The Speech the Right WISHES Obama would have given.

[Damocles]

You know, firstly, I freaking hate when white guys use the word "whitey". You sound so ignorant and bitter, kinda like John Gibson.

Secondly, I think it's a damned sad day when Asshat, who is kind of a freak, can make the statement that "after 300 years of slavery there might be some bitterness and it's understandable" while supposedly more enlightened or at least, more normal, white male posters are whining on and on and on about poor "whitey" as if history began when they graced this world with their birth.

What an eye-opener.

Firstly, I don't care if you hate it when white people use "Whitey" and think it makes them sound "bitter". It really wasn't the point. When Obama speaks of the separatist nature of the rhetoric and even lately has stated had he not retired Obama would have left the church. Ironically I agree with the candidate you attempt to protect with this inanity.

Secondly, Asshat actually celebrates the separatism, not attempts to excuse it. That isn't more enlightened, it is a reason for him to be a White Separatist and feel excused for it as you excuse this man.

Yes, IMO it is an eye opener.

 

[Cancel7]

Firstly, I don't care if you hate it when white people use "Whitey" and think it makes them sound "bitter". It really wasn't the point. When Obama speaks of the separatist nature of the rhetoric and even lately has stated had he not retired Obama would have left the church. Ironically I agree with the candidate you attempt to protect with this inanity.

Secondly, Asshat actually celebrates the separatism, not attempts to excuse it. That isn't more enlightened, it is a reason for him to be a White Separatist and feel excused for it as you excuse this man.

Yes, IMO it is an eye opener.

Sorry if I touched a nerve...again!

Bitter, bitter, bitter. Try putting a little sugar on that lemon you're sucking Damo.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Firstly, I don't care if you hate it when white people use "Whitey" and think it makes them sound "bitter". It really wasn't the point. When Obama speaks of the separatist nature of the rhetoric and even lately has stated had he not retired Obama would have left the church. Ironically I agree with the candidate you attempt to protect with this inanity.

Secondly, Asshat actually celebrates the separatism, not attempts to excuse it. That isn't more enlightened, it is a reason for him to be a White Separatist and feel excused for it as you excuse this man.

Yes, IMO it is an eye opener.

It's more enlightened in that it's in line with the actual reality of the world. You and the neocon fascists have a double standard regarding separatism: Only jewish separatism is acceptable. The moment you relieve yourself of this double standard and denial, you have the right to criticize the separatism of others.

Asshat out.

 

[Damocles]

Sorry if I touched a nerve...again!

Bitter, bitter, bitter. Try putting a little sugar on that lemon you're sucking Damo.

Sad.

You didn't touch a nerve, you just read what you want me to feel into it. I've never been surprised by the willingness of people to forgive from those they think are on "their side" what they would never forgive in others.

 

[Damocles]

It's more enlightened in that it's in line with the actual reality of the world. You and the neocon fascists have a double standard regarding separatism: Only jewish separatism is acceptable. The moment you relieve yourself of this double standard and denial, you have the right to criticize the separatism of others.

Asshat out.

I have no such agenda. You simply project what you want to see onto me. I have told you myriad times such inane factors as pigmentation do not make one of a different "race".

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

I have no such agenda. You simply project what you want to see onto me. I have told you myriad times such inane factors as pigmentation do not make one of a different "race".

But there is ETHNIC separatism which can be race, religion, country of origin, or mixes of them. You want to simplify the argument to PIGMENTATION so you can keep ignoring zionism as the most successful modern separatist movement. That what I see on you.

 

[Damocles]

But there is ETHNIC separatism which can be race, religion, country of origin, or mixes of them. You want to simplify the argument to PIGMENTATION so you can keep ignoring zionism as the most successful modern separatist movement. That what I see on you.

You confuse the fact that I make fun of the "Jews run the World" and pretend it is the same thing as supporting separatism by "Ethnicity" (At least that one is more to actual reality than 'race'). We are one nation, here we should separate by that not by pigmentation.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

You confuse the fact that I make fun of the "Jews run the World" and pretend it is the same thing as supporting separatism by "Ethnicity" (At least that one is more to actual reality than 'race'). We are one nation, here we should separate by that not by pigmentation.

Im not confusing anything damo. Im pointing out your bullshit.

 

[Damocles]

Let me put it this way, AHZ. You support dividing our nation into tiny little nations within a nation. Each "race" of people separate nations of "Black Americans", "White Americans" so forth. I do not. You use this man's message to say, "Yeah, he has a right to that, because I want it too."

 

[Damocles]

Im not confusing anything damo. Im pointing out your bullshit.

