Shout!




Friends

  • Chandramoon
  • Libertine
  • Patty
  • Treasa
  • Woman of Feathers
  • Eclectablog
  • Lisalisabobisa
  • Deejay
  • Lady Visine
  • Kinnigirl
  • Legs
  • Patuca Warrior
  • Miss Minda
  • Aielman
  • Texican
  • Keith
  • Indigo Moon Arts
  • The Outlaw Wolf
  • Old Man Lincoln
  • Donald
  • Anthony
  • Geoff
  • Paledaemon
  • Slayerbarbie
  • LittleMissConfused
  • Lauries Asylum
  • dantesinferno
  • Cam
  • Birdsnest
  • Tony

    ~~~~~


    ~~~~~




    ~~~~~



    ~~~~~



    ~~~~~



  • The Mystery....Why We Need To Know More.

    Posted: 10:47, April 24, 2008



    The mystery of Barack Obama and his wife Michelle and their very questionable associations continue on, and liberals and the mainstream media continue to ignore the facts, look the other way, and dismiss what way too many other people believe are some pretty serious issues. But then....liberals understand the fine art of dismissivenss when it comes to the acceptance of the ones they so adore but that still require questioning. So...in this case, and once again, it's Barack Obama, and now his ever-more present wife, Michelle.

    As is so typical in the liberal mindset and world, where anything and anyone not a part of that world requires, no, demands questioning, the tearing down of, explanations under extreme scrutiny to the point of belittlement, and public denouncements, denunciation, implication and indictment is the norm, especially in politics; the opposite holds the norm when roles are reversed. Clearly I'm speaking of the deliberate attempts to dismiss and ignore the issues that surround Obama and his wife and associates, especially by the mainstream media, and to confuse the general public and simultaneously distract the public in an effort to make the whole affair(s) just go away. In other words....hey, when it comes to you, we have questions and we want serious answers and now, but we'll not afford you the same. End of story....

    I want to submit some excerpts from an article in National Review by Andrew McCarthy titled, The Company He Keeps--Meet Obama's circle: The same old America hating left. And the reason I want to do this is because everywhere you go in the news today you're only getting this rosey picture painted of Barack Hussein Obama. And....if your only news sources are mainstream such as ABC, CBS or NBC or any of their affiliates, than you're not getting the entire picture. You're getting only what they want you to get because they're so enamored by the guy and love him so much and are scared crazy that you might start to question these things. And they don't want that, they want what I think are four of the scariest words we might ever hear....President Barack Hussein Obama!


    Why is Barack Obama so comfortable around people who so despise America and its allies? Maybe it’s because they’re so comfortable around him.

    He presents as the transcendent agent of “change.” Sounds platitudinous, but it’s really quite strategically vaporous. Sen. Obama is loath to get into the details of how we should change, and, as the media’s Chosen One, he hasn’t had to.

    But he’s not, as some hopefully dismiss him, a charismatic lightweight with a gift for sparkling the same old vapid cant. Judging from the company he chooses to keep, Obama’s change would radically alter this country. He eschews detail because most Americans don’t believe we’re a racist, heartless, imperialist cesspool of exploitation. The details would be disqualifying


    His wife Michelle:

    So, instead, we get glimpses. The most profound influence in his life, his wife Michelle, is notoriously less circumspect than her careful husband about where she’s coming from. Her college thesis, which Princeton tried to keep under lock and key, testifies to a race-obsessed worldview. She may have refined it, but she’s never grown out of it.
    After four years at one of America’s most esteemed academic institutions, Michelle recoiled at the thought of “further integration and/or assimilation into a white cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant.” That the sky has been the limit for her, that she has managed to ride the “periphery” from Princeton to Harvard Law School, to one of the country’s top law firms, and to a plethora of prestigious institutional positions, has not much altered her perspective. Through the windows of her mansion on Chicago’s south side, American society still appears as a caste system.
    The United States, says she, is “just downright mean.” Never, prior to her husband’s presidential run, had she had a reason to feel proud of it, she told a campaign throng. But by last November, with Barack’s pursuit of the brass ring catching momentum, she suddenly got plenty proud. And confident: so much so that she was moved to tell MSNBC, “Black America will wake up and get it” — unite and carry him over the finish line.


    I think I speak for a whole bunch of bitter folks who turn to their Bibles and guns when things are down that that's a pretty racist viewpoint. And I suppose that if she were to become "First Lady Michelle Obama", that she would appreciate, and be proud of America and all it has to offer just a little bit more.

