Why did Obama hang this picture in the White House?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by FortuneTeller, Aug 24, 2011.

  1. Eight

    Eight

    Democrats and their race issues are really tiring.. it's their biggest selling show in the Bigtop every time though... I moved away from an area that was overrun with Black criminals. It was all nice but there was a mass movement of them up from Los Angeles at one point and they really hate whities and love their criminal stuff so I split to an area where they are very rarely seen and even less heard... it's nice really...
     
    #31     Aug 26, 2011
  2. plyka

    plyka

    It's very simple, it is the establishments greatest tool, calling all their enemies "racists." It resonates with the American people, and so anyone they don't like, individuals or ideas they despise, they must get the people to consider them racists. It's not a Republican or a Democratic thing, although I admit that the liberals are more apart of the establishment and thus use this tool more often. It's an establishment thing.

    The largest anti-establishment movement in the country today is the tea party. Although to some extent it has been commandeered by the REpublicans. Still, the tea party is very anti-establishment.

    And you see the first tool used to combat these anti-establishment types: THEY ARE ALL RACISTS! Then they move on to calling them other names, like "terrorists" or "anti-american" or whatever.
     
    #32     Aug 26, 2011
  3. plyka

    plyka

    You guys are all giving excuses as to why the terrorism the USA did in WWII is/was a good thing. That's not the issue. Perhaps nuking a couple cities while killing and maiming hundreds of thousands and well as affecting millions with radiation disease and other things --perhaps all this was a good thing for the USA's purpose. Perhaps it was completely legitimate from the USA's point of view, or even legitimate in a rational point of view.

    But it doesn't change the fact that it was terrorism. Terrorism is a tactic and it has a definition. What the USA did fits that definition. Whether that terrorism was necessary or even good is irrelevant to the definition.
     
    #33     Aug 26, 2011
  4. Arnie

    Arnie

    I think one very big reason Obama won in 2008 is because he transcended race. A lot of whites voted for him because he wasn't another Jess Jackson or Al Sharpton. He starts to lose that image and he is toast. The economy won't matter.

    One a side note, he could win a lot of redneck votes with this painting :D

    [​IMG]
     
    #34     Aug 27, 2011

  5. It clearly fits the definition ,but of course these morons like to make up their own definitions when they don't agree with something
     
    #35     Aug 27, 2011

  6. <iframe width="560" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/MMzd40i8TfA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
     
    #36     Aug 27, 2011
  7. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    So why aren't you, Ricter and your other bleeding heart buddies crying about the Japanese, British and German "terrorist" attacks?

    Is someone incinerated from a low yield nuke somehow any more dead than someone incinerated in a firestorm created by conventional weapons?
     
    #37     Aug 27, 2011
  8. If you haven't noticed I criticize aggressive foreign policy all the time and have stated that is the # 1 reason I would vote for Paul
     
    #38     Aug 27, 2011
  9. This thread is developing into something interesting.

    I wonder how long it will take the JakeIsraelLover to start moaning about the "greatest tragedy of them all".
     
    #39     Aug 28, 2011
  10. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    I haven't noticed, no doubt I've been blinded by your constant hypocrisy.
     
    #40     Aug 28, 2011