Thats largely because he's ahead in the polls and people only hear what they want to hear in support of their candidate etc I accept the perception is more important than the reality, but from the first 45 mins (before I nodded off) McCain was beating him pretty comprehensively
The Next President?
- Thread starter Guest_
- Start date
Define beating him? Simply blowing hot air and coming off more aggressive does not mean he was beating him...far from it.
I still wonder why they are backing off the wright associations and concentrating on the far less relevant Ayers business.
The ever excellent melanie phlips puts it perfectly. Simple fact is that anyw white/jewish/latino or whatever candidate with such strong connections to racist organisations would have been crucified long ago
The ever excellent melanie phlips puts it perfectly. Simple fact is that anyw white/jewish/latino or whatever candidate with such strong connections to racist organisations would have been crucified long ago
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Melanie Philips is a retard, clivex.
We established that a long time ago.
Please move on.
We established that a long time ago.
Please move on.
Yeah. We should all swallow a PR company's puffed up bio rather than analyse his actual actions and associations over the past twenty years
Unbelievable.....
I can well imagine the dim Guardian readers on here having been equally apologetic for Le Pen and Jorge Haider's past links in the event of either of them having suddenly become "mainstream"
Nazi salutes and uniforms...but lets "move on"
Very uncomfortable for some that saint obama has a past of...at best...bad judgement...at worst... close links to the black equivalent of any white supremicist orgainsation
But lets "move on"
And you think that describing a journalist as a "retard" is what its all about?
Yes...i suppose you would
Unbelievable.....
I can well imagine the dim Guardian readers on here having been equally apologetic for Le Pen and Jorge Haider's past links in the event of either of them having suddenly become "mainstream"
Nazi salutes and uniforms...but lets "move on"
Very uncomfortable for some that saint obama has a past of...at best...bad judgement...at worst... close links to the black equivalent of any white supremicist orgainsation
But lets "move on"
And you think that describing a journalist as a "retard" is what its all about?
Yes...i suppose you would
Last edited:
Really struggling now arent you?
Argue the points raised or simply drop it. Your usual tiresome habit of trying to get in the final "funny" remark is of no interest
Or do something different, like raise a valid point yourself ....for once
Argue the points raised or simply drop it. Your usual tiresome habit of trying to get in the final "funny" remark is of no interest
Or do something different, like raise a valid point yourself ....for once
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
Struggling is using the term "Guardian-reader" and invoking Nazis at every opportunity.
Raise a valid point myself? The points you want to argue have been raised by Melanie Phillips, not you, so stop acting like you're doing anything more than parroting her talking points, her cock-eyed loaded questions and her guilt by association claptrap that desperately wants to believe that Obama is a radical black-supremacist. Give me a break.
Raise a valid point myself? The points you want to argue have been raised by Melanie Phillips, not you, so stop acting like you're doing anything more than parroting her talking points, her cock-eyed loaded questions and her guilt by association claptrap that desperately wants to believe that Obama is a radical black-supremacist. Give me a break.
The points raised have been raised by me (in less detail) many times before.
So answer this,... if you can
Would YOU make the same apologies for a politicain who had been with a white seperatist church for 20 years? And whos leader believes that blacks deliberately spread aids amongst whites, say?
Is Obama a radcial black supremicist? I dont think so, but hes certainly been very comfortable in that enviroment for a very long time.
As ever, you have said nothing of value
So answer this,... if you can
Would YOU make the same apologies for a politicain who had been with a white seperatist church for 20 years? And whos leader believes that blacks deliberately spread aids amongst whites, say?
Is Obama a radcial black supremicist? I dont think so, but hes certainly been very comfortable in that enviroment for a very long time.
As ever, you have said nothing of value
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Clivex, here you go:
"He should use Obama's own words against him. He should ask him whether he still thinks white Americans should make reparations to African-Americans. He should ask him why, in his March 18 speech on race, he tried to blame Pastor Wright’s racism on white America."
Absolute supposition on the part of the Idiot Philips. It is her interpretation that Obama "tried to blame Wright's racism on white America". Please point me in the direction of the Obama quote which states "White America is responsible for Pastor Wright's racism", and I will cede both you and Philips the point.
"He should ask him how he could have belonged for 20 years to a church which was founded on a philosophy of hatred of white people."
More supposition and racism from Philips.
"He should ask him what he saw in Louis Farrakhan that led him to join the Nation of Islam’s Million Man March in 1995."
