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 Slams ‘All White, All Men’ GOP

page: 14
48
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: knoxie
is michelle thinking of running? we got the usual crowd here triggered. lol starting their slam campaign, making up crap, just in case.

punch of pusses, imo.


Triggered, eh? What a cliche.

Don't really care what you like to punch either. But that does suggest who you voted for....




posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Anything she said would have been inverted, intentionally misconstrued, and blatantly misrepresented.

In this case, she made a simple point ... there are demographically a lot of White male Republicans.

Just as there are more Women, Black, Hispanic, LGBT, etc. Democrats.

This is simple fact.

However, the wailing and crying about how badly the White men are being treated (with nary an example other than "she said something mean.") are coming from the SAME PEOPLE have castigated, ridiculed and maligned anyone perceived to be "on the left" for being overly sensitive, spouting "words don't hurt," snowflake, triggered, babbling ... and it's, I'm sorry ...

UTTERLY FREAKING FABULOUS to witness. Not because you think you're being discriminated against ... but because you're bigger babies than any SJW Rad Fem has EVER thought about being.


edit on 5-10-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Gandalf77

I think it's a problem with all politicians with all ideologies.

They're too concerned with superficial diversity. No politician what's different ideas anymore.

They just care if someone "looks" different. But by god, they better THINK the same.

That's why I have been on about the lack of real diversity and how superficial all politicians are.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Gandalf77


i'd vote for michelle! i think she's great. she's hands down 100% better than what we got. lol



edit on 5-10-2017 by knoxie because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gandalf77
Sorry, but I'm not buying it.
She was pointing out a lack of diversity in all that whiteness.
She wasn't dissing on the crackers, hating on whitey, etc.

The more honest members of the GOP have also admitted as much.

The Obamas are not racist--as much as the looney fringe would like to believe otherwise.


Ignorance is no defence of racism.
There is no lack of racial diversity in the GOP representation. It is about as it should be.


I would hardly call it it ignorance.
The GOP itself admitted that a lack of diversity played a factor in Romney's defeat.
Just because she has a problem with that lack of diversity, perceived or otherwise, does not make her a racist.
That's just right-wing twaddle.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:31 PM
link   
lol the video got taken down.

Copyright claim apparently. Probably fraudulent, most YouTube copyright claims are.
edit on -050006pm10kpm by Ohanka because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gandalf77
Sorry, but I'm not buying it.
She was pointing out a lack of diversity in all that whiteness.
She wasn't dissing on the crackers, hating on whitey, etc.



So we're going by what she meant rather than what she said?

If she meant lack of diversity she'd have said lack of diversity. Instead she blamed whitey.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Gandalf77

I think it's a problem with all politicians with all ideologies.

They're too concerned with superficial diversity. No politician what's different ideas anymore.

They just care if someone "looks" different. But by god, they better THINK the same.

That's why I have been on about the lack of real diversity and how superficial all politicians are.


In terms of diversity of ideas, I would absolutely agree. Party politics--especially two-party politics--has a way of squeezing out any ideas that may run counter to the party platform. The party bulls whip their people into line. Even if they have a wonderful new idea, they end up cowtowing to their butt-puppet masters and the election cycles.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:36 PM
link   
The esteemed Mrs. Obama also recently said:

"Any woman who voted against Hillary Clinton voted against their own voice,".

Let me guess, she didn't actually mean that and instead meant "I approve of diversity among the women's vote".

Lol.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66


EXACTLY!

the Russian trolls must have pushed this narrative hard cuz it stuck. I can't even imagine my husband or any man in my life crying about how hard he has it... cuz he's white!

how unattractive...



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysticPearl

originally posted by: Gandalf77
Sorry, but I'm not buying it.
She was pointing out a lack of diversity in all that whiteness.
She wasn't dissing on the crackers, hating on whitey, etc.



So we're going by what she meant rather than what she said?

If she meant lack of diversity she'd have said lack of diversity. Instead she blamed whitey.


