jump to last post 1-23 of 23 discussions (48 posts)

Obama Praises Indian Chief Who Killed U.S. General

68
I am DB Cooperposted 6 years ago
http://i.imgur.com/779Vw.jpg

I've got to hand it to Fox News/Fox Nation, they didn't lie at all in this headline.
reply report
1. 80
  Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  So what if Obama praises Sitting Bull over Custer, anyone who knows anything about Custer would do the same. Once again Fox News screwed up!
  reply report
2. 80
  IntimatEvolutionposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  Don't ya think this is just a propaganda ploy to discredit Obama? I mean, you can put spin almost on anything that the man says or writes. Everything can be taken out of context one way or another.
  
  I think this is fishing for something that isn't there. It just seems like a waste of space and time. But that's just my opinion.
  reply report
3. 54
  Dave Barnettposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  Got a problem with that? If you do, you really won't like what is going up down the road from Mt Rushmore.
  reply report
4. 77
  Rogochuksposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  The real issue here is that some people are scared of anyone that looks different from them. We should embrace our heros like Obama and sitting bull. I sure would love for my kids to be Indian Chiefs or Presidents of the US. I am proud of Obama.
  In this life where you are remembered for your legacy, Sitting bull and Obama will live forever.
  reply report
80
psycheskinnerposted 6 years ago
Sitting Bull was an inspirational leader. If we can praise Custer (who killed native Americans including children pulled from their beds in suprise attacks) why can't we praise Sitting Bull who promoted peace and consiliation with the new immigrants. Both of these people are, and killed, "Americans". There is more to it than that.
reply report
1. 68
  I am DB Cooperposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  Exactly. The headline isn't technically a lie, but it's about as misleading as they can possibly get. They just want the perpetuate the idea that the sitting president is a foreigner who hates America and the American military in particular. To someone who just gets the Fox Nation feed through a news reader and only grabs the headlines, it appears that Obama is praising someone for attacking America, when in reality he's praising a native-born American who stood up against a brutal general well over 100 years ago.
  reply report
88
rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago
Sitting Bull was a courageous Native American defending his land and his people. There are so many accounts of his life and his courage in children's books and literature. It sounds like something Fox would blow out of proportion. Perhaps they need to check out a few children's book from their local library. Here is an excerpt from the preface of just one book about Sitting Bull.

If Sitting Bull's life teaches us anything, it is the danger of judging one society by the ideas of another. In the winning and losing of the West, each side acted according to its own beliefs and customs. Few people deliberately set out to do wrong. By the standards of their own societies, most individuals acted decently and responsibly. In this, both Indians and whites showed their common humanity."
reply report
1. 60
  C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  "If Sitting Bull's life teaches us anything, it is the danger of judging one society by the ideas of another."
  
  Well we know the lesson was offered...but did we really learn? I say based on our dealings with many Asian and Arab nations, the answer is NO.
  reply report
60
Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago
What general are these nincompoops claiming he killed?
reply report
1. 68
  I am DB Cooperposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  General Custer.
  reply report
2. 0
  prayersposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  Custer
  reply report
89
Pcunixposted 6 years ago
Gotta hate Fox.

Gotta hate the Congress critters who decided that we didn't need limits on media ownership any more.
reply report
58
JOE BARNETTposted 6 years ago
i don't think their was any humanity shown. one side had strictly one goal in mind and that was to "TAKE" whatever they wanted and if the victim put up a fight against it, they called them savages as an excuse to savagely kill them. actually genocide.

the sad part about that headline, is that it is done by people that are intelligent and know better and more than anything know what it will cause or do. these are the same people that say they want fairness and would look you in the face and say that they don't understand why you took that article in a negative way.that you must have something against them.(WINK WINK) they will try to be a victim. remember liars talk out of both sides of their mouths.ALSO THEY WORK TO POLARIZE as much as possible! it's a shame!
reply report
60
Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago
I

AM

SHOCKED!!!!

FoxNews, a legitimate news organization made up a headline without bothering to fact check?

