whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is an adage formulated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states:[2][3]
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Godwin's Law is often cited in online discussions as a caution against the use of inflammatory rhetoric or exaggerated comparisons, and is often conflated with fallacious arguments of the reductio ad Hitlerum form.
The rule does not make any statement whether any particular reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact. Although in one of its early forms Godwin's Law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions,[5] the law is now applied to any threaded online discussion: electronic mailing lists, message boards, chat rooms, and more recently blog comment threads and wiki talk pages.
The rule does not make any statement whether any particular reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable.
Then perhaps you should explain why you may or may not find Ann Coulter's comments appropriate instead of lay out an urban definition of Goodwhine's law as a vague snappy comeback.
But that only serves to illustrate that, as an indicator of how someone might vote in an election (which is, of course, an "or" question), the poll in essentially worthless.
Furthermore, given that the poll has a three percent margin of error, Obama and McCain are essentially tied and Clinton isn't far behind. So, again, it demonstrates the poll is useless as an indicator of the November vote.
Oops - Obama video breaks Ed. rule: Barack Obama's campaign violated city Education Department regulations by making a video in a Bronx classroom starring high school kids.
Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is an adage formulated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states:[2][3]
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Godwin's Law is often cited in online discussions as a caution against the use of inflammatory rhetoric or exaggerated comparisons, and is often conflated with fallacious arguments of the reductio ad Hitlerum form.
The rule does not make any statement whether any particular reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact. Although in one of its early forms Godwin's Law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions,[5] the law is now applied to any threaded online discussion: electronic mailing lists, message boards, chat rooms, and more recently blog comment threads and wiki talk pages.
Read the linked column, Whomod.
It discusses (and quotes) Obama's racist burning for vengeance on the white race. Where even acts of kindness by whites who were ostensibly his friends left Obama suppressing a daily urge to lash out with violence against whites.
The exact kind of perceived betrayal and burning for vengeance that Hitler expressed in Mein Kampf.
It's not an idle comparison, Whomod.
As compared to your own relentless idle comparisons of Republicans to Nazis, for years on these boards, and no doubt elsewhere.
You lying hypocritical sack of shit.
You, of all people, have no moral high ground to get uppity about Nazi comparisons.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
It discusses (and quotes) Obama's racist burning for vengeance on the white race. Where even acts of kindness by whites who were ostensibly his friends left Obama suppressing a daily urge to lash out with violence against whites.
The exact kind of perceived betrayal and burning for vengeance that Hitler expressed in Mein Kampf.
It's not an idle comparison, Whomod.
No, I already read it in one of the current tabloids. Which is abuout as accurate as your Coulter article.
I think Rex is spot on. It's not like if Ann Coulter is ever going to have anything nice to say about anyone save extreme right wing Republicans. Even 9/11 widows are fair game to this shrew.
You, in your hatred and fear of obama, are just willing to swallow any fanciful tale of race hatred and Muslim loyalties. Does anyone besides you deluded far right types,really think Obama doesn't love America?
This is the most ridiculous "theme" I've seen perpetuated yet - and that's saying a lot considering some of the madness that keeps coming up in this primary race. Yes, a man who hates America (he doesn't wear a pin! where's his right hand?) is putting it all on the line to lead this country in what may be one of the most difficult times in modern history. He would inherit all shades of mess, and yet he wants to front the nation even though/because he hates it! Really?
Stop pandering to the insanity! It's a stupid stupid thing to say. Don't give it credence and maybe it will finally go away. Good rule of thumb. If you think it's absurd...it probably is. The end of the article actually makes the right point:
Quote:
"There may be some people who question his patriotism," said Ed Treacy, "but he's never going to get their vote anyway."
Obama is a dark wizard from the 8th century who came forward in time to destroy whites in order to create an Afro-Mexican Supersoldier. A short cloning cycle later and his army of Supersoldiers will destroy american white folks who built this country after the horrible indians failed to be awesome. then god blessed us until a muslim man takes the white house. it's all in pat buchanan's latest blog.