The march was an expression of African-American identify for hundreds of thousands of black men - it was not an expression of support for the Nation of Islam. The fact Philips chooses to suggest that attendance equates to support for Farrakhan on Obama's part, is grossly and undoubtedly intentionally misleading
"He should ask him whether he now repudiates the black power revolutionary Marxism of his great mentor Frank Marshall Davies."
This is so utterly pointless a point, that it doesn't warrant an answer.
"He should ask him why he joined the Chicago New Party whose strategy is to move the Democratic party to the far left by burrowing from within."
It equates to being a member of Compass and New Labour - in other words, so what? Use of the phrase "burrowing" is very telling.
"He should ask him why America should elect as its President someone who believes he has to apologise for America, even to its enemies. And he should ask him whether, in view of his record, far from being a unifier Obama would actually be one of the most divisive presidents in American history."
Obama acknowledges imperfections in US policy, that Philips - a journalist - cannot see for herself? Use of the term "divisive" is, imo, a coded reference to Obama's colour - which isn't surprising given it's Philips who uses it.
"In other words, McCain has to present a coherent case for not voting for this man. He has to show why what Obama stands for is so dangerous and divisive."
I note the real lack of detail as to why it would be so "dangerous" and so "divisive" to elect Obama, other than the bat-shit crazy conspiracy theoires, and racially motiviated cobblers that passes for reason in Philips tiny brain.
"It can be done – must be done – on the level of principles and ideas, not personalities. He has to show that he himself truly understands why Obama should not be elected. To date, this is what he has conspicuously failed to do. Even now, it is not too late to do so."
An unabashed crie de coeur from Philips which amounts to nothing more than an empty request to the US never to elect a black man. Any black man.
The real reason Philips finds Obama "dangerous", is because she is vehemently pro-Israeli and anti-Islam in equal measure. She finds the prospect of "talks", more dangerous than the prospect of "war". That sums her up.
Philips is just about as racist as it is possible to get away with in the mainstream media, and anything she says should be given the same level of cognisance as would anything uttered by a drunk outside Kings Cross (I'll let you fill in the detail about how the drunk is probably Scottish - very Philipseque it would be too)
She's an idiot. An arsehole. A waste of organs. An oxygen thief. A pituary retard. And she's a phoney..................a half-wit masquerading as an 'intellectual' to the bewliderment of almost everyone on the planet, other than - apparently - yourself, and the rest of the Mail and Express readerships.
"He should use Obama's own words against him. He should ask him whether he still thinks white Americans should make reparations to African-Americans. He should ask him why, in his March 18 speech on race, he tried to blame Pastor Wright’s racism on white America."
Absolute supposition on the part of the Idiot Philips. It is her interpretation that Obama "tried to blame Wright's racism on white America". Please point me in the direction of the Obama quote which states "White America is responsible for Pastor Wright's racism", and I will cede both you and Philips the point.
"He should ask him how he could have belonged for 20 years to a church which was founded on a philosophy of hatred of white people."
More supposition and racism from Philips.
"He should ask him what he saw in Louis Farrakhan that led him to join the Nation of Islam’s Million Man March in 1995."
The march was an expression of African-American identify for hundreds of thousands of black men - it was not an expression of support for the Nation of Islam. The fact Philips chooses to suggest that attendance equates to support for Farrakhan on Obama's part, is grossly and undoubtedly intentionally misleading
"He should ask him whether he now repudiates the black power revolutionary Marxism of his great mentor Frank Marshall Davies."
This is so utterly pointless a point, that it doesn't warrant an answer.
"He should ask him why he joined the Chicago New Party whose strategy is to move the Democratic party to the far left by burrowing from within."
It equates to being a member of Compass and New Labour - in other words, so what? Use of the phrase "burrowing" is very telling.
"He should ask him why America should elect as its President someone who believes he has to apologise for America, even to its enemies. And he should ask him whether, in view of his record, far from being a unifier Obama would actually be one of the most divisive presidents in American history."
Obama acknowledges imperfections in US policy, that Philips - a journalist - cannot see for herself? Use of the term "divisive" is, imo, a coded reference to Obama's colour - which isn't surprising given it's Philips who uses it.
"In other words, McCain has to present a coherent case for not voting for this man. He has to show why what Obama stands for is so dangerous and divisive."
I note the real lack of detail as to why it would be so "dangerous" and so "divisive" to elect Obama, other than the bat-shit crazy conspiracy theoires, and racially motiviated cobblers that passes for reason in Philips tiny brain.