    Barack and Michelle's spiritual advisor and pastor for 20 years...The Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Who we actually have heard about.


    Years earlier, the Obamas had gravitated to the baleful Rev. Jeremiah Wright, an unapologetic racist and hard Left firebrand. They were comfortable with him — and he with them.
    By the senator’s own account, Wright is the inspiration for his memoir, The Audacity of Hope — the title is cribbed from a Wright sermon (“The Audacity to Hope”). For Michelle, who had written that a racial “separationist” would have a better understanding of American blacks than “an integrationist who is ignorant to their plight,” Wright’s Trinity Church mission statement had to resonate, right from its opening declaration:

    "We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian… Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain ‘true to our native land,’ the mother continent, the cradle of civilization."


    Quite the mission statement wouldn't you say? Now since Rev. Wright and his very close association to Obama has been in the news, and by this time most folks have had time to make their own evaluation, there's really no need to go into anymore detail about this racist, America-hating fool. This so-called man of God continues to be in the news because he loves the "face time", so we'll be hearing more about him anyway.

    Barack Hussein Obama's past and current association with William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn:


    With this as background, is it really all that startling that Sen. Obama enjoys a friendly relationship with Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, a pair of terrorists?

    I want to be clear here: Not terrorist sympathizers. Terrorists.

    The mainstream media, in their zeal to elect a Democrat, are assiduously airbrushing Ayers: “an aging lefty with a foolish past,” as the Chicago Sun-Times has so delicately put it. In fact, it is the press that is rife with foolish, aging lefties. Ayers, by contrast, is an unapologetic terrorist with a savage past — one who beat the system he so reviles when, after his years of fugitivity, terrorism charges were dropped due to government surveillance violations. He’s “guilty as sin,” by his own concession, but “free as a bird.”
    Ayers didn’t just carry a sign outside the Pentagon on May 19, 1972. He bombed it. As his memoir gleefully recalled, “Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon. The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.”

    Whether Pentagon bombing day was more or less ideal than other days, when he, Dohrn and their Weathermen comrades bombed the U.S. Capitol, the State Department, and sundry banks, police stations and courthouses, Ayers does not say. But on each occasion, there was surely optimism that the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.

    There were lots of bombs. There is no remorse. “I don’t regret setting bombs,” he told the New York Times in 2001, sorry only that he and the others “didn’t do enough.” Like what? We can’t be sure, though National Review Online’s Jonah Goldberg recounts Ayers’s sentiments back in the day: “Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at.”

    Ayers and Dohrn have done the actual dirty work of terror, while Jeremiah Wright draws the line at waving pom-poms. But the prism through which they assay the dirty work is precisely the same: America has it coming.


    Now at this point I realize that this post is only getting longer and what I don't want to do is lose anyone. So I suppose turning this into a two-parter is a better idea than trying to post everything all at once.
    I just cannot stress enough that if this man has any possibility at all of becoming our next president....we damn sure need to know more about him! I mean, after all, if this guy were running on a Republican ticket you can bet your sweet little behind that the media would be all over this night and day. As I said before....it's a true double standard. Liberals and the mainstream media DO NOT want you to know these things because if you did you'd be wanting to know more, you'd be asking questions and you'd be wanting your media outlets to be asking these questions....publicly and loud. But the liberals and the mainstream media would be all over this like "stink on shit" if in fact Barack Obama just happened to be a Republican!

    You know I'm not done so stay tuned....




    Comments (29) | Add Comment | Link
    At 02:20, April 24, 2008, Eclectablog said:
    That's it. I am SO not voting for Michelle Obama for president. She's a racist because she has felt discrimination because of her race in this country throughout her life. How dare her succeed in life despite that? What a bitch.

    And Ayers? I'm totally not voting for that guy for president either. What a tool.

    Thanks for the heads-up on these two.


    At 02:46, April 24, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    I just love it when you get in to your "investigative reporter" mode. I mean, forgetting for a moment that your text always carries the faint odour of Eau de Fox Mulder, it is always so objective and innovative.
    Granted, you make a lot of good points and it is a shock to discover that there is a politician at large in Washington with shady connections, but the real question is... do you really sit at home, writing this stuff and think to yourself "This is it, Mikey, this is the Big One. I'm gonna blow the lid off this once and for all, and change the course of history!". I mean, this is one of the smallest blogging communities online, and you actually post nothing that isn't out there already, so in all seriousness... WTF?

