own education not to suggest Obama is mentally ill.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Yeah, that's the "best evidence" all right.  It's right there in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 

          replyreport
          1. 59

             Bill Millerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I think its pretty good evidence, how many autobiographies will he have before he is done, he may have wanted to wait until he had actually accomplished something.
             
             But then again he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his work in, uhhh, what did he do again?

             replyreport
       2. 85

          donotfearposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          
          Oh yeah narcissictic personality disorder is for real. And no, I am not saying (either) that Obama has this disorder.  Lots of people have narcissistic traits. Heck, we deal with em' every day! It does seem a bit "puffy" that the autobiography was already out there, but then, folks may call ME a bit 'puffy' for putting my life out there for the whole world to see!  Just google 'narcissistic personality disorder'. It should tell you all you need to know, plus it's in the DSM manual.

          replyreport
          1. 0

             PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I should have been more specific. Narcissistic personality disorder is a real mental disorder and is in the DSM.  What is not in the DSM as a criteria for diagnosis for the disorder is publishing an autobiography at a young age.  But, since Bill thinks that is the "best evidence" for the disorder, it must be true, eh?

             replyreport
             1. 59

                Bill Millerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Is he not a narcissist?
                
                Prove it!

                replyreport
                1. 0

                   PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   LOL!  You are freakin' hilarious.  Did you take Logic 101?

                   replyreport
                   1. 59

                      Bill Millerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      I'm sure "Logic 101" isn't necessary to spar with you.

                      replyreport
                2. 77

                   livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   Hmmm...your style seems very familiar...
                   
                   A Texan?

                   replyreport
                   1. 59

                      Bill Millerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      Don't you have the ability to check? Sure you do!

                      replyreport
                   2. 71

                      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      It figures.

                      replyreport
       3. 75

          Jeff Berndtposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          "[Obama] had an autobiography before he had ever done anything!"
          
          Oh, really.
          Let's look at his resume.
          1967: Barack Obama is 6 years old. He lives in Indonesia, in a house with no stable electricity on an unpaved road.
          1982: In Chicago, as part of the Developing Communities Project, Obama successfully carries out several projects, including school reform, hazardous waste cleanup and establishing a job training center. Later that year, he gets accepted into Harvard Law School.
          1988: begins studies at Harvard Law.
          1990: becomes the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review.
          1991: graduates Harvard Law School with a JD degree, Magna Cum Laude.
          1992: Teaches constitutional law at U of Chicago law school and directs Illinois Project Vote.
          
          1995: Dreams from My Father is published.
          
          I don't know what standard you're using, but going from an impoverished childhood to first black president of the Harvard Law Review doesn't really look like "nothing" to me.

          replyreport
          1. 59

             Bill Millerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Yeah, a real life of triumph, glad you're impressed.

             replyreport
             1. 75

                Jeff Berndtposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                And here we go with the willful ignoring (or discounting) of facts that do not fit one's world view.
                
                Quod erat demonstrandum.

                replyreport
                1. 59

                   Bill Millerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   There have been many people who accomplished a hell of a lot more who didn't write an autobiography. I am not impressed at all about what he did as a child or college student, you may be, but don't present what he did as "fact" he is anymore or less than you or I!
                   
                   Sorry don't read Latin.

                   replyreport
                   1. 75

                      Jeff Berndtposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      "There have been many people who accomplished a hell of a lot more who didn't write an autobiography."
                      So what?
                      
                      "I am not impressed at all about what he did as a child or college student,"
                      Dang, where do you set your bar? By my lights, being President of the Harvard Law Review is quite the impressive accomplishment, never mind being the fist black guy to have that job. But I suppose it's your prerogative to decide that being president of the Harvard Law Review isn't all that impressive.
                      
