Savage: "Kenya is going to move to America if Barack Hussein Obama wins"
Michael Savage baselessly accused Sen. Barack Obama of running a "corrupt campaign," suggested that white liberals "hate white people," repeated the discredited charge that Obama "won't produce his birth certificate," and asserted "Kenya is going to move to America" if Obama wins the election.
During the October 10 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage baselessly accused Sen. Barack Obama of running a "corrupt campaign," suggested that white liberals "hate white people," repeated the discredited charge that Obama "won't produce his birth certificate," and asserted "Kenya is going to move to America" if Obama wins the election.
Without providing any evidence to support his claim, Savage said, "Obama is running the most corrupt campaign in American history. He's registering the dead, the criminals, the homeless, multiply registering, driving people across state borders." Savage then said of Sen. John McCain: "If he can be John McCain the younger he has a chance to win in my opinion, but if he's gonna be John McCain the compromiser, you may as well move to Kenya. The reason you may as well move to Kenya is because Kenya is going to move to America if Barack Hussein Obama wins."
Savage continued: "Can you imagine Louis Farrakhan as the education minister? Al Sharpton as secretary of the Treasury? Jesse Jackson as secretary of Labor? Don't laugh. Hey, how do you know what Barack Hussein Obama is going to do? He might appoint somebody from Pakistan." Savage later suggested: "What about [former Weather Underground member] Bill Ayers as secretary of Education? That would be good. Wait a minute, I have a better idea. What if he makes Bill Ayers -- what if Obama makes Bill Ayers the head of the FBI -- the man who killed police and tried to bring it all down, man."
During the program, Savage also repeated the discredited claim that Obama has not released an authentic birth certificate establishing that he was born in the United States, stating, "[W]e don't even know where he was born. His party won't produce his birth certificate." As Media Matters for America has repeatedly documented, a copy of Obama's birth certificate is posted on Obama's Fight the Smears website and was reportedly made available to the nonpartisan watchdog group FactCheck.org, which "conclude[d] that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship."
Savage then stated that "I can't wait to see all of the white liberals, the very wealthy ones say, 'Well, I didn't know, I had no idea, I just hated white people.' We'll say the white people, we'll say they only hated white people. And they only wanted to give a man who was not a white man a chance. They wanted to be fair." Savage later added that after Obama wins, "I can't wait to hear what the liberals say. 'Well, I didn't know. I had no idea. I just wanted anybody but a WASP. Anybody but a white man.' Well, the liberals will say that, of course. Why do liberals hate white people when most of them are liberals?"
Savage also stated during the program: "Now I can talk about tacos or I can talk about Osama, Obama, or Obama, or Osama. I could talk about McCain, I can talk about Bush, I can talk about Ayers. All aboard? I think it's futile to talk about any of it because I think it's over, frankly. You may as well just move to Kenya."
From the October 10 broadcast of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
SAVAGE: I believe McCain is obviously the underdog. I mean, you don't have to be a genius to figure that out. He's been running the worst campaign known to mankind. And Obama is running the most corrupt campaign in American history. He's registering the dead, the criminals, the homeless, multiply registering, driving people across state borders. And the Republicans are standing like -- like the -- the light -- the headlights in the, the eyes. They don't know what to do.
What does McCain have to do to win the election is the question. Can he do anything to win the election? Other than not be John McCain the latter. If he can be John McCain the younger he has a chance to win in my opinion, but if he's gonna be John McCain the compromiser, you may as well move to Kenya. The reason you may as well move to Kenya is because Kenya is going to move to America if Barack Hussein Obama wins.
Can you imagine Louis Farrakhan as the education minister? Al Sharpton as secretary of the Treasury? Jesse Jackson as secretary of Labor? Don't laugh. Hey, how do you know what Barack Hussein Obama is going to do? He might appoint somebody from Pakistan. He could change the rules on that, since we don't know where he was born. His party won't produce his birth certificate. And I can't wait to see all of the white liberals, the very wealthy ones say, "Well, I didn't know. I had no idea. I just hated white people." We'll say the white people, we'll say they only hated white people. And they only wanted to give a man who was not a white man a chance. They wanted to be fair.
[...]
SAVAGE: What about Bill Ayers as secretary of Education? That would be good. Wait a minute, I have a better idea. What if he makes Bill Ayers -- what if Obama makes Bill Ayers the head of the FBI -- the man who killed police and tried to bring it all down, man.
[...]
