Shoot the Darky

Discussion in 'Politics' started by spidergoat, Aug 6, 2010.

  1. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    They were denounced. That first video was a local news story. One of the people interviewed stated openly that it was racist. Another said it was shocking because it was a black president.
    Sufficient? Is it too difficult? Were you talking about something else?
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Ditto. This thread is about Shoot the Alien/Shoot the Darky. It's about effigies, and whether it's inherently racist to have a black president depicted in the effigy.
    That's the crux of this thread.
    I really don't know what Tiassa or Bells or whoever was carrying on about.

    No it is not.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    The joke is stale

    Oh, I'm quite certain I know why so few have chosen to address the point. Quite simply, it is because politics are more important to some than simple logic, or basic dignity. As you once asserted, yourself, people need not be racist to be willing to employ racism in pursuit of their goals. And while I might question such a puerile notion, I am very nearly convinced you believe it. Of course, we might also consider the conflict of interest inherent there: you find some manner of profit if people accept such a pathetic justification.

    Well, Xenu says so.

    Look, it's not difficult to figure out: If I made a game called Bitch Patrol, and one week featured Lassie as the target, and the next week Blue, I might get away with it, especially if I put the game in a tavern where children wouldn't see it. But if, the week after that, I put an effigy of Sarah Palin up for such abuse, well, it wouldn't puzzle me if some found that sexist.

    Or perhaps I'm wrong about that: Is it, somehow, confusing?

    Well, what you did in that response was essentially ignore the basic point you need to address, and argue evasively.

    Still, however, you are overlooking some very simple considerations:

    • The game itself was called Alien Attack. Strikingly—or perhaps, on second thought, given that it is you, after all, not—your prior response avoided this point, overlooking in its selective quoting of other members, some fairly unmistakable considerations:

    —"They only dream of shooting aliens." (Bells; quoted and ignored in response)

    —"Think on this, from the article the game is called "ALIEN ATTACK". Could it not be that whatever dipshit thought that this would a funny stunt was playing on the "birther" take that Obama is in fact an alien from a different country and it's a play on terms (note the antennas on his head)?" (Clusteringflux)

    —"The belt buckles reads "THE PREZ", he's wearing antennae, and the game is called "Alien Attack" (perhaps alluding to claims by the extremist "Birthers")." (Cifo)

    —"The issue is that people think they can get away with shooting the president in effigy because he has been portrayed by the lunatic right as alien." (Spidergoat)

    —"Alien Attack. Heh. What kind of alien is that, then? You know, like outer space? Or a president who "wasn't born in the U.S."?" (Tiassa; response to Bells)

    —"I found it typical that they portrayed him that way, to be honest. I mean could they be more obvious?" (Bells; response to Tiassa)

    —"As we see, they weren't obvious enough for some people to get the point." (Tiassa; response to Bells)

    —"... I'll only suggest that the title mocks the obvious. Bells and I had a laugh about the reasons it's obvious .... Look, this is just one of those things, Will. It's just one of those occasions someone somewhere clearly went too far. There are plenty of excuses that some would accept for this one, but they all lead back to a sublimated racism." (Tiassa)

    —"And the whole thing probably does go back to well before G. Gordon Liddy shot effigies of President Clinton with live ammunition. But, if you want to make the race-baiting complaint by reiterating your distorted Ackerman quote, please address certain points Bells and I have discussed earlier in this thread." (Tiassa; response to Madanthonywayne)

    —"It is still amusing to realise just how much people do not get it. Even when it is blatantly spelled out for them, they still don't quite get it." (Bells; response to Tiassa)

    —"In the grand scheme of things, this particular demonstration of poor taste—the Alien Attack game—isn't particularly worrisome. But the number of ways in which people will either defend the statement, or find one way to insist that the only response is to further pile on the president as if the problems he both faces and demonstrates are somehow unique in history ...." (Tiassa; response to Bells)

    —"As has been noted previously ... the Alien Attack bit was pretty clear to those not already sold on the spurious conservative accusation of Obama's illegitimacy as president." (Tiassa)

    —"There is a specific point on the record in this thread that people don't particularly want to answer. (Tiassa)

    Is it clear yet, sir? Have you figured out what you're missing? Or is this just a ruse to weary people by ignoring what is restated over and over again, hoping to claim some sort of rhetorical or political victory if people just throw up their hands and decide there's no point in responding to you? Certainly, then, you can complain about how disrespectful other people are for not even bothering with you, and considering your opinion worthless and intellectually dishonest.