    Oh, and the reason no one cares about all this is so simple that it hurts my brain to think it. It's that all the people talking about this type of stuff are so far on the fringes (of either side, really) that nothing they say comes through the veil of partisan fanatism.
    It would be different if the people who get worked up about all this jizz would have at some point in the past said something like "holy crap, our president and his family has connections to known terrorist supporters" or "dear gods, our administration has crippled our economy", then maybe someone would listen. But no, when all you spew is hate (and by you I mean every partisan hack on which ever side) people will simply tune you out.


    At 11:03, April 24, 2008, Anonymous MS said:
    “It would be different if the people who get worked up about all this jizz would have at some point in the past said something like "holy crap, our president and his family has connections to known terrorist supporters" or "dear gods, our administration has crippled our economy", then maybe someone would listen”

    Isn’t this just a typical liberal point of view? Lets bring everyone down to the lowest level so we can all feel better about ourselves. Your point here is, only when we admit that everyone we like and admire is at least equally corrupt with the person you like and admire, then we will be heard and accepted as having something reasonable to say. As long as we cling to the idea that there may be some people, even in politics, that are better, more dedicated, more sincere, more honest than others – you will continue to insist – WE just don’t get it.

    The point of this blog post suggests an urgency to take a look at possible danger signs about a person running for the highest office in the land and if elected will be the president of us all, whether Democrat, Republican or Independent. The prudent time to figure this out would seem to be now.

    “….this is one of the smallest blogging communities online, and you actually post nothing that isn't out there already…”

    So…? Why the put down on the subject unless you are uncomfortable that too much poking around may reveal your guy is actually more corrupt than Rubicon’s guy.






    At 11:50, April 24, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    Your point here is, only when we admit that everyone we like and admire is at least equally corrupt with the person you like and admire, then we will be heard and accepted as having something reasonable to say. - No, my point is that if the people who pretend to care about tainted politicians and suspicious connections would cast their eye of suspicion on everyone the same, then people might listen. But when the only people reporting this kind of "news" is fringe nutjobs, then the story carries about as much weight as a feather in a void.

    So…? Why the put down on the subject unless you are uncomfortable that too much poking around may reveal your guy is actually more corrupt than Rubicon’s guy. - When reading my comment, did you actually bother to take in the words I wrote, and let them come together in your mind? A) It's not poking when you report what others have already reported, it's just giving it a spin. B) I specifically didn't put down the subject, I said that he makes a lot of good points. It's the notion that this piece is written with the feeling of "My words will change the world" lingering above it... while ripping off bits and pieces already written by more popular and more known right wing bloggers and pundits. So... I'm sorry, what was your inaccurate question again?


    At 05:35, April 25, 2008, Eclectablog said:
    I don't care what you say, Dante. I'm STILL not voting for Michelle Obama for president and that's final. Or that Ayers guy, either.


    At 08:59, April 25, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    You make a persuasive argument, Mr E. How ever, I should point out that I once saw a picture of Barrack HUSSEIN O'Bama eating a porpoise together with Osama bin Laden, and I'm almost certain it wasn't photoshopped.


    At 01:32, April 25, 2008, LauriesAsylum said:
    You guys, you're so funny....


    At 04:08, April 25, 2008, Anonymous MS said:
    “..No, my point is that if the people who pretend to care..”

    Pretend? Pretend to care, as opposed to real concern??? I’m not sure if you are able to make that judgment.

    “..But when the only people reporting this kind of "news" is fringe nutjobs..”

    Can’t help but wonder why you would bother to read such a blog much less respond to it.

    “..did you actually bother to take in the words I wrote, and let them come together in your mind?”

    Put down of the other person is so much easier than offering real argument.

    “..it's just giving it a spin..”

    Isn’t that pretty much what we all do when we express support for or dissent from a subject? It is usually called expressing an opinion and that pretty much is what blogging is all about.

    “…It's the notion that this piece is written with the feeling of "My words will change the world" lingering above it...”

    Ah… another judgment call here. This time judging the writer’s lofty attitude or motivation, the previous instance, judged sincerity. Dismissiveness of the post’s “spin” or argument or opinion or whatever you want to call it is so much easier than to dispute it with reason. No doubt you have already taken these concerns about Obama into your consideration and are satisfied they hold no worries for you, but I didn’t see that in any of your responses, only trivializing the value of bringing forth the discussion. For me, and perhaps others, there is concern and the expectation that more should be known before this man becomes president, if that should happen.





