It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Michelle Obama: ‘Any woman who voted against Hillary Clinton voted against their own voice’

page: 4
32
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: whywhynot

Well, there you go eh?

Problem solved.




posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

First video is "racial?" It is f'd that NYC had the Stafford Act requirement waived but NOLA didn't. You don't agree with that? And why do you think that was?

Yeah, that's SUPER divisive compared to, "They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

Second video. The Henry Louis Gate's arrest. Yeah, that was pretty f'd. Pretty f'd up that after showing his ID, proving that he was in fact trying to enter his own house, the cops arrested a well-known black Harvard professor for disorderly conduct. You don't think so? Do you think that would have happened to you?

So which part of this statement do you take issue with?

"I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home, and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there's a long history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately."

Funny, the title of that video seems more racist than anything Obama said:

"Obama-Black man vs White man.Whitey is wrong.Facts do not change that,RACIST RANT !!"

Did Obama say, "Whitey is wrong?" No, his third point was that there's a long history of minorities being disproportionately stopped by law enforcement and that's actually true.

Third video, he says that "it's not just a matter of it not being polite to say n****r in public" to illustrate a point. A point that was actually correct.

I think I'm getting the theme here and it's called out of control conservative correctness and snowflake white conservatives who think that any acknowledgement of the realities of racism today or even that minorities tend to have, on the whole, different experiences than their white counterparts, is a slight against white people.

It's funny how the same thing never comes across as racially charged to non-conservatives, including the white ones.



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Gryphon66

I wasn't aware that abortion was the next big equal rights issue of our times.

Explain to me how the unborn are getting their equal rights represented?


You weren't aware that the issue of whether women are have legal control over their bodies is an equal rights issue?

Where have you been?


My deal is, if im required to support it when it is born, i should also be given some input on whether or not she can kill it. Im far too old for it to matter any more....but i'd never authorize the abortion of my child. I'd sign whatever paperwork is needed to ensure that I had sole custody and completely indemnify the childs mother. But just thinking about it makes me very, very sad.

Where are my rights as the father of that child?





posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

No, we can not agree that Mrs. Obama was "divisive" ... speaking the truth about the current status of race relations is not "divisive."

Calling people "divisive" is pretty divisive though.



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Cmon lil kimmie do the world a favor launch the damn nuke already .



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Pres or not, he is in the public light.

He has an issue with the police, and this is why we have the issues we have today.

And the notorious N-word, brought to you dozens of times on RAP albums, is OK?

,
edit on 27-9-2017 by seasonal because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Right, I read her opinion. She can have it and express it. Your opinion is that it's arrogant, etc.

There's nothing in the statement that implies that women can't decide for themselves. Clinton would have focused more on women's issues than Trump is ... do you doubt that?

Not agreeing with opinion isn't "stupid" friend. I encourage you to remember that.

Oh sure, facts only matter when you say they do? Congrats, you're just as arrogant as you're claiming Obama is.



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Gryphon66

Pres of not, he is in the public light.

He has an issue with the police, and this is why we have the issues we have today.

And the notorious N-word, brought to you dozens of times on RAP albums, is OK?


That's a lot of simplistic clap-trap in my opinion. You're tossing stuff at the wall to see what sticks.



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
How would Michelle know what a woman’s voice consists of. She is, after all, a man.

You know, unless you can actually show evidence for that...you and all those who have starred you have just proven her point. But I'm sure it's appreciated since there are still a whole lot of people around that are unaware of the depths of ignorance the Right claims as its own.




posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
How would Michelle know what a woman’s voice consists of. She is, after all, a man.

You know, unless you can actually show evidence for that...you and all those who have starred you have just proven her point. But I'm sure it's appreciated since there are still a whole lot of people around that are unaware of the depths of ignorance the Right claims as its own.



He spelled "Brian" wrong.

Moran.



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

If you're required to support a child of yours when it is born, you should be able to demand that a woman carry a child to term based on your wants and needs? Okay. I understand that is your opinion, although you don't see yourself actually IN that position again ... so it's theoretical angst.

It's your child when it's born (or actually when it's viable). Before that, the fetus is a part of a woman's body, not a child.

I am also opposed to abortion on moral grounds in most cases, so I can understand where you are coming from. It's not and will never be an issue for me either, so my opinion is just that. As these matters have to be legislated though, I can see no way to treat a woman fairly simply because of the fact of nature that women are the ones who get pregnant, unless the law leaves the matter to her sole choice up to the point that the fetus is viable, and, sadly, after that if her life is in danger.

Anything else, frankly, while emotionally troubling, is tyranny in my book.
edit on 27-9-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: amazing
Michelle is sure wrong there. And, I may add, if you really thought that you could only vote for a woman, you had Jill Stein who was ten million times more ethical, honest and likable than Hillary.