GENERAL Custer was never at the battle of Little Bighorn (Battle of the Greasy Grass), Lt. COLONEL Custer was.

Sitting Bull did not kill Custer, a relative did.

But hey, why let facts get in the way of good ol' right-wing race baiting?
reply report
1. 90
  habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  Custer was temporarily promoted to brigadier general in 1864 or 1865. In 1866, he was returned to his permanent rank as captain, but he was promoted to brevet major general with the 7th Cavalry. At 24 or 25 years old, he was the youngest general ever in America’s history.
  
  Sitting Bull didn’t kill Custer. Custer was attacked by several men, and it might have been a woman who delivered the death blow.
  
  http://www.custerwest.org/custercivilwarpage.htm
  reply report
75
pylos26posted 6 years ago
Custer's arrogance and stupidity killed him and his command.
reply report
1. 58
  Twyler (Crazy T)posted 6 years ago in reply to this
  Very true pylos26. The Indians had a GREAT deal under the Fort Laramie Treaty. The first one (1851) awarded the Plains Indians virtually every thing west of Miss. River.. That's a lot land. The American gov't thought the land west of the Miss. river was unsettleable. After the Civil War people started to go West. Within the treaty was a condition that Indians would NOT make war on the White man. Well, they did. That is they attacked, killed and mutilated White people - mutilating dead bodies was part of Indian culture. Well, this is exactly what the White man used to break the treaty. Had the Indians understood the White man's culture (his slavery to written words), they would have never broke that treaty. In 1867, the Indians were given another Fort Laramie Treaty, which they were glad to get, and it was also quite generous - about 6 thousand square acres of land per adult Indian male. Here’s the point. Regardless if the White man came into Indian lands, under the treaty, it was still, and forever, would have been Indian lands. Indians didn't understand the written treaties. They didn't realize what the White man had "given" them.
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  That's just crazy, T. The Americans (they weren't all white) broke the treaties, the Sioux, Comanche and others responded.
  
  How do you "give" people something that is already theirs and call it generous?
  reply report
  90
  habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  The U.S. broke many, many treaties they had made with the natives!
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  By many, many, do you mean all?
  reply report
  89
  Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  Sure. And by "treaty", we mean "convenient lie".
  reply report
  58
  JOE BARNETTposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  exactly!the treaty(wink wink) was used only to hold on to all they had stolen till they could regroup.the treaty slowed things down. the indians thought ok, well if you stop stealing then we will stop. then as soon as they got their breath . . .
  reply report
  58
  JOE BARNETTposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  you seem to skip over the part of the whites breaking the treaty first when they started to move west. that was a fox news move. i guess you thought it would go unnoticed huh?they were generous to them? oh? in your world maybe but not there either. you just want to distance you self from the truth,. no you want to lie for them... why?
  reply report
60
Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago
BREAKING NEWS!!!

Boehner denies bestiality and pedophilia charges. He says he just likes taking kids to the zoo.

Reporting...FoxNews style is lots of fun!!!
reply report
1. 58
  JOE BARNETTposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  ha ha ha that was a good one
  reply report
88
rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago
I don't think it's sad, it's pathetic. as far as intelligent.. ? not sure what their hiring credentials are at Fox.

it's simply their 'machine' trying to find fault with anything and everything Obama does, now attacking a book he wrote for his daughters. I think they must have been asleep during history class.
reply report
92
Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago
If I had been a Native American defending my land against the heartless invaders, I would have thought it my duty to kill anyone attacking my family! We were stealing their land and murdering their people. This was the American way at the time and they did so with God's blessing, according to them!
reply report
80
lovemychrisposted 6 years ago
Errr, this is Fox. You're not allowed to praise anything that isn't white.

White all night! You white-you right! White is outta sight!
reply report
1. 90
  habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  FOX probably has more black commentators than any other cable news. But hey, WHERE are the Native Americans on ANY television shows?? My ancestors are totally ignored...
  reply report
  80
  lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  "FOX probably has more black commentators than any other cable news.'
  