You, in your hatred and fear of obama, are just willing to swallow any fanciful tale of race hatred and Muslim loyalties. Does anyone besides you deluded far right types,really think Obama doesn't love America?
Coulter is partisan, granted. If it were just her opinion, it could be dismissed, as you attempt to.
Perchance since you seem to think there is a great muslim conspiracy going on, do you think Keith Ellison is trying to subvert America?
I actually have muslim friends. As I said, one friend from Bangladesh told me that about 100 muslims who worked mostly in mailrooms and delivery, along with a smaller ratio of professionals, were killed on 9-11.
Not all muslims are terrorists.
But all arab/islamic terrorists are fanatical islamic fundamentalists, and islam breeds a far higher ratio of murderous fanatics than any other religion.
Quote:
Just asking since you seem deathly afraid of anything not WASP.
You're deathly afraid of the truth, that you feel a need to constantly post these kind of slanders, because you can't argue your case on the facts.
If I was "afraid of anyone who wasn't a WASP" I wouldn't be friends with half the people I associate with. As I've said repeatedly, I've dated women of virtually every culture. I'm currently dating a Brazilian girl. And I've almost married two girls, one Phillipine, one hispanic.
I've condemned blacks and other minorities only where I feel they've undermined true freedom and equality with quotas, and been guilty of their own racism. I've critically cited crime problems within minority demographic groups, their attempts to extort reparations and guilt for past racism (every racial group has exploited every other racial group it could, and blame should not be disproportionately heaped on Europeans), and other races' hatred toward the white majority. And illegal immigration.
But in reading my literally hundreds of posts on the issue, I'm clearly not a racist. Much as you like to paint me that way.
But ironically, in making these accusations, you've many times made clear your OWN racist hostility toward whites.
Well, you're the one who keeps suggesting he's a "devout Muslim" as if that's a sign of pure evil or him trying to sneak in and convert us all to Allah.
Lets say that friends say he was a "devout catholic" before he became a Baptist, would you give a shit?
and let's not forget that it is YOU who repeatedly brings up 'Manchurian candidate' fear mongering, so it's clear you think Muslim=terrorist.
WASHINGTON — Nearly three weeks remain before the next Democratic primary, but the results are rolling in from another part of the presidential contest — and they signify trouble for Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Democratic Party officials and insiders known as superdelegates are jumping to Barack Obama's camp or signaling that that is where they are headed.
Clinton trails Obama in fundraising and in total number of delegates awarded so far in state primaries and caucuses. One bright spot for her campaign had been the quest for superdelegates — the nearly 800 elected officials and Democratic activists who are not bound by election results and are free to vote at the party's nominating convention for the candidate of their choice.
Because neither Clinton nor Obama is likely to emerge from the primary season with enough elected delegates to lock down the nomination, endorsements by superdelegates could be the key to victory.
In December, according to the Associated Press, Clinton led Obama by 106 superdelegates. In February, her lead had been cut to 87. Thursday, it was 30.
Obama has won more pledged delegates in primaries and caucuses, giving him the overall delegate lead, 1,635 to 1,501. Needed to win the nomination: 2,024.
In recent days, Wyoming Gov. David Freudenthal and Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Robert Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania have announced their support for Obama.
In an embarrassment for Clinton, one of the superdelegates supporting her, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., predicted in an interview with a Canadian radio station over the weekend that Obama would win the nomination and the presidency.
"I will be stunned if he's not the next president of the United States," Cleaver said.
Obama's gains among superdelegates have come even though he trails Clinton in public opinion surveys in the next state to vote — Pennsylvania, on April 22.
Obama is winning over superdelegates because "his arguments are more persuasive," said Mark Mellman, a Democratic pollster who is unaffiliated in the race. "She obviously hopes that's going to change with Pennsylvania and races down the road. But for now, his arguments are being more persuasive with those superdelegates."