    At 04:21, April 25, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    Pretend? Pretend to care, as opposed to real concern??? I’m not sure if you are able to make that judgment. - How did my prvious statement not make clear what I meant? To show actual concern about the state of affairs is to cast doubt on all matters equally, not just the ones that personally piss you off. That's not concern, that's spite.

    Can’t help but wonder why you would bother to read such a blog much less respond to it. - Boredom, mostly. Running out of things to do this close to weekend.

    Put down of the other person is so much easier than offering real argument. - Yes, it is, isn't it? It's also appropriate when the other person misses the point of the original comment and makes a rebuttle that drifts away in to land of odd.

    Isn’t that pretty much what we all do when we express support for or dissent from a subject? It is usually called expressing an opinion and that pretty much is what blogging is all about. - Correct. And everyone is free to do so, no problem there. But if you pretend to act like a investigative reporter, making an important and startling revelations, then there is such a thing as being objective. You want to scream havoc, go right ahead, but please leave the pretentious attitude of being an advocate of truth in the rack by the door.

    Ah… another judgment call here. This time judging the writer’s lofty attitude or motivation, the previous instance, judged sincerity. - Yes. A judgement call that originates from a long, long history with Rubicon.


    At 12:37, April 26, 2008, Anonymous MS said:
    “…To show actual concern about the state of affairs is to cast doubt on all matters equally…”

    My, my, I must have missed sociology class the day they taught the lesson on how to show actual concern (or caring) instead of spite. Nevertheless, Mr. Dante, I think I am about to check out of the game of insult you like to play. Apparently that is your shtick and you feel comfortable with it but I don’t. Too bad because you seem clever and articulate but your responses go nowhere except to more insults and put-downs and it gets boring after awhile. Substance seems to be lacking -- at least none that was revealed here.



    At 03:37, April 26, 2008, Rubicon said:
    Well well, "Mr. Dante". It comes as no surprise that you would offer up nothing but basic insults and put downs. And it comes as no surprise that your long, long history with me guarantee's that you know, beyond all doubt, just exactly what I'm thinking or feeling while writing a post. In this case pretending to be an investigative reporter, reporting on a subject that's all over the place.

    You're wrong on both counts and I'm not going to waste time on a senseless argument over who's right and who's wrong. Just as you're convinced that Barack Obama does not need to be looked at a lot closer...you're convinced that I'm pretending and deserve to be insulted. Plus...if you're visiting out of shear boredom than I find it interesting that you spent so much time coming back to argue with MS. If you have any kind of substantive debate on this post and the subject matter, fine, if not, than as far as I'm concerned you have nothing to say.

    I think my point has been proven when I say that it's a real liberal double-standard. Libs simply refuse to look beyond their own backyard and will look for any excuse to trivialize an issue that pertains to them and to downplay it while making those who oppose them out to be almost criminal.
    Or in "E's" case to make a joke out of it. No real debate, no attempt to even give some thought to it, knowing that if the roles were reversed he'd be all over it, (but not Obama his hero), only jokes. It's not humorous at all....it gives you the very appearance of someone that just cannot bring himself to realize that his candidate might have some very, very questionable associates, and there is a very real chance that he's not all that you believe he is. And your defense of Michelle Obama's racism, and her complete dis of this country, the country that has given her so very much, just shows what I was talking about when I talked about the liberal world and mindset.

    Anyone in their right freakin' mind would be at LEAST a little worried about someone who thinks and feels this way and this person could potentially become a First Lady!
    If any of this revolved around John McCain, or anyone in the Republican party for that matter, you, your liberal cronies, your beloved mainstream media, and the Church Of The New York Times would be all over it like white on rice! Like a snapping turtle...you would not let go, (and you know it!). But because the man in question is a hero to you, you're not willing to even look a little further...and you damn those who want to know more and hear more from him about these associations, what he thinks about his wife's public statements, and just what the HELL he's going to do to disassociate himself from these people that obviously have had quite an influence on him over the years.

    I just cannot believe that anyone can be so comfortable with a man who is friends with, and continues to associate himself with a known, self-professed and admitted, home grown terrorist that thinks the death of American's had it coming!!! It's mindboggling.....