  Yeah, and they praise white people! They SURE don't praise president Obama. Or his wife.
  reply report
  90
  habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  I've heard Juan Williams praise Obama. Heck, O'Reilly has praised Obama many times...maybe not lately, however.
  reply report
80
lovemychrisposted 6 years ago
I'm guessing. Assuming.Going by prior experience.
reply report
81
Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago
Sitting Bull is a hero throughout the world, Custer is not viewed positively by most of the world.
reply report
1. 90
  Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  Custer was a state sanctioned mass murderer!
  reply report
  81
  Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  Definitely.
  reply report
60
Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago
reply report
1. 89
  Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  I have often thought that if someone had only explained leasing land rather than selling it, how different things would have been.
  reply report
90
habeeposted 6 years ago
The Native Americans, especially the Plains tribes, had little concept of land ownership. To them, it was like the fleas arguing over which one owned the dog. The whites obviously took advantage of this. It really riles me to think about how the "Indians" were treated and how they're still treated. They have very little voice in a nation that was once entirely theirs.
reply report
1. 89
  Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  Agreed. I wonder if their descendants could ever pursue a legal claim on that basis? You can't enforce a contract with a non-competent person; in a fair court it could be argued that many did not understand the concepts inherent to the "sale".
  
  Of course you'd never be able to get a fair court.
  reply report
80
Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago
Sitting Bull is much more respected than Custer. Custer was an a**hole! I do respected the fact that Custer was a dog lover, but as a man, screw him!
reply report
1. 80
  Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  If Fox News ever does any research for once, they wouldn't make no big deal over this. All Fox News is a fund raiser for the Republican Party, other than that, the network is useless.
  reply report
61
EPmanposted 6 years ago
What is the deal with this false notion that only Fox News is capable of political slant? Misconstruing as a means of contradiction is a political practice and science on the part of both the left and the right. Thankfully there is opposing political propaganda, so there's at least some variety in the BS.

Obama haters will do whatever they can to make Obama look bad because, well, they hate him! -- just like Bush haters did to Bush, and Clinton haters did to Clinton, and Reagan haters did to Reagan, and so on and so on.

It's not okay for ANY news organization to misrepresent facts; but some of you are giving me the impression that you only think it's wrong when this misrepresentation hurts the reputation of your beloved Barry O.

Hmmmm... sounds biased.
reply report
60
foreignpressposted 6 years ago
Few people don't realize that there was a land grab going on and the American Indians were caught in the middle. The French were migrating from the north, the Russians from the northwest, the Spanish remnants from the southwest, and the British were still paddling around somewhere. It was open land and ripe for the taking. Had Americans not migrated west it would have been somebody else. But the outcome would have been the same -- the Indians were destined to be displaced. BTW: Obama is not a hero. He's a pawn; selected by the Dems because he was inexperienced and malleable. Obamacare should be renamed Pelosicare; or maybe Reidcare, or (Barney) Frankcare. The Dems' nationalized healthcare plan had been drafted while Obama was still a neophyte in Chicago.
reply report
47
ahorsebackposted 6 years ago
I have to say I love the forums , Its more entertaining than fox news is , I'm watching both right now...I love America, its the only place where the natives have come back and defeated thier invaders. The poor things have decided that casinos are the answer to giving back America to the origianal inhabitants . Defeat us with our own inventions. Custer was a brilliant and decorated civil war officer, and an ego maniac that failed miserably . Crazy Horse was a womanizer and ate grass , and a fearless leader who won the only battle against the armed forces of America.
And yet today we have decided to judge both of them by 'Todays Standards' , And this is my problem , A dialog based on todays hindsight , to judge those who created the nation where we now enjoy the freedom of speach that is all over this page.
reply report
47
ahorsebackposted 6 years ago
Interesting human nature.....
reply report
58
VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago
Before being killed by the native Indian, the general would have killed several native Indians. Mr.Obama is right in praising the killer.
reply report
60
saket71posted 6 years ago
These are all blatantly wrong political moves, one must never betray the dead, particularly those who die for what they believe was good for the nation. If there assumption was not in order, a sincere heartfelt apology would make more sense.
reply report