    • The company official tried to pass off a story that even you and Giambattista find ludicrous. If the Alien Attack game was so "innocent", would Mr. Good really feel compelled to try to con us into believing what is obviously untrue?

    • It is some combination of these obvious factors, as well as whatever other personal perspectives people might have, that suggest racism to many. That you, or others, should persistently ignore especially that which is writ so large—and, as such, so often—in order to carry out a defense of someone to whom you are sympathetic, reinforces either of two basic propositions. Either that you are one of those who is, somehow, not racist but willing to exploit or defend racism, or that you are, simply, racist. I well understand the motivation of one of my colleagues, who, as you well know, proposed people should not be called out for their racism; quite obviously, the proposition is intended to protect and advance racist behavior at Sciforums. I might wonder where you stand on that issue, except, as we are both aware, we already know the answer to that question.​

    Seriously, though, I do start to wonder if this pretended ignorance on your part is some maneuver intended to weary people of the discussion by requiring that they restate themselves over and over again so that you might continue to insist on ignoring those vital points of consideration which are inconvenient to the argument you advocate.

    There is certainly the legal aspect, but the primary focus of this discussion is something else entirely. Your point says nothing about racism. Of course, avoiding the points of contention is something of a specialty for you, isn't it?

    • • •​

    Do you think you can explain the reasons why people found certain effigies racist? One would expect another to understand that argument if the other should choose to dispute it.

    As I said, effigies are effigies. Let us consider your latest spam: What, specifically, makes the effigy sexist?

    If all you have is sarcasm and insincerity, there isn't much to answer.

    I see. So this thread is about whatever you choose it to be about? It has nothing to do with what the people you disagree with have said? It must be about inherent racism? It couldn't possibly have anything to do with the reasons people find this particular effigy racist?

    Really? That's the best you can come up with?

    Apparently, Cifo, Clusteringflux, Spidergoat, Bells, and myself weren't explicit enough. Frankly, I'm unsure what else we might say. Should we shout? Should we scribble it on a brick and throw it at you? I mean, really, man—what?

    Yes, this thread is about Alien Attack. It is about the exploitation of xenophobic dishonesty based in ethnic or racial terms. I don't know how people could be explicit enough to make the point clear to you if what is on the record is insufficient. And let me be clear: By making the point clear, I mean clear enough that you might choose to address it. One cannot expect to convince someone so ensconced in obstinance. But I don't see what is so confusing that you should somehow, after contributint twenty-six of one hundred eighty-three posts in this thread (e.g., 14.2% of the post count), fail to at least recognize the point, speak nothing of address it.
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2010
  8. madanthonywayne Morning in America Staff Member

    One can never be certain of the motives of others, one can only make educated guesses. And if such guesses are to be accurate, one must be have a good understanding of the people in question.

    I assure you, your understanding of those to your right is far less accurate than you think it is.
    Ok. I'll buy that. But then bitch is a term almost always used as an insult towards women and only rarely to allude to female dogs. So Bitch Patrol would be highly suspect from the start.

    Ah, well, I was close with the antennae. But you are saying that using an effigy of Obama in a game called alien attack is racist because of allegations by birthers that he is, in fact, an alien?

    That idea is so ludicrous that I never even considered it seriously. I thought the references to it were in jest. Seriously. Do yo know any carnies? Do you think they're that subtle or politically aware? I've been going to county fairs all my life (just went to one a couple weeks ago) and have never heard any carnie discuss politics or display any interest in anything but figuring out how to separate the customers from their money.
    Because he was worried about getting into trouble with the secret service, I'd guess.
    We have a stupid game that was, we all agree, disrespectful towards the president. We all agree that it was inappropriate for a carnival to have a game, especially one that caters to children, in which the goal was to shoot the president.

    However, a few people see a more sinister motive behind placing an effigy of this unpopular president in the game and advanced the argument that "alien" meant "illegal alien" thus justifying a thread title called "Shoot the darky".

    That's all well and good and par for the course in a political discussion. But, for some reason, simply disagreeing over this issue was not enough. Some people find it necessary to disparage their opponents and charge them with racism and other character flaws for having the audacity to not see things the same way as them.
    No it's not. It's about a stupid and inappropriate carnival game that you interpret as being racist. I seriously doubt that whoever put the Obama effigy in the game put anywhere near as much thought into it as you have.