Ethical?

Didn't she start a go fund me and suck millions from a bunch of gullible voters? Only to state that unused funds would go to future campaigns?

I may be remembering that wrong.


Yes, yes she did. She fooled a bunch of people into donating for that "recount", then when Pennsylvania said fine we'll do it as long as you pay up front, she refused.


yeah when they go low she goes high......



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: seasonal

No, we can not agree that Mrs. Obama was "divisive" ... speaking the truth about the current status of race relations is not "divisive."

Calling people "divisive" is pretty divisive though.


The current status of race relations is directly due to the Obama years. I wasn't born yesterday.

He started his plan of divisiveness between blacks and police with the local event in Cambridge that escalated when Obama said police acted stupidly. Then he weighed in on every single police event thereafter involving a black shooting.

They (he and his ilk) stirred the sh*tpot as much and as often as they could. Then they started pushing their talking/shouting point about Donald Trump being racist (a boldface lie) and kept it up all the way through the campaign.

They're still doing it.

THE most divisive president we ever had, imo, was Barrack Hussein Obama, and he did more to hurt race relations than any president I ever saw in my lifetime.



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

Current state of race relations due to the reactions of many to the Obamas? The current state of race relations is that Republicans just can't figure out why most Black Americans don't trust them and their okey-doke? The current state of race relations is because you can't make racism go away by pretending it isn't there? Because we're doing better now than we were 30, 50 a 100 years ago? Glad for that; there's still work to do.

I can certainly go with that.

The police in Cambridge did act stupidly. Dr. Gates was in his home, showed ID had committed no crime, yet, he was arrested because he was irritated with the home invasion on the part of the cops, and those charges were later dropped and an apology made.

You, who praises every utterance of President Trump is going to take exception with what a President comments on???

That's such an absurd level of hypocrisy there's not even a word for it.

I can certainly understand why a Black man in authority commenting on continuing race issues when so many, apparently, like yourself, are pushing the narrative so hard that there are no racial issues in this country remaining would ignite your anger.

Trump has shown every sign of being as racist as anyone. The Obama's, if that is their opinion, certainly wouldn't be alone in that very valid belief.

The key to what you've said is "imo" ... indeed, that's your opinion, this is mine, Mrs. Obama spoke hers.

Isn't America great?
edit on 27-9-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: seasonal

No, we can not agree that Mrs. Obama was "divisive" ... speaking the truth about the current status of race relations is not "divisive."

Calling people "divisive" is pretty divisive though.


The current status of race relations is directly due to the Obama years. I wasn't born yesterday.

He started his plan of divisiveness between blacks and police with the local event in Cambridge that escalated when Obama said police acted stupidly. Then he weighed in on every single police event thereafter involving a black shooting.

They (he and his ilk) stirred the sh*tpot as much and as often as they could. Then they started pushing their talking/shouting point about Donald Trump being racist (a boldface lie) and kept it up all the way through the campaign.

They're still doing it.

THE most divisive president we ever had, imo, was Barrack Hussein Obama, and he did more to hurt race relations than any president I ever saw in my lifetime.




Good for you sister!



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Ah, the "No true Scottsman" fallacy in action... My God, are they ever desperate.



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Was he not in the public eye?

He certainly had an issue with the police even before he "knew all the facts".

And he should have never use the dastardly N-word.

He and his wife were very divisive.



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: seasonal

Ah, the "No true Scottsman" fallacy in action... My God, are they ever desperate.


Perhaps, if she were doing anything but expressing her opinion. Our opinions often express formal fallacies.



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I think Obama's divisiveness was much more obviously displayed in the fact that nothing was ever his fault, no criticism against him was even considered for debate or refutation, it was all knee jerk "they just hate me because I'm black... racism, white privilege, yadda yadda." It was ridiculous then and it's ridiculous now. The majority of the "race problems" America presently has are the direct result of a spiteful attitude against personal responsibility for actions and the race argument being a convenient (and sadly too often accepted) excuse.



posted on Sep, 27 2017 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Gryphon66

Was he not in the public eye?

He certainly had an issue with the police even before he "knew all the facts".

And he should have never use the dastardly N-word.

He and his wife were very divisive.


What facts do you have to know when a policeman enters a mans house and after being shown proper identification and proof of ownership continues to harass him over a possible breaking-and-entiering call?

They were only divisive if people standing up for thsemlves and the groups they are part of is divisive.

I'm sure you're going to go around damning all these threads that make claims like "White men are the most discriminated group in history" as divisive then? OR the ones extolling the virtues of one religion over another? Of one political philosophy over another? Of one geographic area over another?

Your "divisive" sense seems very finely tuned only to racial issues that don't fit your own narrative.







 
32
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join