Re: Three Main Reasons Obama Bin Laden is so Popular

On Oct 26, 3:07 am, "Part_Time_Troll" <Part_Time_Troll@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
25 Oct 2008,tx_max_king <txmxk...@xxxxxxxxx> in news:b4861593-7912-4f9f-


1) He's black (this is not racist, it's fact). He has almost
the entire black community behind him because, as I can
well understand, they feel that 'finally' one of their own
has broken the glass ceiling. But the fact is that most of them
are voting for him strictly on that premise, and have no
clue of what he represents or what his potential election
might endanger us with.  An uninformed voter can be a
dangerous voter whensomuch is at stake.

By your logic, most non-black voters would vote forobama, ifobamawere (approx all)
white.Soyou agree that racism is the number 1 reason mccain voters will vote
mccain/stalin.

Sarah Palin, is her name. Stalin is the obama guy.
His skin color (mulatto, for those unfamiliar with
Caribe and Cajun culture) is not the issue. His policies
and his concept of 'economics' are. Sure there are
white voters that will vote for McCain because Obama
is black. It's easy to compare this to Obama voters
who are voting for Obama strictly for the reason
that he is black. Maybe they cancel each other out.
I don't know.

2) A significant amount of his backers are just
Bush-haters. They don't care who is on the ticket,
why, or what he represents. They just know that a
vote forObamais a vote against Bush.

Then there's another *large* category of voters that knows anyone who is reasonablypopularis better than anyone repugs/criminals would be willing to nominate.

Your repug hate and bias is evident, so
having any intelligent debate with you is
futile. I'm Independent, I've voted for
Democrats on many occasions (not presidential
though). I've never known a Presidential Democrat
I felt comfortable voting for. And lately since
'Democrat' has come to represent liberal
extremisit, I don't even vote for Congressional
Democrats.

Personally,
I don't think Bush was worse than Clinton. Bush
of course, has a little more moral character than Clinton,

Though I've not even met either, anyone cooly comparing official actions will agree
that gw bush has behaved less morally than b clinton.

Sorry, embargo Cuban cigar up an interns
*** in the oval office is hardly moral.

but that's not the point here. And since the media have
cultivated the hate-Bush ethic to young voters

There you go again. blaming those rightwing radio talk shows for corrupting our youth.

The 'youth' are pretty well lost.
Best they can hope for is 2012.
Might give them a fresh start and
appreciation for the basics.

who are easily persuaded and have little knowledge
of history, well, then they vote for Obee because he's not
Republican and Bush is a Republican. Another ignorant
reason to cast a vote.

I agree that both pugs and dems overlook the historical reliability of destruction of a
society by class warfare which redistributes wealth to extreme disproportion.
However, conservatives prime motivation is to consume and/or destroy anyone who is
not as rapacious. In contrast, dems are mostly slacker class-warfarists.

Now you're beginning to sound non-partisan.

3) The extremist-leftist trash heap. These are burnt
out old losers and rejects from the sixties that still
hold contempt for anything that isn't anti-everything.

and therefore must be right-rant radios's most fervent audience.

Among this clan are repressed artists that never quite
succeeded in life and need to find someone to blame.
And it also includes true-to-life dangerous domestic
insurgents (people like Ayers)

ayres is a repressed artist?

Now that you mention it. He didn't
quite paint the institutions blood red
like he wanted to, did he?

what's your definition of "succeeded"? freedom fighters who gave up the fight for $70
+k/yr professorship?

I don't consider 'Ayers' a freedom fighter.
He was a violent extremist. Probably a psycopath.
MLK was a freedom fighter, Ghandi was afreedom fighter,
Christ was a freedom fighter (Romans weren't too
cool on love), whether you believe religeese or not.
Ayers was an assasin, not much different than
Lenin or Stalin, except he didn't quite have
their balls.

is timmy mcveigh a "success" because he killed civilians?

In Ayers book? Sure, he was definitely a success
in the killing count. Did he succeed in any other
way? Not, he didn't free anyone, he didn't advance
any cause and he certainly didn't gain any popularity
contest. He's dead, exactly where he should be.

(most conservatives are moral and ethical failures, btw.)

A generalization you'd be hard pressed to find
serious data to verify. How about most liberals
express a social conciousness based on selfish
self-interests.

who feel that backing
Obamais another way for them to promote their
destructive anti-American views through thepopular
culture and academia. This is a pretty large group
because it includes some honest-to-real-life traitors
and terrorists that hail from other shores but have settled
here, either because they were sent on a mission
by other countries or because they feel it is their
life-long mission to destroy America and Americans
any way they can (This group includesBinLaden,
Hugo Chavez, Iran mini-jihad, Putin, and Castro buddies
and worshipers).

gordon liddy, ollie north, are traitors who have actually committed treasonous acts.
Since most modern repugs are neo-fascist/commies, i consider them traitors, too.

Gordon Liddy was a two bit burglar hanging
out with the wrong Cubans. Ollie was just running
a covert op when he was double-crossed by politics,
it's been a routine occurence for centuries all over
the world. Even before the ancient Egyptians.