                      "but don't present what he did as "fact" he is anymore or less than you or I!"
                      No, I don't present it as evidence that Obama is more or less than we are. I present it as evidence that he has accomplished rather more than "nothing" (and probably a lot more than most people at the same point in life) by the time he wrote his autobiography.

                      replyreport
          2. 60

             Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I find interesting that a man who majored in Law wrote a best seller autobiography. And Sarah Palin who majored in journalism had to hire a ghost writer to pen her book. But the wingnuts can't see the difference between real turf and astroturf.

             replyreport
12. 77

    livelongerposted 14 years ago

    http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-books.htm
    
    That so many right-wingers are so willing to swallow easily-refutable propaganda is proof the term "conservative" has more a tribal meaning nowadays than a philosophical one.

    replyreport
13. 57

    leebertteaposted 14 years ago

    I'm not suggesting Obama faked his way through school, but it is possible.
    
    http://www.smh.com.au/world/perfect-stu … -v9w5.html
    
    Some say Dreams Of My Father was written by someone other than Obama. Some say it was Bill Ayers that wrote his book.
    
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/ … the_1.html

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       The phrase "Some say"  in this context can be translated 'This is a lie, I know, but I don't want to be held personally responsible for it".

       replyreport
       1. 57

          leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          That's why I included references. Perhaps if you read them you might reach a different conclusion, or perhaps you prefer to practice that willful ignorance we were discussing.

          replyreport
14. 60

    bonita5064posted 14 years ago

    Rhamson, I think you are an idiot and should stop speaking your mind. Stop reading ignorance into every word.  When I read your statement, I knew in my mind, there is a lot of bias in your voice.
    
    bonita5064

    replyreport
    1. 70

       rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Wow! Bonita that came out of nowhere.  Are you sure you are not a Barracuda the way you sneaked up and ambushed me.
       
       Of course you are entitled to your opinion and I am sure there are many who would agree with you but I have to ask what I have said to make you feel this way?
       
       Everyone is guilty of bias, some more than others.  But the differences is what makes the world go around and the conversation productive.  Name calling never helped understanding of the topics.
       
       Maybe if we lived in a facist state there would be laws you could convict me of for speaking my mind.

       replyreport
15. 73

    Reality Bytesposted 14 years ago

    The entire nation operates through "willful ignorance". Pretending we are free. Pretending we are sovereign. The Truth exists, but the masses remain ignorant, simply because they wish to be. They take to heart what is taught in the corporate government schools of indoctrination. The truth is we are all property, all of us.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Fortunately - YOU know the truth. And with no facts or support, you are letting us know  that you know. Impressive!

       replyreport
       1. 61

          KFlippinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Yes, quite impressive, and that is unfortunate for far left wing liberal wingdings who refuse to see the icing on the doughnut at this late date.  Not that you can't see the Icing, not intended to be personal in any way.  I'm not even clear if you have now become a right wing "wingnut", if so, I'm proud.

          replyreport
    2. 71

       Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Speaking of "willful ignorance":
       
       http://www.alan.com/2010/05/23/gop-cong … nt-matter/

       replyreport
       1. 70

          rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          It's the old saying of why let the facts get in the way of a good story.

          replyreport
    3. 0

       LegendaryHeroposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       This country is sovereign, what do you mean?

       replyreport
       1. 73

          Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          The U.S.A. was a nation of sovereign people before the Act of 1871.  That has since been abolished.

          replyreport
          1. 0

             LegendaryHeroposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I just read through the thing and I don't understand how the Act of 1871 did this.

             replyreport
             1. 73

                Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                The Act of 1871 created a government for the district of columbia, this government is a Corporation.  The jurisdiction of this corporation does not exist outside the 10 miles of DC as well as US territories.  The Corporation of the United States is owned by foreign banking interests.  this combined with the federal reserve act and the creation of the CAPITILIZED strawman eliminated any resemblance to sovereignty for the people that once existed.  I have published a hub on the subject and I am currently working on a hub concerning common and private law.

                replyreport
             2. 72

                CaribeMposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Probably you read the 1871 Civil Rights Act which was later pronounced unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1883. I guess RealityBites refers to the Act of 1971  'An Act to provide a government for the District of Columbia.'
                