    At 05:00, April 26, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    Just as you're convinced that Barack Obama does not need to be looked at a lot closer - See, misunderstanding again. I absolutely think he should be looked at closer. What is it that makes you misunderstand EVERYTHING I say? My problem is not with Obama being scrutinised, because he damn well should be, and has been. My problem is with people who pretend to act as concerned citizens just to dish out the same personal animosity over and over again.
    You say libs have double standards and refuse to look at Obama closer? Seriously? Where do you get the nerve to say stuff like that? Look at E for a moment. The guy smacks conservatives around on a regular basis, but also takes shots at his own guys when the need arises, and it arises often. See, that's the difference between a real concerned citizen and a fringe element. He looks at both sides and chastises them, you look at both sides and kick the shit out of the ones you hate.

    Plus...if you're visiting out of shear boredom than I find it interesting that you spent so much time coming back to argue with MS - Please pick up a dictionary and look up boredom. The very reason I commented on this and continued with MS is that I have nothing else to do. Probably not going to be able to continue a lot further, with weekend plans and all.

    it gives you the very appearance of someone that just cannot bring himself to realize that his candidate might have some very, very questionable associates, and there is a very real chance that he's not all that you believe he is. - You just described yourself, in every detail.


    At 09:25, April 26, 2008, littleMissConfused said:
    Y'all lost me!

    Just stopped in to say "Hi!"




    At 10:41, April 26, 2008, Rubicon said:
    "What is it that makes you misunderstand EVERYTHING I say?"

    Well dude....that's most assuredly a two way street where you're concerned.

    "My problem is with people who pretend to act as concerned citizens just to dish out the same personal animosity over and over again."

    No act....no pretending. You read what you want to read and you read into my post just what you want to read. You'll make no attempt to have a reasonable debate but to misconstrue everything I write. It's your style and it suits your immediate needs.

    "The guy smacks conservatives around on a regular basis, but also takes shots at his own guys when the need arises, and it arises often."

    That statement just goes to show that you don't read anything I write. Numerous times I've stated that John McCain was never my first choice and that I part company with him on a number of past and present issues. I've stated many, many times my extreme dislike and aggravation over some of the failed and mishandled policies of George W. Bush.

    If you had taken anytime at all to go back in my archives, or to keep up, or stay current with my political posts you would have read posts where I expressed my extreme disappointment at the Republican party as a whole and even some so-called conservatives. So your comment there is incorrect.

    "Please pick up a dictionary and look up boredom. The very reason I commented on this and continued with MS is that I have nothing else to do."

    Speaking of boring...that's exactly what I am with this whole deal. You don't want to debate the subject, and in typical fashion you're more interested in doling out insults and put-downs whether they be subtle or not so subtle.
    You need to try and understand the difference between personal opinion and animosity. There is no animosity in this post, but rather personal opinion...you don't have to like or agree with my opinion but to sling out insinuations and insults to avoid the subject matter you just blow yourself out of the water.

    The final analysis dictates that your extreme dislike for me governs how you respond to my posts, and what you say to me. You so vehemently despise what I stand for and my beliefs and ideals that all else is negated and reason just flies right out the window. Every comment you make to me clearly shows your feelings about me. Not to worry though....my feelings are certainly not hurt.

    So why don't you go have yourself a grand 'ole weekend and don't give a second thought to us animosity riddled and pretending/acting, pseudo-concerned fool citizens.


    At 10:49, April 26, 2008, Rubicon said:
    Hi to you Lisa...hope you're feeling better!


    At 11:10, April 26, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    That statement just goes to show that you don't read anything I write. Numerous times I've stated that John McCain was never my first choice and that I part company with him on a number of past and present issues. I've stated many, many times my extreme dislike and aggravation over some of the failed and mishandled policies of George W. Bush. - Ok, first of, saying that someone isn't your cup of tea is different than dissecting his flaws publically. That's pretty much the core of my beef with your writings. You say something like "Aw shucks, I don't approve of what these here folks are doin'." when it comes to the minor problems you have with concervatives, but you are more than eager to attack everything, every single thing, about liberals (which in your posts comes off as anyone left from Bush). That's not concern, that's not political awareness, that's singleminded hatred and animosity.
    Where as bloggers like E are equally eager to take down your side, but spares no ammo when it's time to hit his own guys.
    A fundamental difference, easy enough to spot by anyone. Now do you get it? My problem isn't that you are a polar opposite of what I believe in, it's that you pretend to be a "fair and balanced" blogger just trying to raise awareness. You're not. You're just another fringe element, which is why people resond to your comments with humor. It's not the message people are riddiculing, it's the messenger. They can't get over the fact that you expect to be taken seriously.