Now that's the reality and I haven't even mentioned
his league of loser Democrat pals that got us into
this little Fannie/Freddie economic 'downturn'. Or the
fact that he wants to tax the hell out of the people that are
actually growing the economy,

Most of the people in the USA who do productive work aren't paid enough to pay
much in (income) taxes. Leechers don't grow anything but their self-aggrandizing
"lifestyle". Most high income "earners" in the USA are leechers.

More generalizations. You'll never touch the real
money makers because they're the real crooks and no
'tax' program will ever touch them. These include
drug dealers (the big boys with mansions in ten countries,
not your friend that scores your bag of weed), the con
artists and scammers (Nigerian and Canadian kind, not the Fifth
Ave. flunkees), cartel, gunrunners, slave trade bosses,
high dollar smugglers . . . your 'tax' plan won't touch
any of these crooks. Obama certainly won't. And they're mostly
not even pary affiliated.
Imagine that.

The tax system is a mess mostly because government costs are not even loosely
assigned to tax sources. For instance, national defense exists to protects lives and
property, yet AFAIK, no property tax pays for national defense. (Income tax is an
appropriate form of "life tax")

I will agree with you that our tax system is no
longer 'strategic' and that is one of our biggest problems.
As a matter of fact, I have to give you much
credit on this most excellent observation.
There was a time when you taxed to build
a bridge, the money would go to build the bridge.
But no more, now it's all put into a big pot
and everybody grabs what they want. Kudos to you.

Eventually he will tax
the hell out of all of us. Or the fact that his total ignorance
of history and foreign policy will very quickly get us
very, very fucked.

Many presidents relied hugely on advisors. Even parah stalin would (or she'd quickly
be removed by pugs and dems).So, you wonder why has nobody has been briefing
parah (at the campaign level) on foreign matters? only the gop can know.

Advisors told Biden to keep his mouth shut
and it didn't work. Foreign policy ain't like
cramming for an exam. Even the foreign policy
advisors are themselves clueless. It takes years
of knowledge of history and a little cloak and dagger
inside scoop. Most have no clue what really
happens behind the scenes and they never will.

Nor the fact that he will bring with
him into that great power vacuum we call DC, a host
of some of the slimiest, thieving con artists the world
has ever seen (many times worse than Republicans,
trust me on this one).

There's too much dinero in DC (state capitols, county, city, and various district
governments) to keep the slime away. The pug slime and dem slime are mostly the
exact same slime.

Another fine point of agreement. We're almost
brothers in arms here. Scary. Repugs steal looking
you in the eye, Demons steal behind your back.
I'd mostly rather have them looking me in the eye.
I knew Bush would take his money, but I also knew
he had the balls (or more likely the backing) to
eradicate Sadam. He performed to my expectations
on both counts. I never expected him to save the
trees, although that was wishful thinking.

Where did you find this essay? Despite the " there are many of us... we.... the 60's",
this 1st-person is apparently a "literary device" for intro (copied from that dennis
hopper ad, yes?), indicating that the author was either not an adult, lived outside of
the USA, and/or was unconscious during the 60's thru 80's.

It's my own. Do a little profile on Google, I've been
around the froups since '99' and my writing has been
consistent. To answer your other questions. I just hit
half century last year, there were times from the 60's
to the 80's when I might have been considered
unconcious, but I always revived in the morning.
And I was born in a country under a Marxist/Socialist
dictator which I escaped in '61' and have been proud
to have the opportunities I've had here. I am an
American, without a hyphen, and I think that many
native born Americans have no appreciation for what
they have. And since they have never lived in a country
where you do what they say or you are killed or thrown
in prison, they will never fully appreciate what they
have. I'll be goddamned if my parents got my ass out
of a piece of *** Marxist/Socialist Commie government,
to be raised in the good ol' USA, for some dumbfucks
to come along and want to destroy everything Democracy
stands for so he can 'give back' to his community.

In contrast, "Personally, I don't think Bush was worse than Clinton... " suggests this
author witnessed at least part of clinton's presidency. (btw, bush is not yet a "was"
president.)

I suffered through all eight years of the ***, thank you.

--http://www.pe.com/localnews/opinion/editorials/stories/PE_OpEd_Opinio....
_ed_prop8_1_elx.97ff31.html
voters should always be skeptical of a constitutional amendment that takes away
rights, rather than guaranteeing them.http://www.bakersfield.com/opinion/editorials/story/581251.htmlhttp://www.ocregister.com/articles/marriage-sex-protection-2174926-ca...http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/story/950392.htmlhttp://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?
AID=/20081015/A_OPINION01/810150307/-1/A_OPINIONhttp://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/oct/12/proposition-8-denie...
#c140765

http://www.google.com/search?
q=Karl+Rove+Coal+Country+Pennsylvania+Where+People+%
22Really+Do+Cling+to+their+Guns+and+their+Faith%22http://www.google.com/search?q=site:wordpress.com+%22Bible+Spice%22http://www.google.com/search?q=%22George+Bush+in+Lipstick%22- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.

Loading