"It can be done – must be done – on the level of principles and ideas, not personalities. He has to show that he himself truly understands why Obama should not be elected. To date, this is what he has conspicuously failed to do. Even now, it is not too late to do so."
An unabashed crie de coeur from Philips which amounts to nothing more than an empty request to the US never to elect a black man. Any black man.
The real reason Philips finds Obama "dangerous", is because she is vehemently pro-Israeli and anti-Islam in equal measure. She finds the prospect of "talks", more dangerous than the prospect of "war". That sums her up.
Philips is just about as racist as it is possible to get away with in the mainstream media, and anything she says should be given the same level of cognisance as would anything uttered by a drunk outside Kings Cross (I'll let you fill in the detail about how the drunk is probably Scottish - very Philipseque it would be too)
She's an idiot. An arsehole. A waste of organs. An oxygen thief. A pituary retard. And she's a phoney..................a half-wit masquerading as an 'intellectual' to the bewliderment of almost everyone on the planet, other than - apparently - yourself, and the rest of the Mail and Express readerships.
betsmate
At the Start
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,752
I've been called worse.
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
You already do - your recent espousing of Mitt Romney ignores that he was a Mormon for a long time before they removed their racist rules.
Actually, I believe Wright was blaming that particular one on the US Government. Which is crazy, but not racist.
Only that which serves to reinforce your narrow beliefs has any value to you, so I'm glad you think so.
The mormon church is not a church i respect in any way but how old was Romney in 1978? 30 years ago isnt it?Wrights church is to this day stuck on black seperatist rubbish. how many white members are there of wrights church today?
Romney's bid possibly failed because of his faith, which would be ironic given that his church is far less controvertial than Wrights
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Clivex, as far as the Wright "saga" is concerned, you have failed to address the fundamental question, which is:
Who gives a fuck what his looney-tunes pastor says?
The answer would appear to be: Your good self, Melanie 'Cerebral Ring-piece' Philips, and a handful of Karl Rove wannabes in the GOP. No-one else gives two shits, and no-one else thinks it shows flawed judgement on Obama's part either.
You keep coming back to this whole Wright thing, and emphasise it as if it is something of import.
It isn't.
Wright is a barking old coot - a relic of the past, and the child of an age when racism was not only real, but often legislated, in the US. Obama represents that other United States - the new improved version that looks beyond skin colour, and is post-racial. There are still problems with race in the US, for sure, but they are confined to the fringes in both the black and white communities - where the nutters live.
To suggest, as Melanie Philips does, that Obama is some kind of black supremacist, merely by dint of his 20-year association with Rev. Wright's church, is contemptible bilge of the highest order.
Who gives a fuck what his looney-tunes pastor says?
The answer would appear to be: Your good self, Melanie 'Cerebral Ring-piece' Philips, and a handful of Karl Rove wannabes in the GOP. No-one else gives two shits, and no-one else thinks it shows flawed judgement on Obama's part either.
You keep coming back to this whole Wright thing, and emphasise it as if it is something of import.
It isn't.
Wright is a barking old coot - a relic of the past, and the child of an age when racism was not only real, but often legislated, in the US. Obama represents that other United States - the new improved version that looks beyond skin colour, and is post-racial. There are still problems with race in the US, for sure, but they are confined to the fringes in both the black and white communities - where the nutters live.
To suggest, as Melanie Philips does, that Obama is some kind of black supremacist, merely by dint of his 20-year association with Rev. Wright's church, is contemptible bilge of the highest order.
Last edited:
I find it remarkable that somebody picks on the Wright issue to dismiss a candidate in favour of one who believes the angel Mornony gave tablets of gold to a serial masturbator called Joseph Smith all those years ago.
Give me the Rev Wright any day.
Give me the Rev Wright any day.
So you would support a racist over and above someone who believes in a daft but harmless cult
Obama clearly did...for twenty years. Hardly dismissed him as barking until it became necessary to do so did he? Very strange that he supposedly disagrees with his worldview but kept turning up for more over and over again
So ...and the pathetic left never seem to be able to answer this...would be the reaction to a white candidate who was a member of an aryan church say that espoused the following
1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the White Community
3. Commitment to the white Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the white Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of "Middleclassness"
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting white Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all white leadership who espouse and embrace the white Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the white Value System.
Obama clearly did...for twenty years. Hardly dismissed him as barking until it became necessary to do so did he? Very strange that he supposedly disagrees with his worldview but kept turning up for more over and over again
So ...and the pathetic left never seem to be able to answer this...would be the reaction to a white candidate who was a member of an aryan church say that espoused the following
1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the White Community
3. Commitment to the white Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the white Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of "Middleclassness"
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting white Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all white leadership who espouse and embrace the white Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the white Value System.