    Is it possible that your interpretation is correct? Could the carnie be a racist birther? Sure. I just don't see it as being an inescapable conclusion or evenly a likely explanation given the facts in evidence.​
  9. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    How stupid do you think people are?

    Such guesses are based in no small part on one's behavior. To wit, your presumption of jest took over ten days, and how much prodding, to contrive?

    Additionally, your long habit of defending racism and racist outcomes belies any pretense to innocence.

    Likewise, one might suggest that the term "alien", as applied to President Obama, rarely alludes to extraterrestrials, and thus would be suspect at the outset.

    Quite clearly, the use of the health care bill as an identifier, combined with the notion of an alien attack, offers some clarification of context and intention.

    And people accuse me of elitism? It is well within the bounds of my imagination that a carny might have a political opinion, and some of them so much so that they might even vote.

    We've both worked menial jobs before. Would you pretend that you had no political opinions back then? And did your bosses encourage you to discuss or promote those opinions with customers? I highly doubt I would have sold more pizza or music boxes by regularly denouncing conservatives to my customers. Indeed, at most I would have driven customers away.

    I find your suggestion that carnies are naturally without political opinions, despite their diverse awareness, laughable at best. In truth, it sounds like a desperate argument offered in lieu of something more substantial or useful.

    If it came down to prosecution, what sort of jury would believe that argument?

    No, really. Would you accept it? I would think not, based on your latest posts, but if you were actually on such a jury? Given your willingness, to the one, to advocate whatever opposes that which you oppose, and, to the other, your habit of avoiding such questions until cornered, and, to yet another, the weakness of your arguments when you finally do address what is so apparent that we might wonder why you need it spelled out in forty foot, flaming letters, one need not be insane to wonder.

    Beyond that, though, if one has such a concern that their business practice might run afoul of the law, why go forward with it? In your own business practice, do you err toward satisfaction, or caution? Would you offer a "fig leaf" for cover, or perhaps protect your licenses both of business and practice?

    It is not simply the "audacity to not see things the same way", but, rather, the nearly unquestionable appearance of striving to avoid certain issues and misrepresent the opposing argument. Do you not belittle people by misrepresenting their arguments in order to depict them as unreasonable according to your presuppositions? And yet you complain when your defense of what many perceive as racist is denounced as a form of racism in itself? What should we make of such blatant hypocrisy? Certes, we might accuse calculation, which you might find offensive. But the primary alternative is deficiency, that you are in some way incapable of recognizing, much less understanding, the counterpoint. In other words, perhaps it is not racism, but simply a matter of stupidity. (Let me forestall any pretense that it is a reasonable argument by reminding of the conspicuous avoidance of the primary argument you dispute.)

    It does not, as many have shown over the last two years, require much thought to denounce Obama as foreign-born, and therefore illegitimate. Indeed, the gullability of birthers ought to be well-established by at least two fake foreign birth cerificates that were so quickly debunked.

    Likewise, it doesn't take too much thought to recognize such blatant bullshit. That you presume carnies so retarded as to be unaware of any political discourse is beside the point, as such an argument says more of you than them.

    I think it's more a matter of your politics than anything else. That it took you so long to recognize the argument you chose to dispute is a significant testament to that suggestion. Your presumption that carnies are so oblivious, indeed, nearly inhuman in their ignorance and apathy, only reinforces the point. Indeed, it could be nothing more than inestimable stupidity on the part of the game operator and parent company, but such an extraordinary presumption ought to be supported by some extraordinary evidence. That is, your presumption is insufficient to demonstrate your argument as true.

    For my part, yes, such profound stupidity and apathy is possible, but also rather unlikely given the political climate and Mr. Good's anemic excuse.
  10. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    I know. Because it was much ado about a few points interspersed among 100+ posts about an "alien" and that the word alien = illegal alien = racism.

    Skin color? Criticize a president, all well and good. If it's a black president, however, suddenly previous criticisms are off the table because of skin color.