You need to show me, word for word, in quotes, where she put the blame on whitey. Show me how she was hating on the honkey--again, with a direct quote from her. If you can do that, I'll concede the point and STFU.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gandalf77

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Gandalf77

I think it's a problem with all politicians with all ideologies.

They're too concerned with superficial diversity. No politician what's different ideas anymore.

They just care if someone "looks" different. But by god, they better THINK the same.

That's why I have been on about the lack of real diversity and how superficial all politicians are.


In terms of diversity of ideas, I would absolutely agree. Party politics--especially two-party politics--has a way of squeezing out any ideas that may run counter to the party platform. The party bulls whip their people into line. Even if they have a wonderful new idea, they end up cowtowing to their butt-puppet masters and the election cycles.


Did you just refer to Mrs. Obama as a butt-puppet master?

Well ok then.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gandalf77

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gandalf77
Sorry, but I'm not buying it.
She was pointing out a lack of diversity in all that whiteness.
She wasn't dissing on the crackers, hating on whitey, etc.

The more honest members of the GOP have also admitted as much.

The Obamas are not racist--as much as the looney fringe would like to believe otherwise.


Ignorance is no defence of racism.
There is no lack of racial diversity in the GOP representation. It is about as it should be.


I would hardly call it it ignorance.
The GOP itself admitted that a lack of diversity played a factor in Romney's defeat.
Just because she has a problem with that lack of diversity, perceived or otherwise, does not make her a racist.
That's just right-wing twaddle.


Of course she is ignorant. Like I said, only about 1-1.5% of GOP voters are black. She should know that.
She suggested that the GOP should have less white people than they actually should in favour of "black" or "yellow" people.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Gandalf77

That's the only diversity that should matter, in my opinion.

It's 2017 and we're still talking about skin color for gods sake!




And yes, I will say that there are racists, and that racism exists and will continue to exist because we have stupid people in the world and racism is the home of stupid people.

But we are better than the stupid people. We should focus on values, ideas, character instead of how someone looks.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ohanka
lol the video got taken down.

Copyright claim apparently. Probably fraudulent, most YouTube copyright claims are.


here's another copy....



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Gandalf77

Get the full quote.




“At the State of the Union address… when you are in the room what you can see is this real dichotomy. It’s a feeling of color almost,” Obama said. “On one side of the room is literally gray and white. Literally, that is the color palette on one side of the room. On the other side of the room, there are yellows and blues and whites and greens. Physically, there’s a difference in color, in the tone, because on one side all men, all white, on the other side some woman, some people of color.”

“I look at that, and I go, no wonder. No wonder we struggle, no wonder people don’t trust politics. We’re not even noticing what these rooms look like,” she added.


So if you just follow her words, people don't trust politics because....white people.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Gandalf77

That's the only diversity that should matter, in my opinion.

It's 2017 and we're still talking about skin color for gods sake!




And yes, I will say that there are racists, and that racism exists and will continue to exist because we have stupid people in the world and racism is the home of stupid people.

But we are better than the stupid people. We should focus on values, ideas, character instead of how someone looks.


Well said sir. Can't argue with that.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: MysticPearl

No, she's not saying people don't trust politics because of white people.
That's a real stretch there. A real stretch indeed.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: MysticPearl

No, since you want to grind axes from thread to thread, as it was explained to you, there is a simple difference between the stated policy platform of Hillary Clinton versus that of Donald Trump.

Trump's only position is ... that Women have no rights, not even to the autonomy of their own bodies.

Clinton has pages of policy on Women's rights, equality and concerns.

Clinton was a "voice" for Women's rights ... Trump, quite obviously, is not.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: Gandalf77


i'd vote for michelle! i think she's great. she's hands down 100% better than what we got. lol




Maybe you'll get your chance. Contact your local DNC office and push the idea. I think Michelle is proud of America still.
edit on 10/5/2017 by carewemust because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
48
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join