A major objective of Clinton's superdelegate operation is keeping supporters from defecting. Working from her campaign headquarters, a team of aides stays in seemingly constant contact with superdelegates committed to Clinton, sending them poll numbers and news articles meant to keep them from bolting.
Some superdelegates in Clinton's camp have suggested they might reconsider if she cannot meet certain goals, such as overcoming Obama's lead in the popular vote total. With 10 contests remaining, Obama has won about 700,000 more votes than Clinton. That tally excludes the votes in Florida and Michigan, which are not being recognized by the national Democratic Party.
Clinton aides would prefer that superdelegates consider a broader set of criteria, such as which candidate is likely to be more electable in the fall, or who ran the strongest in pivotal states such as Florida and Ohio.
I actually have muslim friends. As I said, one friend from Bangladesh told me that about 100 muslims who worked mostly in mailrooms and delivery, along with a smaller ratio of professionals, were killed on 9-11.
Not all muslims are terrorists.
But all arab/islamic terrorists are fanatical islamic fundamentalists, and islam breeds a far higher ratio of murderous fanatics than any other religion.
fair enough, i've actually made that point myself. it's not the religion itself, it's where the religious people live and grow up (same as how you'll find most catholic terrorists are from Ireland). And since Obama is American raised doesn't that imply that if he is muslim he probably isn't a radical terrorist?
Quote:
You're deathly afraid of the truth, that you feel a need to constantly post these kind of slanders, because you can't argue your case on the facts.
as for slander, you do realize that you're implying obama is some evil monster out to destroy America. and, knowing you, you base most of this belief on the word of anne coulter and rush limbaugh.
Quote:
If I was "afraid of anyone who wasn't a WASP" I wouldn't be friends with half the people I associate with. As I've said repeatedly, I've dated women of virtually every culture. I'm currently dating a Brazilian girl.
oh, that's right. wondy isn't racist because he has token friends. so even though he says racist stuff it's ok because a black guy gave him permission.
Quote:
And I've almost married two girls, one Phillipine, one hispanic.
so do you think that having both relationships fall apart caused you to hate non-whites? or was this the cause of your hatred of women who dn't get married and do their duty by having children?
Quote:
I've condemned blacks and other minorities only where I feel they've undermined true freedom and equality with quotas, and been guilty of their own racism.
i seem to remember Obama talking about how there was very real anger from whites about unfair quotas just as there was real anger from blacks about inequality and that these were issues that needed to be addressed. i then seem to recall you trashing that speech.
Quote:
I've critically cited crime problems within minority demographic groups, their attempts to extort reparations and guilt for past racism (every racial group has exploited every other racial group it could, and blame should not be disproportionately heaped on Europeans), and other races' hatred toward the white majority. And illegal immigration.
no, you've used a few numbers to justify condemning entire races of people as criminals. you twist your statistics to justify racism.
Quote:
But in reading my literally hundreds of posts on the issue, I'm clearly not a racist. Much as you like to paint me that way.
except when i quote you word for word saying something racist. then you were taken out of context. so i post the entire post where you say something racist, then you say i'm full of shit and stop responding to the thread.
Quote:
But ironically, in making these accusations, you've many times made clear your OWN racist hostility toward whites.
i know you're talking to whomod, but you are the racist. you have many times, as you are now, tried to say that white euro-americans are perfect and any history that brings up problems is evil lies, because the indians were savages and the africans were beneath us and that both cultures deserved to be "absorbed" into our "superior" culture. you're a vile, little, pathetic old man stamping his foot at the damn teenagers on the lawn. if it weren't for the internet the world would've forgotten you by now, as it is i bet we're the only ones who have to hear your BS since you seem like the type who is too cowardly to discuss these beliefs in real life. but i still love you.