    My latest spam.
    Well, I would assume her gender is what makes it sexist. She's also a God-fearing Christian conservative.
    The reasons for her hanging there should be obvious when one considers that the house in question was owned by two male lovers. Get it? Homosexuals? They not only shun women, but conservative Christians as well.
    They got two birds with one stone.
    Hypocrites, they are!
    Sometimes all we can do is laugh about it. Whatever it is.
    But my sincerity is certain. My aim is true.

    I was wrong, okay? Forgive me. This thread is about whatever Tiassa chooses it to be about.

    I see the reasons as being debatable.
    So he has frickin antennae on his head. Alien Attack. They must be jabbing him with that whole illegitimate president thing. Totally racist.

    No, I think the reasons for finding it racist are kinda poor. Real poor. .com!!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You need to resort to violence to get your point across?

    Perhaps you are the one in obstinance?
    Again, this thread is only about what you took from it? That a depiction of Obama as an alien = racism?
    I'd love to pretend to level with you, but I just don't see how it's racist. That's it. If people have a problem with his status as a person who is Constitutionally eligible for the office, then that's their issue. If they want to call him an illegal alien, fine.

    Were you referring to me? If so, thank you for acknowledging my "contribution" to this discussion, though I am a spammer.
  11. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Yes. I suspect racism. SHOOT THE DARKY!!!

    Obviously it was Obama. That much should be clear.

    So? What's racist about it, other than cartoonish antennae?
    If someone accuses another of being an illegal alien, which this depiction may or may not be getting at, so what? What does being an illegal immigrant have to do with race?

    Knee-jerk Republicans and conservatives and anyone else who has a problem with him are likely to latch onto the idea that he's not eligible because of birth status to be the President of the United States.

    Racism is presumed in that argument? By who? Those who love him and think he's doing a good job? Those who feel the need to cite racism as the opposition's motive every single time a criticism, however substantive or not, is hurled?

    Is this a wake up call to all would-be politicians to darken their skin, so as to have a shield against criticism?

    Agreed. Many people may have undisclosed political tendencies.
  12. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Whatever you say, right? That's how it goes, it seems.

    Just out of curiosity, do you think such accusations of not being a natural-born American would hold up against John McCain, should he have won, based on the assertion that his citizenship was awarded ex post facto, and lacking natural-born status?

    But as to the subject, President Obama's natural-born status has been affirmed by Hawaii; at this point, claims to the other require a conspiracy theory involving an entire state government. Is this really a reasonable argument to make in order to inspire xenophobic fear along racial and ethnic lines?

    Perhaps if this was the first time we heard an accusation of Obama being an illegal alien, or not a natural born citizen, your point might have some credit. But not everyone ignores history the way your argument does.

    These arguments are flat-out dishonest, Giambattista. To the one, you mock people's consieration of xenophobia. To the other, arguments like those quoted above ignore it. Just like—

    —your Palin argument.

    If you can't be bothered to acknowledge the argument on the table, and instead must dispute some fiction of your own invention, one can only wonder what the point of your silly rant actually is.

    Says you, and that's hardly a credible assessment. For instance:

    Come now, are you incapable of acknowledging other people's arguments? Or must you simply insist that they are saying what you would rather they say in order to make the counterpoint easier for you?

    Then debate them. Don't just sit there and set up your own windmills to tilt.

    Yes, ethnic xenophobia is racism.

    I might actually chuckle at the joke, but it's one we might describe as, well, real poor.

    Not especially. It's a figure of speech intended to reflect on your obstinate refusal to actually address the arguments at hand.

    Look, it's not really so difficult to figure out: If you wish to refute an argument, address the argument. Inventing a surrogate argument that is easier to address only means you've addressed that invention, not the actual argument on the table.

    And if you so disdain facts, that's your choice. Meanwhile, why should anyone respect your devotion to fantasy?

    That your contribution is not in the least respectable obviously doesn't bother you, since you keep up this ridiculous performance. But, hey, that's your choice, and if you wish to diminish yourself as such, well, that's just fine with me.

    This argument is just stupid. Perhaps you haven't noticed the amount of criticism he receives from the left. Wake up, pay attention.

    The Birther issue is not simply to challenge his legitimacy as president, but to encourage xenophobia according to ethnicity, which is a widely-accepted application of the word racism.

    But, of course, it is easier for you to just make up some stupid shit and pretend you've actually addressed other people's arguments.

    Whatever you want, man.