                The issue with that Act, from the standpoint of those who are unhappy with the presumed declining state of freedom in America, is that Congress while creating Washington DC, converted the United States from a constitutional republic into a corporation.
                
                I'm sorry to not be able to explain the whole "evidence" of the arguments, because for me is mumble jumble. Sincerely no offense intended for those who could believe in that theory... maybe for me is mumble jumble because I'm not sophisticated enough to get their point.

                replyreport
                1. 73

                   Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   
                   
                   You are correct. The Corporate Government Education System will not teach these facts.  there is a presumption that the People need to be aware of the law as it impacts them.  (Ignorance of the law is no excuse)or so they say.  We are responsible as a society to educate ourselves about the world we inhabit.

                   replyreport
16. 60

    Sa`geposted 14 years ago

    I sometimes can not believe the straws some people will pull to tear apart any and everything no matter what it is.  Politics and religion are the easiest to get under people skins with, so that is what they use the most.  So long as people like this exist, there will never be peace.  and i am not naming name here. we all know who and what we are so no needs to point a finger at anyone.
    ~PEACE~Aloha~

    replyreport
17. 67

    Arthur Fontesposted 14 years ago

    It is nice to see the forums being populated by a group with a like mind.  Ahhh peaceful agreement.  CRUSH DISSENT!

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Arthur -
       
       I'm disappointed by your reaction. Pretty Panther put the misquote out there in context and the post was a GROSS distortion of what Obama said and what he meant. No one is trying to discourage dissent - but telling lies about people - other hubbbers or the President of the United States is wrong in my book - and yours, too, I believe. I don't presume to know what Tobey100 knew when he posted it- was this his original work or was he parroting from some other source? But the original author was deliberately deceptive and I expected condemnation from those on the right who bear even partial alligiance to the truth.

       replyreport
       1. 61

          KFlippinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Doug...I'm disappointed that no lefty has criminalized Obama's clear belief in a religion, or a God, or a higher power, or whatever, just real clear. And are his beliefs perhaps impacting his choices as our POTUS?
          
          Of course I do understand that Christianity is the bad guy and the one to beat up on.....but still, tis very interesting there is no overt, outright, chest thumping objection to Obama and his religions leanings.  Are his beliefs perhaps impacting his choices as our POTUS?

          replyreport
          1. 70

             rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I have to ask what legislation or policy has Obama enacted that would put Christianity on the receiving end?
             
             "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
             
             It is the first amendment of the constitution.  How has he abridged this?

             replyreport
             1. 60

                Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                The troll was only trying to provoke me. It wanders around spouting senseless crud.  I have observed other hubbers are starting to just ignore it. There are plenty of conservative hubbers with an honest interest in debating real ideas. This is not one of them.

                replyreport
             2. 61

                KFlippinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Never said he has by act of law.  And 'put Chritianity on the receiving end?' -- not pertinent to the post. 
                
                The point is Obama does have religious beliefs, and he has made it clear that 'empathy' should impact even Supreme Court rulings, so for sure his own empathies have to impact his decisions as our POTUS.  Given the rampant atheism of many of you, it is odd you would support any President who believed in a Higher Power.

                replyreport
                1. 73

                   Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   When the Higher Power is government it does not seem to be a problem. The congregation is the bloated unions.

                   replyreport
                   1. 71

                      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      What "bloated unions?" The fact is that private sector unions have shrunk to their lowest level since the 1930s.

                      replyreport
                      1. 73

                         Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                         "private sector unions"  I am referring to the anchor of government unions that are bringing down this nation.  The government is growing faster then one of richard simmons clients.  We will not be able to sustain them forever,  the worst part is these govt unions will ride this country into the grave still screaming for their contracts to be fulfilled.