You are upset because I pointed out yours.

You seek to separate my nation into little bits and pieces of "ethnicity". I do not. That is all we are speaking of here.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Let me put it this way, AHZ. You support dividing our nation into tiny little nations within a nation. Each "race" of people separate nations of "Black Americans", "White Americans" so forth. I do not. You use this man's message to say, "Yeah, he has a right to that, because I want it too."

I support people being able to do what they want, and if people feel they are not getting a fair shake from the greater population, they have a right to create a state for themselves, just like the jews you worship. Separatism is separatism whether it's based on pigmentation or some other traditional facet of identity, like country of origin, or religion. Is religious separatism more acceptable to you than racial separatism?

 

[Damocles]

I support people being able to do what they want, and if people feel they are not getting a fair shake from the greater population, they have a right to create a state for themselves, just like the jews you worship. Separatism is separatism whether it's based on pigmentation or some other traditional facet of identity, like country of origin, or religion. Is religious separatism more acceptable to you than racial separatism?

Neither are very "acceptable" to me. I argue against such fabricated lines. Unfortunately other people believe in God differently than I do and use that as an excuse to treat others poorly.

And I'll bet that Darla might be rethinking her "enlightened" tag she gave you about now.

As for what I "support". This pastor has every right to say and do as he wishes, as do I have a right to agree with Obama and say that the message and rhetoric was divisive and negative and not something that I agree with nor want to see personally supported by a President.

Obama's speech recognized something that you recognize too. The difference is he and I agree that it is negative, while you celebrate it.

 

[leaningright]

All I want to know is where is that dead horse smiley? Gee Whiz.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Neither are very "acceptable" to me. I argue against such fabricated lines. Unfortunately other people believe in God differently than I do and use that as an excuse to treat others poorly.

And I'll bet that Darla might be rethinking her "enlightened" tag she gave you about now.

As for what I "support". This pastor has every right to say and do as he wishes, as do I have a right to agree with Obama and say that the message and rhetoric was divisive and negative and not something that I agree with nor want to see personally supported by a President.

I've never seen you argue against zionism. GOtta link?

 

[Damocles]

I've never seen you argue against zionism. GOtta link?

Gotta link of me arguing "for" it? All I have stated is that if they believe their Bible they will think that way. Just as with Christians. It seems we have this idea that people can believe in God as they see fit.

Your argument is that the Bible was tampered with. That doesn't change that if they believe what their Bibles say, it is what they believe.

 

[Damocles]

All I want to know is where is that dead horse smiley? Gee Whiz.

use bdh within colons :<insert bdh here>:

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Gotta link of me arguing "for" it. All I have stated is that if they believe their Bible they will think that way. Just as with Christians.

Your argument is that the Bible was tampered with. That doesn't change that if they believe what their Bibles say, it is what they believe.

You said you argue against all forms of separatism. I'm saying I've never seen you argue against jewish separatism. You gotta prove that. The burden is on you.

Gotta link to where I say the bible was tampered with? I believe it was from the very beginning a creation of interested parties, not a divine word in it. Though there are some cool stories, some of which hint at my idea of human morality.

 

[Socrtease]

I'm talking about on the board. Just about spitting notwithstanding I've seen people who would be all up in arms about Whitey saying stuff, shoot they just about went and started a posse to end Ron Paul for letters with a few statements "taken out of context".

Seriously I could see the reverse going on as people tried to talk about "It's not him, it's his pastor. I'll bet you sat in a church you didn't agree with everything..." then finally adjusting the argument to "It really isn't racist if you take the whole sermon in context..." as the lefties went berserk and the guy was trumped out of the race.

You guys would be all over some "cracker" who went all spouting stuff like the examples I gave. Even once or twice would be enough. And you would be saying the same danged thing about the fact that "context" really doesn't change what was said.

And all this because it appears to smudge their Superhero...

Wow now you are whining about Paul catching shit for racist comments on a publication that CARRIES his NAME. Just one teeny tiny difference there. If the Barack Obama survival guide said things about Jews and Italians and things like that you would have a point. But since nothing that Barack said or that was published in HIS NAME says anything racist you have NO POINT.

 

[Damocles]

You said you argue against all forms of separatism. I'm saying I've never seen you argue against jewish separatism. You gotta prove that. The burden is on you.

Gotta link to where I say the bible was tampered with? I believe it was from the very beginning a creation of interested parties, not a divine word in it. Though there are some cool stories, some of which hint at my idea of human morality.

I don't have to prove a negative.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

I don't have to prove a negative.

Proving you have made some argument in the past is not "proving a negative". Now you're just being a child.