    Interestingly, I find myself wondering why you wish to throw your lot in with dishonest arguments. No, really, look at your fellows in this one. But then I remember that aphorism about birds of a feather.
  13. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Oh, you got me there!
    Since I think McCain is an unsavory person, I would very much like to see this issue brought to light. I have heard about it before, and if there is a legitimate case to be made, so be it.

    I addressed that before. It seems that his full birth certificate has not been viewable these days.

    There's just the certificate of live birth.

    Apparently Robert Gibbs of the White House doesn't feel it is too important to answer the question of his Social Security number either.

    Of course! What does that prove? NOTHING!

    What does xenophobia have to do with racism? It can include, but is not limited to racist ideals. C'mon, man!
  14. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Why should anyone continue to take you seriously?

    In truth, sir, you should probably go with a source that isn't World Net Daily or Jerome Corsi.

    Then again, as you noted in your citation:

    Those listed as entitled to obtain a copy of an original birth certificate include the person born, or "registrant" according to the legal description from the governor's office, the spouse or parent of the registrant, a descendant of the registrant, a person having a common ancestor with the registrant, a legal guardian of the registrant, or a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant.


    This is nothing new. It is largely the same in Washington state. That is, you, for instance, would not be entitled to my daughter's birth certificate.

    To reiterate, since you seem to have missed it the first time:

    The Birther issue is not simply to challenge his legitimacy as president, but to encourage xenophobia according to ethnicity, which is a widely-accepted application of the word racism.​

    Is there some reason what is on the record is insufficient to warrant your consideration, so that you need to invent issues to argue against?

    C'mon, man. I mean, really.


    Corsi, Jerome R. "Obama's birth certificate sealed by Hawaii governor". World Net Daily. October 26, 2008. August 17, 2010.
  15. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Well, the only reason I used them is that I'm a racist retard.
    But you probably already knew that.

    Are you frickin serious??? Is your daughter the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?

    Well, I wouldn't know, being retarded and all, what the fuck you're going on about.

    PlLeeze enlitenn mee. I nut two smart.

    Zeenoophubeea... dont. dont no. bowt thaat. to deefekult.
  16. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Explaine exactly how WND and Jerome Corsi, are any less accurate then the left wing alphabet news sources or Fact Check dot Org are?

    Just because you don't like them doesn't mean that they do not report accurate and legitimate news stories.

    Funny thing is that to even get married you need a original birth certificate,

    To send your child to school you need a birth certificate,

    To get a drivers license you need a birth certificate,

    You have to have a Original Birth Certificate to get a Pass Port.....

    To get a Green card you need a Original Birth Certificate,

    Original Birth Certificate are suppose to be open record documents, so why is Obama's Original Birth certificate not a open record?
  17. madanthonywayne Morning in America Staff Member

    There was no contrivance. Until I knew specifically what you found racist about the game, I couldn't address your concern.

    Let me make this perfectly clear to you, I saw nothing racist about the game and couldn't even imagine what one would find racist about it. Even if the term alien was meant as a reference to claims that Obama wasn't born in the US, why is that racist? There are those who claimed that McCain wasn't born in the US either since he was born in the Panama canal zone.

    Every president has a slew of conspiracy theories advanced about him. Obama was born in Kenya. Bush was AWOL. Clinton murdered Vince Foster. It's all the same thing. Conspiracy nuts with too much time on their hands.

    When I see Obama I see Obama. A man. I don't give a shit about his race. I hate his policies, his ideas. Give me a black Ronald Reagan and I'll sing his praises all day long. Not everyone sees everything thru the prism of race the way you do.

    Likewise, when I see a game in which people are shooting at an image of the president I disapprove of it because it's disrespectful to the office of the President. Not because they're shooting at an effigy of a black guy, or at a guy who some people claim was born in Kenya. Such thoughts never even enter my mind and are so foreign to me that you had to spell out your concern in flaming letters.
    And your long record of crying racism belies any pretense of credibility with respect to such claims.
    But the game was not designed specifically for Obama. The term "alien", without the modifier "illegal", almost always applies to extra-terrestrials in common usage. Whereas "bitch" is almost always used as a derogatory term for females.
    Wouldn't the same be true of the carnie? Racism is about as popular as child molestation in polite society these days. If the carnie thought the game would be perceived as racist (even if he is a racist), he'd never have used the Obama effigy. He's there to make money, not to promote white supremacy.
    You're right. That was a stupid thing to say. But it is true that I've never heard a political opinion from a carnie and can't imagine that the inclusion of Obama in the game was intended as a racist statement. As you yourself said, it would likely drive away business. The very idea is laughable. This isn't 1950, for Pete's sake.
    I would assume that the game uses the images of various celebrities without their permission and that the pretense that the effigies aren't really who they clearly are is the only thing that allows the game to exist. Well, that and its previous anonymity.