SAVAGE: I can't wait to hear what they say a few years from now. After they've taken this man, and they've made him into president. I can't wait to hear what the liberals say. "Well, I didn't know. I had no idea. I just wanted anybody but a WASP. Anybody but a white man." Well, the liberals will say that, of course. Why do liberals hate white people when most of them are liberals? I don't understand that part of it.
[...]
SAVAGE: Now, I can talk about tacos or I can talk about Osama, Obama, or Obama, or Osama. I could talk about McCain, I can talk about Bush, I can talk about Ayers. All aboard? I think it's futile to talk about any of it, because I think it's over, frankly. You may as well just move to Kenya. See if you can get a hut next to Obama's cousin. I'll be right back.
Media Matters: The right-wing media's election analysis just ain't that good
The Friday Rush: For conservatives, $400 million buys defeat at the ballot box
The myth of Fox News' ratings spike
And they only wanted to give a man who was not a white man a chance. They wanted to be fair.
Yeah, that's what we want to do. Such insight. How did he figure it out?
Darn it! did the orderly leave his door open again? I'm gonna have to talk to the head nurse about this. Jeez, c'mon Dr. Weiner lets go back to your room and leave these nice people alone.
And let's not forget this new little development.
What development? Some clown's idle speculation?
Every once in awhile, you show signs of understanding.
And then you fall for a story like the one you linked to.
Obama's book was written before he knew Ayers. You really need to work of your critical thinking skills.
Obama's book was written before he knew Ayers.
No, no, no!
Let's not waste brain cycles debunking this garbage.
Just laugh and go on with your life. Spend not another moment on it.
SRSLY.
Oh.
My.
God.
Yeah, let's just give credence to every ridiculous little theory any wingnut with a computer can come up with.
Yeah, why don't we just spend hours and hours investigating how McCain is really from the planet Zarkon-V. I've seen the documentation that proves it!
Pathetic. Truly.
The far right would be funny if they weren't so fundamentally dangerous to the principles of this country.
The best part, is that the guy who is speculating about this says, that he can't prove anything.
McCAin is teh alien? OMG!!!
<forwards mass email>
Accusations against Obama that the accuser says himself says he cannot prove?
THAT'S WHAT YOU CALL "NEW?"
McCain had a vestigial tail surgically removed as a child.
I can't prove it of course, but I'm gonna write about it on my wingnut blog anyway.
It's hard to imagine a "development" with less credibility.
Even if it could somehow be substantiated, it's humorous that anyone would bring it up. As if "OK so people hate McCain's position on the war, he looks like an idiot on the economy, Palin is backfiring, the Ayers story isn't swaying anyone, McCain's lost his edge on trustworthiness and leadership, and people just generally want to change direction from Republican rule. But bring up the completely unsupportable notion that Ayers ghost-wrote Obama's book, and that'll turn it all around."
It's the scattergun approach to campaigning.
Whatever you think will work.
This is especially true if your campaign is tanking as badly as McCain's is.
What's the over/under on Palin's political carreer lasting past 2009?
Her chances are better than you might think. Consider the factors:
1)wingnut worship
2)predictable behavior of screechmonkeys during an Obama administration
3)"who would you rather have a beer with?"
4)billions of pounds of horsecrap left over from Bush, and the stench that comes along with it
While Obama deals with Bush's mess, the wingnuts are going to blame everything on Obama himself, and turn to Palin as the one who will bring "change". And we know people don't vote primarily on the worthiness of a candidate, as we saw with Bush. It may not pan out this way, but don't be too surprised.
I think you may have a couple of points.
I suspect it could go either way. Especially if she keeps up the ridiculous rhetoric of hate she's been vomiting all over the constituency these last few weeks.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and predict she'll have to slink back to Alaska, leaving a slime-trail over half the "flyover" states as she goes. There she'll be relegated to finishing the remainder of her one term as governor. At best, she'll be the punch line for a few Leno jokes here or there over the next year or so. At worst she'll wallow in obscurity and have to rely on her husband's business ideas to sustain herself and her oddly-named brood.
Plus, the Phyllis Schaflees of the US just got a $700B bailout so they can continue to fund their think tanks, flaks and other assorted propaganda apparatus.
Started thinking about the "scattergun approach" you mentioned, and how well it fits in with the conservative approach to science and education. It goes something like this:
BOOOM!!!!
"Okay folks, let's see what kind of results we got..."
"hmmm, no effect on middle class white women, or minorities, or..."
"Wait! I found something! Rural white males! See? Right in this little area right here!"
"Excellent!"
"Now, if we could just target that area, we'd have it."
After much consternation, puzzlement, theorizing, and standing around staring into space, the Republicans come away with the realization that they have no idea what exactly caused the result of the affected demographic...