                         replyreport
18. 71

    Ralph Deedsposted 14 years ago

    Idaho Republican candidate, Vaughan Ward, pays President Obama a high compliment by plagiarizing his speech word for word!!
    
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCF3Vpf6iCg

    replyreport
    1. 72

       CaribeMposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Good one... Thanks Mr Deeds.
       
       Gee, How it can be since Obama "is not a good orator" like some people argue. Maybe Ward is also a "Socialist".

       replyreport
19. 70

    Cagsilposted 14 years ago

    My publication of Degeneration Value also touches on other things that might help bring things into perspective, with regards to the Economy and the Federal Reserve Bank. (not self promote) just could add value to your discussion.

    replyreport
20. 59

    mikelongposted 14 years ago

    This entire thread is stupid and pointless...
    
    For those who might think that Obama wrote what this thread's original poster claims, your powers of critical thinking are severely lacking...
    
    It's amazing with critical-mindedness, the internet, and 5 minutes of free time before a morning shower can do...
    
    I'm tired of these b.s. "conservative" email-chainmail garbage...
    
    Yet...it is funny to see how many "intelligent" and "successful" people fall victim to their own internal prejudicial biases...
    
    I've debunked several such trashmails that my own family members send out......
    
    Garbage................and those who perpetuate the lies...as opposed to researching first....are worse human beings than those who originally wrote the messages...  How careless, reckless, and dangerous can you behave?
    
    http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/d … stand.html
    
    "Actual quote from "The Audacity of Hope" [pg. 261]: Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
    
    
    "The evidence was right there in front of us the whole time and we willfully ignored it to our detriment."<---original topic poster
    
    It seems as though this person is willfully ignorant to me...
    
    
    "Based on the philosophy of 'know your enemy' I read his books (Who writes two autobiographies before they've done anything?)  One sentence told me exactly who he was and that we were in big trouble.  After reading it I closed the book, put it in the garbage can and said a prayer for this nation."<---original poster
    
    I don't know who you are praying to....but if your God exists...he/she/it knows that you are sadly mistaken...
    
    
    "This man was elected President of these United States of America.  That one sentence cannot be misinterpreted.  He did not 'misspeak'.  It is not taken out of context.  I defy any Democrat or Liberal to rationize it or explain it away."<--original poster
    
    Easy....obviously you have not read the book...or done any homework on this matter....  I hope you are not so careless when voting time comes around..
    
    This original poster has demonstrated a lesson in "projection."
    
    Being willfully ignorant his or her own self...he or she then pushes this trait onto others...(the American people).
    
    Sadly for this person, but better for the rest of us...the only person who should feel ashamed is the original topic poster here...
    
    Good job showing you lack of research and intellect..

    replyreport
    1. 70

       rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Maybe he suffers from Glen Beck's Tourettes.
       
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMOh9L60FKw
       
       Enjoy

       replyreport
21. 85

    lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

    Tobey does display the same drama queen quality as Beckles...."oh woe is me...oh woe"  *sniff* *sniff*....
    Poor America....how will we survive Obama?   *sob* *sob*....
    
    Oh the Paaaaaaain.
    
    Black is right about Beck and the rest of them...anything Obama is Nazi or Communist or Chavez or Castro...
    
    Such an organized swat team of demonizers....you would think they all get the same memos or something!
    hey.....now wait a minute.....
    I read that somewhere....
    it CAN"T be kismet that they all think the same thing???
    
    (Beck: "yeah yeah, i got it...nazi, socialist, communist infiltrator, un-american, traitor....anything else? Now get me my vial of tears, I'm gonna need them tonite....Obama just sent troops to the border...gotta make it look bad!")

    replyreport
22. 59

    mikelongposted 14 years ago

    And these same forum-posters often use the "whiner" epithet towards me...and those who think in a similar fashion...
    
