firstly as I said before if you think Obama's citizenship isn't legit your a idiot and secondly no there isnt. to be usurper you have to gain power illegiamely something there is no proof of. accusations aren't evidence. there is evidence for his predecessor but not for him. I believe Tiassia has commented on you righties eqiuvocating things. No but I am saying your full of shit when you say your "usurper"(must be in quotes because you use it for political reasons and don't use it accoding to its definition) because you are clearly using it for politcal reasons. than you need to redo your schooling because you not. Quite trying to make excuses for your political usage of words against their meanings of course you do than you'd have to use words correctly.
Yes. However, people (Tiassa, Bells) conveniently remain silent when confronted with such information. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I be Idiot now! Thanks for the compliment. I don't think gaining power "illegiamely" is the sole requisite for being called such. One can also violate the Constitution of the United States, and assume, or try to assume, powers not given to them in that document. That, my fine, feathered friend, would be a usurpation, would it not? Apparently there are only accusations regarding the other guy, as well. Have either actually been successfully subpoenaed to stand trial for anything? Does the fact that either of them have powerful forces at work to prevent such a trial from taking place actually mean anything? I'm all for the notion of "innocent until proven guilty" but when it comes to powerful politicians and heads of state, generally even getting them to trial is nearly impossible. The stars must be aligned right. And I would think that the defendant would have to be extremely unpopular and basically a liability to others before he would be sacrificed. It's really funny, all this talk about the "real" birth certificate. It's also funny how White House spokesperson Gibbs doesn't at all seem in a hurry to leave after this question is asked. He demonstrates that he is willing and able to stick around and give straight answers to honest questions. I'll gladly concede that this issue is almost attaining the feel and relevance of the Sherrod Charade. Word is, no one except a family member, guardian, representative, or other intimately connected or interested party can access the "real" birth certificate. Or by the order of a court or somesuch. And so, as long as a legitimate court won't touch it, then I guess we'll never know. Obama Birth Certificate Law: Hawaii Can Now Ignore Repetitive Requests I'm sorry that I brought up the new N-word. I guess I should only use it on other people from now on.
What?!?! There are OTHER issues? I think you got it wrong, Wills. They're just here to keep us on track.
(chortle!) Perhaps you'd like to tell us what we should think, say, and do? Really, go for it. I'd love to see what you come up with.
Try and accept the more mundane, probable, and non-racially based reasons for Obama being depicted in the target game, for a start. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Why your point fails As has been noted previously, Will, the Alien Attack bit was pretty clear to those not already sold on the spurious conservative accusation of Obama's illegitimacy as president. In other words, your point has a point if we ignore the facts.
In and of itself .... In and of itself, the question is not inherently racist. Persisting in the face of evidence to the other? That's just stupid. Insisting on new standards coincidental to the first black president? That treads in dangerous territory. Incorporating that bit into a pseudo-violent protest that encourages people to "shoot the president" as such? Well, we're no longer simply restricted to questioning somebody's eligibility to be president. And, frankly, I see no legitimate reason why we should pretend these folks are simply questioning someone's eligibility to be president. Exempting a president from the Constitution? Why? Because it's a black man with a strange-sounding name? Denigrating an entire state government? Okay, fine, but why? Because it's a black man with a strange-sounding name? At what point, in your opinion, do such details about the Birther conspiracy theory become relevant?
Thank God you're not one of those pregnant birthers! I was beginning to Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!!!! About those Naked Racism Glasses... You know, the ones that allow you to see through an issue straight to the racially-motivated core? Are they permanently attached?
Bolted Just call me Vic Rattlehead, baby. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Now then, about a point ... you know, the thing that suggests your post has something near to a purpose? Do you have one?
You didn't see it? It wasn't obvious? Do you tend to see race issues more often than most, and if so, do you tend to make a bigger deal of them than most? It's just that it seems that so much criticism of our dearly beloved President lately seems to devolve into "You hate him because he's black! Admit your guilt!" No comment on the effigy burnings? Why the Obama burning was racist, but Bush burning (!) was just good political venting? Not to imply that you had an opinion either way, but other people seemed to think it was a no-no for Obama, which, judging from your opinions, you would seem to agree with those people. Either that or I can't quite understand where you are coming from.
It isn't really that tough to figure out I was actually hoping you were about some joke. I probably do see them more often than most, largely because most don't pay attention. As to making a bigger deal of it, most of those would prefer their omissions or commissions be ignored. That's because so much of it does have a racist tinge. I laid out that point in another thread for Madanthonywayne; I would direct you to that post, but he has since deleted the entire thread, which he started in the first place. Effigies are effigies. What racist elements can you identify about them? And which Obama effigy burning was racist? And how, aside from your sarcastic say-so? Depends on the circumstances. There is a specific point on the record in this thread that people don't particularly want to answer. I would ask why, when certain aspects of a discussion are in play, some people—yourself included, it seems—wish to continually restate the question as if those points are irrelevant. That is, if you disagree with the point, go ahead and tell us why; don't just ignore it, as that's downright rude. And when a particular ignored aspect has to do with racism, yes, some might wonder why others might want to ignore the point.
Let's just cut to the chase, then You call that an answer? Tell me, Giambattista, are you hoping someone will condemn you as a pathetic, racist punk? No, seriously: Let me restate the questions: What racist elements can you identify about them? And which Obama effigy burning was racist? And how, aside from your sarcastic say-so? Are you capable of answering those questions? Are you willing to give them a legitimate shot? What, exactly, are you trying to prove by depicting yourself as an incompetent hack moron?
Doesn't surprise me. The GOP is very adept at tapping into the insecurities of their base. Then they wonder why policies like affirmative action are still justifiably needed.
Could you tell me what a racist is? I think the same Q is in order for tiassa as well. Why do I get the feeling that it is whatever the 2 of you decide it is?