I didn't click the links, I'll take you at your word they're american-born. but that's what 13 people out of how many million? and John Walker Lindh is the only one I immediately recognize. He wasn't a terrorist. He felt more of a connection to the people and beliefs in afghanistan and went to that country. he went at a time when we were on good terms with them and I remember reading that the month he flew over so did Bush sr. to try and negotiate some oil rights (oil rights they refused until we invaded). then once in his new home for awhile the country was invaded and he basically did his patriotic duty to his country by fighting in the army. he did not stay here and work on covert schemes or terrorism.
Barack Obama has long argued that he has shown better foreign policy judgment than his remaining presidential rivals, specifically in opposing the Iraq war.
But at a fund-raiser in San Francisco over the weekend, he reportedly made the case that he has more foreign policy knowledge and understanding as well -- a claim getting a lot of blowback from presumptive Republican nominee John McCain and Democratic contender Hillary Clinton.
According to an account posted online on The Huffington Post, Obama was answering a question about what he would look for in a running mate if he wins the nomination. "I would like somebody who knows about a bunch of stuff that I'm not as expert on," he replied. "I think a lot of people assume that might be some kind of military thing to make me look more commander-in-chief-like. Ironically, this is an area -- foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain."
Clinton took exception when asked about the comment while making the rounds of the morning TV shows in advance of the long-awaited testimony today by General David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, the top US diplomat.
She laughed, actually, before responding on Fox News. "Well I’m somewhat shocked by that since I don’t see any evidence of it," she said. "This is kind of hard to square with his failure to ever have a single policy hearing on the only responsibility he was given, chairing the European and NATO subcommittee the foreign relations committee. ...
Before you read this latest poll, remember, Pennsylvania is supposed to be a blowout for Hillary Clinton. Given the state's demographics, she should win by a wide margin. She should. Okay, now read Quinnipiac's latest Pennsylvania poll:
Quote:
Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is catching up with New York Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary and now trails 50 - 44 percent among likely primary voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
This compares to a 50 - 41 percent Sen. Clinton lead in an April 2 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN uh-pe-ack) University.
In this latest survey, one of the biggest shifts is among women who went from 54 - 37 percent for Clinton April 2 to 54 - 41 percent for her today. A look at other groups shows:
* White voters for Clinton 56 - 38 percent, down from 59 - 34 percent last week. * Black voters back Obama 75 - 17 percent, compared to 73 - 11 percent. * Men are for Obama 48 - 44 percent, compared to a 46 - 46 percent tie last week. * Voters under 45 go with Obama 55 - 40, while older voters back Clinton 55 - 38 percent.
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
I didn't click the links, I'll take you at your word they're american-born. but that's what 13 people out of how many million? and John Walker Lindh is the only one I immediately recognize. He wasn't a terrorist. He felt more of a connection to the people and beliefs in afghanistan and went to that country. he went at a time when we were on good terms with them and I remember reading that the month he flew over so did Bush sr. to try and negotiate some oil rights (oil rights they refused until we invaded). then once in his new home for awhile the country was invaded and he basically did his patriotic duty to his country by fighting in the army. he did not stay here and work on covert schemes or terrorism.
i forget sometimes you like to fish people in to arguments, your too smart to actually believe that....
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
I didn't click the links, I'll take you at your word they're american-born. but that's what 13 people out of how many million? and John Walker Lindh is the only one I immediately recognize. He wasn't a terrorist. He felt more of a connection to the people and beliefs in afghanistan and went to that country. he went at a time when we were on good terms with them and I remember reading that the month he flew over so did Bush sr. to try and negotiate some oil rights (oil rights they refused until we invaded). then once in his new home for awhile the country was invaded and he basically did his patriotic duty to his country by fighting in the army. he did not stay here and work on covert schemes or terrorism.
i forget sometimes you like to fish people in to arguments, your too smart to actually believe that....
If only that were true, but sadly, Ray does believe it.
Well, you're the one who keeps suggesting he's a "devout Muslim" as if that's a sign of pure evil or him trying to sneak in and convert us all to Allah.
