Obama turns pastor hate controversy into race speech

Barack Obama’s Speech on Race is a clear case that Obama is clearly influenced by the 20 years of radical indoctrination he underwent at the Trinity Church. Obama is living in the past when the country needs to move forward. Obama states that he is married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners. Obama carries within the blood of slaveowners. Many Americans carry within the blood of veterans that fought to free the slaves in the civil war.

 

That's your opinion, not fact. It's a good thing your opinion means nothing.

 

Now, now Bogart - whether it's page 10, or 10,000 - does it salve the wound anymore, each time you cut and paste this repeated b.s., and I debunk it again? Brother - go within, sincerely.

 

Do not begin victory celebrations NPT, the battle hasn't yet begun.

What if obama comes to power and you are wrong , atleast on some counts ?

Or can you see the future
Pessimism while you hope and optimism while you cope.

 

Lightless, just a suggestion, but to really smear is to do more than just say "yeah!" from time to time to smears made by others. In other words,

Do you really wish to be taken seriously?

<<Sigh>>. Ok, in the name of good faith: From the inception of all the discussions on Barack Obama, across all the threads concerning all the various conspiracy theories floated by all the posters naming them, I have been happy to hear any and all real evidence that corroborates a single accusation made. As a statement of principle, I am quite happy to change an opinion, in the face of evidence, and admit the errors of my ways.

I have yet to receive a single piece of that evidence.

In the face of every smear raised by any number of people, evidence has been concretely provided refuting the smear. And yet the smears are merely repeated, without evidence of any kind. This is why they are called "smears," and not "facts."

Please contribute something substantive, and I'll be glad to listen.

 

Do i have a choice ?

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=7030869&postcount=63

You seem too convinced that you're "right" and others are wrong. Be prudent and Wait till obama completes a year as president before slamming others for false accusations.

 

Of course you do. Stop posting nonsense, and you'll be taken seriously. Continue posting along the lines of:

Or piggybacking on the baseless smears of the Mia and Bogart show, then I'll continue to take your posts as childish.

I'm sorry I missed your "present" votes worry. You'll note that I was gone from the thread from 3/19 - 3/26, and I simply missed your post.

The "present" votes thing was a non-starter to begin with. Obama voted "present" 129 times out of close to something like 4000 votes during his 8 years in the Illinois legislature, or about 3% of the time; and the "present" option is often used in Illinois for a host of reasons, including questions on points of constitutionality, concerns with procedural aspects of the bill being brought to the floor, or just plain saving one's political ass. There is no doubt Obama voted "present" for all these reasons, including, probably on at least a few of those votes, a political maneuver to save his ass. But 3% (actually, clearly less, since there is no doubt that most of the "present" votes were over procedural and constitutional questions) of an 8-year tenure doth not amount to the man's core, unless you're Hillary Clinton, or you're a DP member freaked about an Obama presidency for any number of bad-faith reasons. At least it seems so to me.

Eric Zorn, Chicago Trib columnist, had this to say about Obama's "present" votes:

Zorn: Disparagement of Obama votes doesn't hold up

Here's Obama's explanation:

Fact Check: Present Votes

 

What about Obama having 'Nation of Islam' staffers and interns is a smear and untrue?

What isn't true about Rev Wright making anti-american sermons at the trinity church or Rev. Wright being a black seperatist and associating with the 'Nation of Islam'?

What was Obama doing sitting in the Trinity Church listening to Rev Wright if he didn't like what he heard?

It is hard to be objective when there is more concern about winning an agruement than what is best for the country.

 

You think some of my posts as childish, that's great. How i wish i was a child again. I am not the most serious guy on earth and nor do i want to be.

Oh and it's good to be able to laugh at yourselves once in a while. some of your posts made me laugh at myself and showed me the error of my thinking.

I do hope you give some consideration to opinions and hunches and perceptions and "grey areas" than saying "I want Evidence" everytime.

P.s Don't ask me for evidence or substantive arguments for the above, i have none. Laugh at me, if you want.

 

When Bill Clinton was the Governor of Arkansas there were a number of allegations about him for either sexual harrasment or using State Police vehicles to pick-up women.

Well we all know how that turned out later on.

Bill Clinton even made the statement that he never slept with the women.

Of course it was the literal truth because there was no sleeping going on

 

Don't forget about Whitewater, Jennifier Flowers and how Hillary invested $1000 in futures and with some freindly advice turned it into $300,000 or so.

 

Spitzer should hire Bill Clinton as a consultant. If Obama wins the nomination he would be wise to bring the Clintons onboard.

 

Did you guys read my article link up thread from Rolling Stone?

Also, has anyone figured out what Obama stands for?

 

Bogart repeats himself, as a weak method of deception. Please refer to Posts #87 and 89, among dozens of others, for answers.

 

I'm all for laughing at oneself, and do it all the time.

No one's laughing here. There are gross smears based on nothing, and ignorance, on the one side - and folks aren't laughing there. There are my investigations, and debunkings, to the tune of dozens, and I'm not laughing either. It disgusts me.

I do give consideration to "hunches" and "opinions" and "perceptions" and "grey areas." Precisely why I investigate them, and spend the ridiculous amount of time to post my findings.

 

No smear will matter if obama's intentions and/or presidency are good.

I will agree that there are some negative opinions about obama that are completely baseless, others have varying amounts of truth in them.

How about answering this question.
What do you think are the flaws of obama as a politician and public figure ?.
Give your honest assessment.
Feel free to skip it if you don't want to answer. I certainly won't hold it against you.

 

You have said this before, in so many words:

Yet you offer no proof. Truth requires proof.

Obama's flaw is that he is a politician. Politics stink, because it requires swimming in an impure sea, reaching actionable goods that are never good enough (the course of the amendments to the Patriot act through House and Senate, for example). But it's the best we have, living as we do in society and not in caves of pure reflection. If you would like a reference to another post where I've discussed this, please let me know.

Quite honestly, he's also hemmed in by his stand of a new way of playing politics. He has been subjected to an unheralded amount of slander, gutter politics, and smears, and Clinton is only the tip of the iceberg. But his "politics of change" requires him to stay above the fray. Personally, I'd have wished he came out swinging more, but I understood he could not and keep the moral high ground.

Oh, and his ears are weird. Nixon's 5-o'clock shadow, Johnson's nose. Fatal.

 

Earth was round? gravity ?. Truth always exists. Proof comes very late.

You will never be able to see nor list obama's flaws objectively.
You are quite biased towards seeing "The perfect obama". Some others here will see "The flawed obama" [Include me if you please].
The truth lies somewhere between those extremes.