    The type of "patriotic" image of the American nation they are trying to create...."One America, Our America..like it or leave it" rhetoricizing.....the real fascism is found within this thinking.

    replyreport
    1. 70

       rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I ponder to think if we were left to a scenario where big business and government will be left to their own devices as these whinners envision.  The "real" patriot and the "right way of expressing it" the way they wish us all to be.
       
       It kind of reminds me of the movie Soylent Green where the government is in cahoots with business to make food from dead bodies.  Maybe the deregulation of these industries is more prophetic sounding more and more.

       replyreport
23. 61

    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 14 years ago

    If the aspirations of the people who elected Obama as ignorance, it is not their fault. Those who term them as such, are ignorant of the aspirations of the people who elected him.
    A man from the earstwhile slave society becoming the President of that country is not a common thing. It is history.
    
    But I want to see Americans to become more broadminded and elect a woman as their president.

    replyreport
    1. 71

       Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Okay, as long as it's not Sarah Palin or Lady GaGa!

       replyreport
       1. 67

          Arthur Fontesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Jillian Michaels 2012 she could kick butt.LOL

          replyreport
          1. 71

             Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             
             
             
             
             
             
             How about a tag team match between Jillian and Sarah?
             
             Sarah could pair up with Lady Gaga and Jillian with Michelle Bachman.
             
             
             
             

             replyreport
    2. 0

       Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I'm well aware of the aspirations of the people who elected Obama.
       And he's not from an "erstwhile slave society".   He's from the Chicago gangster-type society and an anti-American-church-mentality;  big difference.
       America corrected its mistakes in the race issue years ago.  The "chickens coming home to roost" quote is vengeful crap outta the mouth of that racist preacher with a chip on his shoulder bigger than Obama's chip.
       
       And as for me, I don't want to see a woman become President, especially just for the sake of illustrating how "tolerant" America is.   There should be a strong decent patriotic MAN who can fill that position effectively.   America missed the boat on that during this past Election.  I hope we don't miss it again the next time.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Geez, Brenda, it would be nice if you would show just a smidgen of humility now and then.  To say that you "are well aware of the aspirations of the people who elected Obama" is incredibly arrogant and so completely false that I truly cannot contain my laughter.

          replyreport
       2. 60

          Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Not even if'in she's barefooted and pregnunt?

          replyreport
          1. 0

             Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             lol
             especially not.
             Ron you crack me up!  lol

             replyreport
             1. 60

                Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Are women not capable of being president?

                replyreport
                1. 0

                   Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   Sure they are.
                   But it's best if a man fills that role.
                   Men are, by nature, the stronger sex concerning matters of military, physical labor, national security, etc.  (or, are supposed to be anyway.)
                   I'm not a women's libber at all.  I expect men to take charge.  I just expect them to do it the right way.

                   replyreport
                   1. 60

                      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      Good.
                      
                      I command you to be more open minded.
                      
                      Don't make me come over there to straighten you out.

                      replyreport
                      1. 0

                         PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                         I still have a crush on you, Ron.  I like it when you order other women around. 

                         replyreport
                         1. 60

                            Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                            Should we ask Brenda's blessing of our online shenannigans?

                            replyreport
                   2. 71

                      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      Spoken like a good Evangelical. 'Cause the Bible says women should be ever subservient to their men.

                      replyreport
       3. 72

          earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          I think Al Capone left Chicago some time back Brenda! Last time I was there it was a wonderful International city. I didn't see one gangster!

          replyreport
       4. 60

          nightwork4posted 14 years agoin reply to this

          brenda , you are what's wrong with the world today. as rude as that may sound, it pales to your posts.

          replyreport
24. 72

    earnestshubposted 14 years ago

    From the Presidents book;
    
    "Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging.  They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
    
    You wanted a rebuttal? You have one!
    What is said and what you implied it meant are light years apart.
    
    Very dishonest!

    replyreport
25. 0

    Brenda Durhamposted 14 years ago

    hahahaaa
    You two have fun.  I'm going to sleep.

    replyreport