Lets say that friends say he was a "devout catholic" before he became a Baptist, would you give a shit?
and let's not forget that it is YOU who repeatedly brings up 'Manchurian candidate' fear mongering, so it's clear you think Muslim=terrorist.
It's only clear that I think Obama has hidden loyalties, and hidden anti-American/anti-white/anti-European hatreds and hidden agendas of vengeance and revolution against said groups.
It's not that Obama is a muslim. The problem is that Obama is a CLOSET muslim, with hidden loyalties and a hidden agenda.
People who practice a peaceful form of islam that isn't attempting to overthrow western culture and establish Sharia law, are not of concern to me. A man who was raised a "devout muslim" who lies about ever being muslim, and has demonstrated the levels of hatred he has in his quoted book, toward white classmates and his own white mother, who were nice to him (!!) is of great concern to me.
That's not "fear" or "fearmongering", that's objectively looking at the facts.
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
I actually have muslim friends. As I said, one friend from Bangladesh told me that about 100 muslims who worked mostly in mailrooms and delivery, along with a smaller ratio of professionals, were killed on 9-11.
Not all muslims are terrorists.
But all arab/islamic terrorists are fanatical islamic fundamentalists, and islam breeds a far higher ratio of murderous fanatics than any other religion.
fair enough, i've actually made that point myself. it's not the religion itself, it's where the religious people live and grow up (same as how you'll find most catholic terrorists are from Ireland). And since Obama is American raised doesn't that imply that if he is muslim he probably isn't a radical terrorist?
No. See BSAMS' wikipedia links to American-born Al Qaida terrorists.
Originally Posted By: Ray
Originally Posted By: WB
You're deathly afraid of the truth, that you feel a need to constantly post these kind of slanders, because you can't argue your case on the facts.
as for slander, you do realize that you're implying obama is some evil monster out to destroy America. and, knowing you, you base most of this belief on the word of anne coulter and rush limbaugh.
Where did I, or anyone here, mention Rush Limbaugh? More manufactured blanket-slander on your part.
I'm posting friends of Obama, and quotes of Barack Obama's stated muslim beliefs, by people who know him, and as quoted by him in his own book. Beliefs that he denies, which manifest a hidden agenda.
Originally Posted By: Ray
Originally Posted By: WB
If I was "afraid of anyone who wasn't a WASP" I wouldn't be friends with half the people I associate with. As I've said repeatedly, I've dated women of virtually every culture. I'm currently dating a Brazilian girl.
oh, that's right. wondy isn't racist because he has token friends. so even though he says racist stuff it's ok because a black guy gave him permission.
That doesn't even make sense.
I don't have "token" friends. Maybe you do. My friends are my friends.
Originally Posted By: Ray
Originally Posted By: WB
And I've almost married two girls, one Phillipine, one hispanic.
so do you think that having both relationships fall apart caused you to hate non-whites? or was this the cause of your hatred of women who dn't get married and do their duty by having children?
You're obviously trolling, but...
That's assuming one hell of a lot about me and my relationships that's not in evidence. My relationships didn't fall apart becaust I "hate non-whites". We simply weren't compatible, or they moved away. Most of them I still have some contact with, so again your "hate" theory falls apart. All of these things about "do their duty by having children", "hatred of women", and "hate non-whites" are YOUR ideas, NOT mine. Things you have paraphrased to make me conform to the racist/hater image you want to portray.
Once again, it is YOUR intolerant hatred that makes you assume that anyone who doesn't believe your radical liberal ideas must be a hate-filled racist. When in truth, myself and other conservatives simply have other ideas of how to eliminate racism, and truly create a society of equal opportunity, instead of bean-counting racial quotas that reward skin color instead of achievement, and avoid the liberal pitfalls of forever resurecting and apologizing for the past, that only succeeds in perpetuating minority hostility toward whites, and a sense of entitlement, of unending compensation that is owed. But liberal ideas along these lines ignore the complicity of black nations in the slave trade, and that Europeans were only about 100 years out of indentured servitude, serfdom and slavery themselves.