Absolute crap
Pretty disgusting innuendo
Other black politicians (Powell, Rice) are not deeply entwined in seperatist churches
You may as well state that an attack on a white politican who flirted with the BNP is an attack on all white politicians
The racism on view here is the assumption that all blacks share the same "values" as Obama and his pastor
dont be so naive and ridiclulous. What sane person would associate themselves so deeply with a churhc that was so embeded in that world view when disagreeing with such a fundamental part of their constitution (or whatever its called) Its fucking written down. It was a CHOICE
out of your depth again
Of coure. he just happened to be there every week for twenty years and didnt really follow what was being preached. Or proclaimed it "wasnt for him" but "ill be back next week for more". Idiot
As for supremacist, not once did she use that word. Its seperatist
Theres nothing more to be said in the continuing and lauaghable inability of the pathetic left to answer what their opinion would be of a white church with the same values and a candidate that had a very close twenty year association with the same
Say nothing until you can answer that
Unlike Philips i dont believe that he is a subsriber to these views in totem now, but has had sympathy in the past for sure. his views have altered to fit the present circumstances perhaps but even with the benefit of the doubt it was extraordinary bad judgement and he has escpaed extremely lightly.... so far
As for romney being my choice, again the usual troll on here is quoting selectively and tiresomely having to drag out corrections. I said he should have been the GOp candidate especially given the present economic situation
My overall choice would probably have been Clinton
out of your depth again
Of coure. he just happened to be there every week for twenty years and didnt really follow what was being preached. Or proclaimed it "wasnt for him" but "ill be back next week for more". Idiot
As for supremacist, not once did she use that word. Its seperatist
Theres nothing more to be said in the continuing and lauaghable inability of the pathetic left to answer what their opinion would be of a white church with the same values and a candidate that had a very close twenty year association with the same
Say nothing until you can answer that
Unlike Philips i dont believe that he is a subsriber to these views in totem now, but has had sympathy in the past for sure. his views have altered to fit the present circumstances perhaps but even with the benefit of the doubt it was extraordinary bad judgement and he has escpaed extremely lightly.... so far
As for romney being my choice, again the usual troll on here is quoting selectively and tiresomely having to drag out corrections. I said he should have been the GOp candidate especially given the present economic situation
My overall choice would probably have been Clinton
Last edited:
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
This argument is simplistic to the point of being stupid.
Answer me this, clivex. A 'Yes' or a 'No' will do please:
Do you believe that Barak Obama supports black seperatism as it is commonly understood, and as espoused by his one-time pastor Reverend Wright?
And....please........no dicking about with "Well, he went to that church for 20 years blah blah blah" waffle. Just tell it like you see it - is Obama a believer in black seperatism - yes or no.
Last edited:
I attend a Catholic Church....but I do not believe there is anything wrong with being gay or divorce as the Church teachings tell us there is.
Obama went to a Church were the pastor held his main beliefs but the "extreme beliefs" were and are not his....is it really that hard to believe? I have gone to church for 26 years...and in none of those years have I been disguisted or seen the sin in what gay people do or have I looked down on my neighbours who divorced.
Obama went to a Church were the pastor held his main beliefs but the "extreme beliefs" were and are not his....is it really that hard to believe? I have gone to church for 26 years...and in none of those years have I been disguisted or seen the sin in what gay people do or have I looked down on my neighbours who divorced.
No Grasshopper i do not believe he publicly holds those views now. Did he in the past? Well, what was he doing there if he didnt? Arent there other churches available?
Yet again, i ask what your opinion would be of a white candidate who hitched himself to a church with such views
Now answer that question...which i know you wont and cant
Galileo thats your chice. i find it bizarre. A church should be chosen which is surely close to your worldview? There are differing strands within most religions which are liberla/conservative etc. How can anyone go to worship at a place where they disagree with the prejudices against gays/women/races/sexual standards which are such a core element
Yet again, i ask what your opinion would be of a white candidate who hitched himself to a church with such views
Now answer that question...which i know you wont and cant
Galileo thats your chice. i find it bizarre. A church should be chosen which is surely close to your worldview? There are differing strands within most religions which are liberla/conservative etc. How can anyone go to worship at a place where they disagree with the prejudices against gays/women/races/sexual standards which are such a core element
