Brainless Voters (Obama Sheep)

Originally posted by chissler

Originally posted by FlyersFan
America is a democracy and a capitalist society.
We are not a marxist country.
Redistribution of wealth is marxism. Not democracy and not capitalism.

I'm not sure if your trying to convince us, or yourself, or whomever. But if you say so, I won't even bother to engage you on this. It is what it is, but for the record.. I disagree.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
In this country - if you earn it, you keep it (for the most part)
If you earn more, then enjoy what you earn.

The equivalent of, "it's my ball and I'm not playing so I'm going home?" It's funny how we try to teach young children idealisms when they are young, but how quick we brush them aside when were older as they suit our own personal agenda.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
We can help Americans through difficult times, but to ask Americans to
support the world and to work and toil for the entire world????? NO!
Let them help themselves or go get their $$$ from OPEC or someother
rich country. Leave us alone.

Leave us alone?

Do you realize how this sounds? Allow me to take a moment right now to be so thankful for being Canadian where we hand over our tax dollars without batting an eye, so that we can fund social programs and we can make sure that the working and unemployed alike can afford their basic necessities and a proper health care. Toil for the entire world? Again, I think your working too had to convince everyone here. If that's your mind set, I won't question it. But again for the record, I could not disagree more.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
America is generous.

And from your post(s), you don't seem very happy about it.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
MORE than enough. If you earn it, you should be able to keep it.
If Americans WISH to donate to overseas poverty programs, they
already have programs in place that they can do that.

Alright, you have said this enough and we get the point. Show me the legislation that Obama is pushing that will have you directly funding the rest of the world. I'm sure your speaking with more than simple conjecture here.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Exactly. He's just like the rest.

Do you speak of the same disdain towards the rest of the candidates? Yes? No? If no, why not?

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Council Foreign Relations (NWO folks)

More conjecture?

I hate it when people chop up posts like this...does anyone actually take the time to read through all that spaced apart crap/ not me, i just scroll right past it. it would get more read time if it wasn't all spaced out like that. you know, people actually know what question you are answering without you having to space it out like this. it is so frustrating and a colossal waste of time!


[edit on 1-6-2008 by blimpseeker]

Originally posted by disgustedbyhumanity
Anyone voting for Clinton or McCain is basically saying that they like the condition our country is in and that they do not want change.

Not at all. The Clinton administration was very successful and not at all like what we see today. I don't get how people think McCain and Clinton stand for the same, unless they are buying into a great deal of propaganda.

Originally posted by vuoto
This is what passes for a reasoned criticism of Obama.
"...you're precious Obama..."

That wasn't criticism of Obama. That was sarcasm. You should know the obvious difference. There is plenty of substantiated reasons to question Obama, if you are willing to read this thread and others.

Minds are like parachutes vuoto. They need to be open to work.

Originally posted by vuoto
I get a sense from SteveR's posts that he's not completely comfortable with the whole "end of slavery" thing.

That's an absurd insinuation. I would be curious to know what it is in your mind that makes you compare criticism of Obama and irrational voters to an endorsement of slavery. That is real "lockeroom behavior" and an issue you should really look at. I would be willing to bet, like BigBert, you are secretly African American and feel intensely insecure at the normal political process being applied to Barack Obama. Such a shame.

Yes we do question Black Presidential candidates, no they don't get a free pass, and yes you should get used to it rather than whining that we're all racists. End of story.

Originally posted by chissler
Show me the legislation that Obama is pushing that will have you directly funding the rest of the world.

Global Poverty Act of 2007. Apportions 0.7% of USA GDP to third world nations (an 845 Million Dollar tax).

Details

Blimpseeker, let's keep this civil. I am interested to hear what Chissler has to say about these subjects.

reply to post by SteveR


SteveR...."secretly African American"...hmmm....how (and why, for that matter) does one accomplish such a thing?

I'm on pins & needles.....

reply to post by ezziboo


In context of the internet ofcourse.

Noticed this earlier, thought I would post it here.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Puerto Rico exit poll

Race of Candidate Was...

Not Important
HC 71%
BO 29%

71% of Barack Obama supporters said race was an important factor in their vote.

[edit on 2008/6/1 by SteveR]

reply to post by SteveR


SteveR, it's one thing to challenge the viewpoints of others by posing questions in the hopes of stirring up intelligent debate....but, it's quite another to attempt to diminish the POV of another by "accusing" them of being "secretly African American" as a means of ridiculing their political views re: supporting Barack Obama.

Did you ask this of BigBert and AAC to be inflammatory, or are you trying to give creedence to the idea that "black people will vote for Obama simply because he is black?"

Originally posted by vuoto
"I get a sense from SteveR's posts that he's not completely comfortable with the whole "end of slavery" thing."

This whole defense of pulling the race card is the only thing I see that is racist. So because he is African American he is immune to critisism? You are going to use our race as an excuse as to why we can't be critical of Obama? I find Obama racist, I find his race card pulling lackeys racists, and I find the overall reality of a double standard racist. And these white people that hide behind his color are being more racist than anyone.

It's funny that the people with "white guilt" or that just simply want to make it as easy as possible for black people to get an edge on everything are in actuality being more racist then a person that things that they shouldn't have any unfair advantage in the workplace or otherwise. It's like saying you know we don't think your good enough to work for this company so we are going to lower our standards and rule out this white candidate here and hire you....congratulations. Or we don't think your smart enough to get into this school so here is some special funding to help you and we will temporarily suspend any admission from white students while we wait for enough of you to join. Or we don't think your capable of making the right decisions or defending your actions so we will gladly pull the race card for you and hereby make all critisism of African Americans off limits.....Baaaraaack Obaaaamaaa!