...
...
BOOOM!!!!! BOOOM!!! BOOOM!!!......
But bring up the completely unsupportable notion that Ayers ghost-wrote Obama's book, and that'll turn it all around."
Brab, I heard this Cashill stooge on Michael Medved's show earlier. They must realize what a weak attempt at a smear it is, as they kept repeating very matter-of-factly that Obama's entire career is based on this book.It fits into the "he's never done anything" chant and helps the gullible to believe that the unsupported suggestion that Obama didn't write his book is relevant to his qualification to be President.
I really don't know who they're directing this stuff towards anymore. I'm trying to imagine anybody but a completely on-board wingnut buying any of this crap, and I can't.
This is another reason to add why today is the day when l finally realised why the "Angry Left" are called the "Angry Left". Another stupid, ill-informed, badly thought out, easily debunked smear about Obama linked to by someone who, after all this time on this site should know better. This after a stupid person on a UK blog yet again posted the question about Obama and his birth certificate, not as if the question has been answered MONTHS AGO!!!
And if it's not the smear it's the projection of their own idiotic/biased/racist/uninformed veiw onto the other person and the idea that they are the ones who are the problem.
I doesn't matter what you debunk, it doesn't matter what the truth is, these idiots will come back time and again like 10 year olds who have lost an arguement but still want to say "yeah but YOU stink". It's just pathetic how it continues and l am now not surprised when rational people get agry when they do it.
Just start yelling the 'N' word, Weiner, you know you want to. It's eating away at you.
I wonder how the apologists are going to spin THIS one...
I'm just looking forward to the U.S. finally having a chance at winning gold in the marathon at the 2012 Olympics.
lol@olympics joke. But you do realize that after Kenya moves here it will become obese?
Of course you're right, and it will buy an Escalade to accomodate it's increased proportions and array of personal electronics equipment with which to entertain and thereby ignore it's children.
Obama isn't registering anybody.
And the employees who registered false names were fired, then turned in to the authorities by ACORN itself.
Move along people. There is literally nothing here.
Cross-posted from another thread:
I mentioned this recently in another thread, but it bears repeating here.
I worked for ACORN during a voter registration drive in the Pueblo, CO area back in 2004. When I went for my mandatory training session, the one thing that they made perfectly clear was they would not tolerate any fradulent applications, seeing as we were paid by the application we turned in. Anything they found that appeared fraudulent would be turned over to the authorities. They also said that they recently had to turn stuff over on two people they had working for them in the Denver Area, because they were making up names and filling out the applications themselves.
I also read in an article that many states require that ALL received voter registration forms must be submitted even if they are obviously fraudulent. When ACORN can't control what completed forms they receive and they have to pass those on by law, is it really rational to fault them for those registrations?
Not that rationality means much to some.
Voter registration fraud is to vote fraud as my canoe is to a supertanker.
Also cross-posted: Thanks, that's what I was looking for! :)
There's always some pathetic stack of cards behind the false front on these conservative arguments, isn't there? Thanks for helping me to avoid being a victim of "truthiness."
BTW OT, but if you live in California, here's a deconstruction arming you against the arguments being made in favor of Prop 8, the "Write discrimination into the constitution" initiative. WARNING: It's a PDF, not an HTML.
A bit O/T, but I just had to pass it along. OMFG....
http://current.com/items/89393772_racist_obama_billboard_causes_outrage?xid=216
Where do you find a mannequin in Klan gear?
I saw the skinny white hands sticking out, and thought that Michael Jackson was wearing it! :-)
I think your picture of Michael Jackson was the anti-matter to all the previous (now missing) posts about the Klan, WZ. After all, he makes it apparent that in today's America, a poor black boy CAN grow up to become a rich white woman...
I think it's quite obvious at this point now that Michael Savage wants someone to assassinate Obama. He's saying these things to rile up his white supremacist base to "take action" against Obama. All in jealousy over his own failed PR stunt "bid" for the Presidency. If the Secret Service doesn't arrest Michael Savage for inciting violence on the radio airwaves soon, they're not taking their job serious.
Of course he wants someone to take aim at Obama. Tonight he kept repeating the M-word (Muslim). He angrily emphasized that Obama "has a muslim name and two muslim fathers."
I just don't know how they square their complaints that Obama belonged to a "radical church" with their claim that he is a muslim. How does that all come together in their heads?
SDL, you just helped me to connect some dots. Do you think it's possible that the only reason Weiner stays in California is because he loves saying the Governators last name so much?