    The loss of anonymity is probably the real reason they are changing to a Pirate theme from now on since this Obama business has brought them into the public eye.
    Do I? I don't think so. Maybe you're thinking of someone else.
  18. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Cutting to the chase and stating the obvious


    (Somebody pinch me, please. Or smack me. Or put some ice in my pants, or drop a Buick on my toe. In other words, wake me up, please, because I must be dreaming.)

    One might suggest that, as "conspiracy theories" go, Bush's service record is a more substantial question than Birther, Truther, or Foster conspiracies. But I think people are largely aware that your primary purpose here is to advance Republican talking points, of which defending, promoting, and justifying former President Bush is an obvious part.

    And give you a man like Obama is—despite comparisons to Reagan—and you'll be happy to defend and exploit racism because, well, as you've already established, it's not racist to do so if you dislike someone enough.

    The only thing more ridiculous than that paragraph is the idea that you might actually expect me to believe it.

    I would note that at least I can give a reason why I think something is racist. You, on the other hand, first claim you thought people were jesting, then say, what, it never entered your mind until it was meticulously spelled out for you? Understand, please, that #184 above constitutes at least the thirteenth address of that point in this thread.

    Maybe on your planet. (USCIS, at least disagrees, and that disagreement is a matter of law.)

    If the game was in Seattle, you might have a point. In a region rich with latent racism, such as the South, not as much so.


    Nor is it San Francisco. To the other, am I to believe you are unaware that much racism in this society is so ingrained in some people's cultural outlooks that they are not aware of the behavior?

    Seriously, even me. That I cannot list specifically any of my particular expressions of racism does not mean I am without them.

    Don't ever wonder why I consider you dishonest, sir.


    Lechliter, Gerald A. President George W. Bush's Military Service: A Critical Analysis. 2004. August 17, 2010.

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. "Resident Alien". (n.d.) August 17, 2010.

    Wikipedia. "Alien (law)". June 27, 2010. August 17, 2010.
  19. Cowboy My Aim Is True Valued Senior Member

    It's not sexist because she's a conservative. Duh.
  20. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    The Buffalo Paradox

    Perhaps you should attend your precious WND, Mr. Roam. Or, to reiterate, since you seem to have missed it—and twice at that:

    Those listed as entitled to obtain a copy of an original birth certificate include the person born, or "registrant" according to the legal description from the governor's office, the spouse or parent of the registrant, a descendant of the registrant, a person having a common ancestor with the registrant, a legal guardian of the registrant, or a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant.


    Do you somehow not trust the sources you advocate? Pray tell, what would be the purpose of that?


    Corsi, Jerome R. "Obama's birth certificate sealed by Hawaii governor". World Net Daily. October 26, 2008. August 17, 2010.
  21. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Because they're "Birthers" guy, duh!!
    And further, anyone who questions Obama is probably racially motivated.
    So WND can be scratched off the list completely.

    Alan Keyes wants your vote. I can't guarantee a new Reagan. That'd probably be a good thing. Bad thing for Keyes, though: unlike Reagan, the bullet would probably find its mark.

    I don't care who murdered him. I highly doubt the suicide story.
    Most of us retarded racists do.


    Well, look at that! Madanthony and Tiassa can agree to get drunk and puke on those filthy conspiracy theorists! Peace in our day...

    Of course, Tiassa has to throw a monkey wrench into the workings of the accord by giving slightly more credence to the Bush theories. Naturally.

    Great! You stumbled upon the Master Key!
    Everyone's motives can now be questioned on grounds of racial bias due to unconscious racial identity and stereotyping.

    Let us not see another thread criticizing Obama ever again. We now know the deep-seated forces driving the naysayers.

    So true. So true.
  22. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Again the law is for a certified copy.
  23. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Again, trying to make Obama into a scary alien. This is about the level at which cons think. Did the scawy man twy to give your cwoperashuns a boo boo?
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2010

Share This Page