[edit on 1-6-2008 by Sheeper]

Originally posted by ezziboo
Did you ask this of BigBert and AAC to be inflammatory, or are you trying to give creedence to the idea that "black people will vote for Obama simply because he is black?"

There is plenty of credence to that if you just go talk to people and check the exit polls. It is the point I'm making, yes. If you read the thread entirely you'd know this without having to ask me.

[edit on 2008/6/1 by SteveR]

reply to post by SteveR


Oh, I did read the entire thread...

So tell us all, SteveR, how long have you been employed as an Internet shill for Senator Hillary Clinton?

How's the pay? Pity having to work on Sundays, though....
With that, I'm off...I hope this thread dies a pleasant, pain-free death. Feel free to send U2U to discuss, SteveR...

[edit on 1-6-2008 by ezziboo]

Thanks for the post, ezziboo. You are welcome to waste as much of your time as you wish responding to my posts.

It's these kind of irrational frustrations that prove what we've been saying all along. Obama supporters, use the brain that God gave you, and maybe we can have a logical discussion about this. If that is even possible.

Until I see some pretty convincing facts to the contrary, I remain in the firm belief that deep seated racial insecurities and victim mentality has made a mockery of democracy.

Originally posted by SteveR
Until I see some pretty convincing facts to the contrary, I remain in the firm belief that deep seated racial insecurities and victim mentality has made a mockery of democracy.

I would love to refute what you are saying here.. would love to. But if one is to consider the facts, it is not a conclusion that one can come to.

However...

I don't think this is anything new. Democracy has been made a mockery of for a very long time. Women have been running for the oval office since 1872, and it is only now that a woman has finally captured a primary election. Why is that? Are we to honestly believe that every man that has won an election over a woman in the past was truly the better candidate? Or does a bit of sexism come into play? Would this be making a mockery of the process, based on gender stereotypes? I would think so.

Now I would love to think that our side of the world has made some progress, but apparently we're still working on it.

So it is wrong, but it isn't something new.

I think it is a travesty that it is only now, in 2008, 136 years after the first woman ran for the president of the United States, that we're seeing a strong following behind the mockery of democracy and votes casted with an ulterior motif.

Thoughts?

reply to post by chissler


*Sigh* I just can't seem to stay away....

Chissler, you have has read my mind and stated the point that I was hoping to make far more eloquently than I ever could...my cattiness just overpowers me, most of the time, and I can only manage to hiss and spit....a star for you!

SteveR, in the context of Chissler's last post, would you agree that questioning the race/gender/religion as a means of debasing another's ideas is a true example of the democratic process being made a mockery of?

reply to post by ezziboo


Those are problems of the past that we have made great strides to overcome, it is this very thing that we are opposed to, using that as justification for what is going on now is only enabling it.

reply to post by Sheeper


Sheeper, when someone states that they think candidate X is the man/woman for the job, and their choice is questioned on the base of race/gender/religion, that is INDEED a mockery of the democratic process...our founding fathers would die of shame (were they not already dead).

However, this thread did expose several ATS members as numbskulls, even though they did their best to keep it a secret...(claws retracted...)

reply to post by ezziboo


I think people are bringing up a good point when they point to the fact that a lot of people are voting for this guy because oh his color and I think that is a problem. I don't think it makes anyone a numbskull to think this way, it would be nice to think that such things couldn't happen but I would bet my life that the thing keeping this man afloat is his race, you would think by the amount of people that pull the race card this would be self evident but people like to view the world with eyes wide shut.

Originally posted by ezziboo
our founding fathers would die of shame (were they not already dead).

I think it's entirely logical to think that the founding fathers were involved in blatant mockery of the democratic process, if it is agreed that women back in the 1800's were passed up on due to their gender. The first woman ran in a presidential election not very long after Abraham Lincoln, so it is not a stretch of the imagination to say that this has been going on for over a century.

Tough to teach an old dog new tricks.

So to reiterate, I'm merely stating that this isn't anything new. I agree it is wrong and I'd rather see a vote spoiled than casted with ulterior motifs... but after almost 150 years, I think this "mockery" of the system is actually a part of it.

The system either adapts or it becomes it. It hasn't adapted.. so this exploitation of the process has to be considered a part of it.

As wrong as that may seem.

Chissler,

You can say this isn't anything new and has occured in various forms throughout history... and you'd be right. It's more of a "yes...and?". The general point of putting that forward seems to be an effort to detract or deflect from our concerns in the here and now, which takes priority. I don't see what else it adds.

The first African American has to be the right African American. Alan Keyes, a true black man, was a far better candidate this election. He didn't get the media attention he deserved, but he was included in one national debate with the other republican contenders. Just because Barack Obama is the first African American to generate this much momentum in an election doesn't mean we should give him and his supporters carte blanche to make history. I see it all the time. Those who question Barack as an individual and his campaign must desire to obstruct social progress. It's an unfortunate point of view to have, and a form of reverse racism since he is being favored and defended with the color of his skin.

In return, I ask his frustrated and desperate supporters here in this forum if they are African American too. The people who seem unable to tolerate threads questioning Barack without invoking racism. I see this question has been inflammatory but what I suspect is that some of the attitudes affecting election results are represented in some of the posters here.