Your trolling on my personal life with insulting factless assumptions just manifests your inherent maliciousness. And then you have the audacity to talk about evil.
Originally Posted By: Ray
Originally Posted By: WB
I've condemned blacks and other minorities only where I feel they've undermined true freedom and equality with quotas, and been guilty of their own racism.
i seem to remember Obama talking about how there was very real anger from whites about unfair quotas just as there was real anger from blacks about inequality and that these were issues that needed to be addressed. i then seem to recall you trashing that speech.
Yes, because he circumnavigated that he listened to Rev. Wrights anti-white, anti-American paranoid rants for 20 years. For him to listen to that excrement and not walk out of the church with his family in two minutes, Obama has to be a black racist who shares Wright's hostility toward America.
Obama's televised "I can no more disown.." speech simply excused his hatred. And for all the praise heaped on it by liberals, it is simply a perpetuation of the status quo, where black America will not take responsibility for itself, and will continue to blame white America for all its problems, with Barack Obama's blessing.
Originally Posted By: Ray
Originally Posted By: WB
I've critically cited crime problems within minority demographic groups, their attempts to extort reparations and guilt for past racism (every racial group has exploited every other racial group it could, and blame should not be disproportionately heaped on Europeans), and other races' hatred toward the white majority. And illegal immigration.
no, you've used a few numbers to justify condemning entire races of people as criminals. you twist your statistics to justify racism.
I haven't "condemned entire races". I've cited many black Americans whose achievements I admire.
I've condemned a few specific problems, particularly in black and hispanic demographic groups, of high crime rates, disproportionate (relative to whites and asians) high-school dropout rates, disproportionately high gang membership, and disproportionately high imprisonment rates. That these are problems that need to be addressed, not swept under a rug and dismissed as evidence of "white racism".
If I "condemned entire races" I would be saying that blacks and hispanics were incapable of the same achievement as whites. Instead I'm saying that these are problems within the black and hispanic communities that need to be resolved, and blaming whites is scapegoatism that absolves these demographic groups of taking responsibility for themselves and achieving real equality. And rationalize exacerbating racial quotas that perpetuate the problem, reward under-achievement, and dumb down our society.
Originally Posted By: Ray
Originally Posted By: WB
But in reading my literally hundreds of posts on the issue, I'm clearly not a racist. Much as you like to paint me that way.
except when i quote you word for word saying something racist. then you were taken out of context. so i post the entire post where you say something racist, then you say i'm full of shit and stop responding to the thread.
You quoted words of mine that didn't prove your case, then added comments that equated to tea-leaf-reading where you ad-libbed what you alleged I really was saying.
Once again: your racist words of hatred, not mine. Deceitfully put in my mouth.
Originally Posted By: Ray
Originally Posted By: WB
But ironically, in making these accusations, you've many times made clear your OWN racist hostility toward whites.
i know you're talking to whomod, but you are the racist. you have many times, as you are now, tried to say that white euro-americans are perfect
Please show me where I said white europeans are perfect. In never said that.
I said that at the time Europeans colonized the world, they brought a technologically superior culture, but **NOT** that they were racially superior. And that this, despite clear abuses of Europeans during colonialism, worked out as a net benefit in advancement for India, China, the arab world, and the Americas.
African-american scholars have said that African-americans enjoy incomes, healthcare, and protection from ethnic violence that is 50 times better than the blacks who remained in Africa. I guess these black scholars are racists too, right Ray?
Originally Posted By: Ray
and any history that brings up problems is evil lies,
Again, this is your intolerant liberal hatred, that needs to demonize conservatives who disagree with you, in this case me.
It is the one-sidedness of liberal history revisionism that always portrays Europeans in a negative light, without mentioning the gains of people everywhere who lived under European colonialism. Liberals are somehow prone to demonize their own history, rather than look at European abuses within the context of the greater good and achievement, and simultaneously play down the abuses of non-Europeans.