    You so vehemently despise what I stand for and my beliefs and ideals - In all, perfect and true honesty, I believe you have neither beliefs nor ideals. Because 99% of the time we have known each other, you have stood by men who have publically raped most of the beliefs and ideals you claim to possess. There are people in this world, civilized people in western countries, who riot against their governments for misconduct among the elected, and you turn a blind eye to atrocities that will forever stain the once proud nation you idealize.


    At 08:02, April 26, 2008, Eclectablog said:
    If you guys are trying get me to vote for Michelle Obama or Ayers for president, it's totally not working.


    At 10:10, April 26, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    I'm trying to get you vote Ziff "Pop" Macauley from the Loon Party. He's plans to make asparagus a mandatory part of breakfast speaks to my heart.


    At 08:59, April 27, 2008, Rubicon said:
    Well "E"..you're proving my point that you're just so unwilling to look past your own backyard on this one. And you STILL have not admitted to the fact that if all of this were about McCain it would be an entirely different story....wouldn't it??
    But I see that you're trying to set up some sort of comparison between McCain and this pastor Hagee to Obama and Rev. Wright. There is none but yet you try and you want folks to listen to what you're trying to say!

    But if I try to bring up points or issues about Barack Obama your listening process, and debate process becomes nil. Your response is the same, to try and use some sort of ridiculous humor, that is not funny, and shows either a fear that we might be right, or that you don't have an argument...yeah, we know, you're not going to vote for Michelle Obama or Wright or Ayers. Some dialog.

    And again...in true liberal fashion, whatever issue you bring up is important and bears discussion, and of course your post is mixed with your personal opinion which is fair and ok. I on the other hand, a conservative brings up issues that I feel are important and bear discussion and they're met with ridiculous humor, meaning that the issue is not important, I'm met with insults and put-downs and rather than anything being my personal opinion it's called animosity!

    This is just exactly what liberals are all about! Anyone that doesn't think, feel or believe the way that they do...well, they're opinions don't count for anything, they're meaningless, and don't deserve any meaningful dialog. But of course anything you all say is much more important.

    Your party's infighting is really hurting them and it shows. A division over race, a DNC that can't figure out how to lead and can't land solidly on any one subject or person. And a candidate that has a very questionable history that IS going to come out more to haunt him, and you're making jokes about it....


    At 10:30, April 27, 2008, Eclectablog said:
    I have responded repeatedly to your guilt-by-association mantra. You just aren't listening: I don't judge people by the beliefs of their associates. I judge them by THEIR beliefs. And there's NOTHING in any of the things you have presented to suggest that Obama believes in things I find show-stoppers. Much like I don't believe that McCain believes that God sent Katrina to punish New Orleans for its forthcoming gay parade, I don't believe that Obama believes the USA government created AIDS and I don't believe God inflicted the attacks of September 11, 2001 as some kind of punishment.

    I think I'm a very fair person I find your suggestion that I would point a finger at McCain that I wouldn't point at Obama a bit insulting, frankly. If nothing else I believe I have always presented myself as a fairly balanced observer/critiquer of American politics. I just tend to agree with the Progressive Left far more than the Regressive Right :D


    At 12:28, April 27, 2008, Rubicon said:
    Well of course you would agree with the "Progressive Left" as opposed to the right...and I know and respect that.

    But I'm not the only one pointing out these issues with Obama. As I said, and you should know this, that even people in your own party are questioning and demanding that Obama speak up more on these issues in the hopes that it will assuage the savage beast. All of this is in the major blogs and the cable news sources...not just me and again I have every right to be concerned, especially if there's any change at all that Obama could be our next president. I would feel the same if this were all about McCain.

    You need not feel insulted since nothing I said was insulting. My point was that your post about McCain's association with Pastor Hagee and comparing it to Obama's association with Rev. Wright was quite feeble. It seemed like pointing a finger when the comparison is weak.
    And hey...I get accused all the time of being unfair and unbalanced and extremely bias...even as recently as this post, so don't feel so bad.