Originally Posted By: Ray
because the indians were savages and the africans were beneath us and that both cultures deserved to be "absorbed" into our "superior" culture.
Technologically superior, yes. But not racially superior. People of all races who have moved into the European economic model all enjoy a far better life than their ancestors did.
Just as all Europeans enjoy the benefits of the ballast rudder, the compass, and gunpowder, that Europeans gained from interaction with Chinese culture. All cultures exchange ideas of art, medicine, healthcare, technology, and military tactics. Japan first came into contact with the U.S. in the 1860's, and rapidly transformed from a backward feudal system into a global military and industrial power. As are India and China now.
I don't believe races are inferior, only cultures are. Much as you try to paint my beliefs otherwise.
Originally Posted By: Ray
you're a vile, little, pathetic old man stamping his foot at the damn teenagers on the lawn. if it weren't for the internet the world would've forgotten you by now, as it is i bet we're the only ones who have to hear your BS since you seem like the type who is too cowardly to discuss these beliefs in real life. but i still love you.
Another vicious, factless personal attack of yours.
Originally Posted By: WB
Sometimes I wish had enough meanness in me to give you a full taste of the mocking antagonism you live your miserable life to dish out every day. But I stood at the edge of the abyss, and I stepped back. Better to let you roast in your own bile, than to leap off there with you.
___________________________________________
Battle not with whomods, lest ye become a whomod. And if you gaze into the whomod, the whomod gazes also into you. --Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzche (abridged)
Actually, I listen to Limbaugh fairly regularly and I've never heard him claim Obama is a Muslim. I don't listen to the entire show every day, but when I do, he's much more likely to be criticizing Obama for being in Rev. Wright's "hate Whitey" church.
White House hopeful Barack Obama's campaign persuaded a delegate to step down after she was ticketed for calling her neighbor's African-American children "monkeys."
Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski, a Carpentersville village trustee, was elected as an Obama delegate to the Democratic National Convention. She sports an Obama sign in her front yard.
Ramirez-Sliwinski "came outside and told the children to quit playing in the tree like monkeys. The tree was not on Ramirez-Sliwinski's property," Carpentersville Police Commander Michael Kilbourne said.
Ramirez-Sliwinski admitted she used the word "monkeys," but said she did not intend racism. She said she was only trying to protect them from falling out of the tree.
"Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski said she saw the kids playing in the tree and didn't want them falling out of the tree and getting hurt. She said she calls her own grandchildren 'monkeys,' " Kilbourne said. The mother of one of the children did not see it that way, noting she and Ramirez-Sliwinski have clashed before.
"She felt it was racist because of the fact the children were African-American," Kilbourne said.
Told of the incident Monday by the Sun-Times, Obama's campaign called Ramirez-Sliwinski and persuaded her to step aside as a delegate because the campaign felt her remarks were "divisive and unacceptable."
Let this be a lesson for other Obama delegates: If someone is bothering you, don't call them "monkeys." That would be "divisive." Instead, shout at the top of your lungs, "God damn America!"
That's just how folks talk in church. You know Obama will stand by you then.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Tuesday called for a "diplomatic surge" including talks with US foe Iran, to help stabilize the situation in Iraq. ADVERTISEMENT
The Illinois Senator battling Hillary Clinton for his party's nomination called for more pressure on the Iraqi government to embrace political reconciliation and a regional "diplomatic surge that includes Iran."
Quote:
"I continue to believe that the original decision to go into Iraq was a massive strategic blunder, that the two problems you pointed out, Al-Qaeda in Iraq and increased Iranian influence in the region are a direct result of that original decision.
wow a flip flop in the same statement!
Iran is a country that we can engage in diplomatic talks with and the war increased Iranian influence in Iraq.
by influence does he mean they have a positive influence? if that's the case then it was a good thing to go to war right?
or by increased influence is he talking about the American GI's that are murdered by training and roadside devices supplied by them.
that sounds like people i want a seat at the table with!