    At 12:30, April 27, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    I on the other hand, a conservative brings up issues that I feel are important and bear discussion and they're met with ridiculous humor, meaning that the issue is not important, I'm met with insults and put-downs and rather than anything being my personal opinion it's called animosity! - See, again, one last time, for all you illiterate at the back. You are not faced with humor and riddicule because you are a conservative and bring up non-important issues. You are met with riddicule because unlike some other people, you reserve your comments and investigative posts solely on the side that pisses you off. If you would once, even once, show actual outrage against your own clan, others may look at you and go "huh, maybe he isn't such a dick after all".

    Here's a test. This is a purely fictional scenario. Let's say it's few weeks before an election, right? And suddenly a scandal erupts, revolving around a Republican congressman trying to nail 16 year old House pages. Would you, being a man of certain principles, A) express outrage at the matter in which your party has neglected to deal with the situation, or B) raise doubt as to why this scandal was brought up right before the election, and could the Democratic leadership perhaps be somehow involved?

    Reading through my proposed scenario, my mind seems to wander in to past times, and I suspect there is a chance, albeit a small one, that this imaginary sceario has been carried out, and you acted like a partisan douche.


    At 08:21, April 27, 2008, texican said:
    Interesting post. Some of the stuff that Michelle Obama has said (or that has been attributed to her) sounds to me like it could have come from Malcolm X.




    At 07:04, April 28, 2008, Rubicon said:
    Well..ok, I'm illiterate and totally beneath you, as most others are as well. And calling me a partisan douche, or any kind of name for that matter, is disrespectful and doesn't bode well for any kind of debate or argument that you may have. And it shows that you're incapable of carrying on a reasonable debate without belittling, insulting and calling someone that is on a different side names.

    I would much prefer that you just stick to the subject matter and maintain a respectful attitude regardless of how much you may disagree with what you're reading. And if you read something and feel that you cannot debate it or submit a reasonable comment then it would be best to just stay out of it and wait until something comes along that suits you better....thank you.

    Rene....funny you should mention Malcolm X because Rev. Wright, Barack Obama's former pastor and still spiritual adviser was good friends with Malcolm X and at one time awarded X a plaque calling him a great man.
    And also back in the 80's the two of them traveled to Libya to visit then enemy number 1 Muamar Quadfi. So...how much influence did Rev. Wright pass along to the Obama's during their 20 year association. Maybe none...but one has to wonder.


    At 09:10, April 28, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    And calling me a partisan douche, or any kind of name for that matter, is disrespectful and doesn't bode well for any kind of debate or argument that you may have - Right... because history has shown that having a debate or an argument with you is possible. C'mon man, even E has mostly lost hope and responds with funny onliners. And why should anyone show you any respect? When it's a post on someone else's blog, you derail the original topic with a tirade of anti-liberal, anti-Obama, anti-Dem, anti-whatevercrawledupyourasstoday vitriol, and then expect people to respond to your myopic posts on how the liberals are destroying the world today, or how George W. Bush's semen has brought salvation to the Middle East.

    So...how much influence did Rev. Wright pass along to the Obama's during their 20 year association. Maybe none...but one has to wonder. - Classic... You're a delusional conspiracy theorist on the verge of killing people with a rifle from a vantage point, and you honestly expect people to take you seriously? Really?


    At 11:06, April 28, 2008, Rubicon said:
    Won't respond to that kind of garbage....


    At 11:26, April 28, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    Gee, what a shocker... The only responds you have, on any issue, is either an attack against Obama/Dems/Libs, even when the issue is not related to any of the three. The day you can actually muster up the fortitude for a genuine comment that doesn't require you to attack someone or turn the issue away from a real problem, is the day when I will convert to catholicism.


    At 01:15, April 28, 2008, LauriesAsylum said:
    Hey, no catholic bashing, lol


    At 01:17, April 28, 2008, dantesinferno said:
    I'm sorry, it just comes naturally to me. I see a guy with a black robe fondling 12 year old kids, and my mind just wanders to darker places.





    Post Comment


    From:
       
    Registered User: [ login / signup ]
    Message:

     
     

    Rubicon




    My Links


    Home

    Register Today!

    My Profile

    Archives

    Friends

    Admin





    ~~~~~



    ~~~~~



    ~~~~~



    ~~~~~



    ~~~~~



    ~~~~~



    ~~~~~



    ~~~~~


    ~~~~~



    <- Last Page | Next Page ->