You're right. There's not much funny about the BS that columnist is peddling.
Real nice, Mikey. When ya got no conservative successes to tout just try to shut down discourse with eliminationist rhetoric, resort to calling Obama a terrorist and incite violence against him and liberals like me.
Michael Savage is a threat to democracy.
It is hard to see any conservative successes out there when there are hardly any TRUE conservatives in public office anymore....see...so you should be happy...you're side is winning because whether there are Dems or Repubs they really all act the same...just with nuances
Right, sure. You would have us reward the failures of conservatism by electing more conservatives? All this failure is because these Republicans aren't conservative enough?
For more than 25 years American policy has been dominated by conservative ideas, policies and leaders. Your side, as you say, has given us tax cuts that favor the wealthy and corporations, we've been given pro-privatization, deregulation and corporate friendly trade legislation. Unions have been busted right along with consumer and environmental protections all in the name of giving business the edge. And we are suffering for it. So I get it, you and Mikey don't want to talk about it. Guys like you would rather incite violence against liberals than take some of that personal responsibility you are so quick to mouth, yet so slow to exhibit.
So save it. You have no leg to stand on.
There you go again...a conservative must spewing "violence" all the time...do you even read what i write?...never ever ever has there been anything remotely violent in my writings.
To you main point...we'd go round and round and round...and round again...so what's the point
Too funny. Deny, deny, deny. You know very well what you're up to. I know you get it. You're a guy who says comparing the disturbing language at McCain rallies to the rhetoric of George Wallace is the same as saying John McCain is George Wallace. I know you are capable of making those kinds of connections; consciously or not.
You have a subtle mind, but you are fundamentally dishonest in representing yourself. You know that linking Obama to anti-government acts committed 40 years ago has the subconscious effect of bubbling forth cultural resentment, fear and loathing. I'm not talking about outright solicitations of violence; that would be political suicide as it's not acceptable in America to call for snuffing out opponents. But to lay the groundwork that Obama pals around with terrorists, is not like us, does not share our values, on an emotional, subconscious level ain't that much different than outright calling Obama a terrorist.
Savage is wrong about Obama acting very disproportionately in the interests of Blacks once elected as I think is his implication here with the speculation on Farrakhan and Jackson and Sharpton being named to his cabinet and massive over immigration from Black Africa. Obama is running as the Democratic Party's candidate for President, not as an independent. And once elected he would need the assistance, or at least not the obstruction, of the Democrats in Congress to get anything he wants done. Also he would then owe many Democratic Party financial contributors and workers and interest groups which helped elect him---people he'd also hope to have the help of in four years time.
ooohhh but i thought he only took money from the common man....all those multi million dollar months of support raising is supposedly from guys like you and i pitching in 5 dollars as we could spare.....okay that was full of sarcasm we all know you are 100% right that he has raised his money from the low middle high and full blown interests groups out there...that's why he the same as all the other politicians out there just with a far leftest vision...that's all
The same as all other politicians? My ass. You don't have the Obama campaign out there calling McCain and Palin terrorists, questioning their patriotism or challenging their love of our country.
You are left only to wish that we liberals were as filled with hate and feelings of inadequacy so much so that we would incite violence against Republicans. Nope. The right is hate, the right is violence and therein lies the difference.
No one ever called Obama a terriorist but you in your above statement...you go find one place I CALLED OBAMA A TERRIORIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Calm down, shorty. You are obviously way to sensitive to even read clearly. Show me where I accused you of saying any such thing. I very affirmatively asserted that it's the McCain Palin campaign out there "othering" Obama.
Sheesh, son. You a candy-ass. Ya fragile kid.
I'm a white liberal. I'm pretty sure I don't hate white people, though.
The thing is, racism is a fact of life in America. in my opinion, it's better to know where racists like Savage stand than to have them cover their rants and raves in some kind of false PC language.
That said, that he has a forum and an audience to say this sort of stuff says a lot more about the people who tune in to listen tot his crap than it does for Savage himself.
Kenya, what a juicy topic. This article details the radical Kenyan Prime Minister that Obama is friends with, and campaigned for. Add another criminal, radical muslim sympathizing, genocide-enabler to the list of those Obama has worked with and helped.
http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/oct/12/obamas-kenya-ghosts/
Interesting find on the article....it'll be shot down in a blaze of glory on this site.
Now...onto Savage's rant here...I heard it live...I thought it was a hysterical (funny) rant...Savage throws out edgy comments all the time...but I have heard plenty of times callers that have called into the show saying anything about violence and Savage instantly Rebukes them and hangs up....Savage is not about Hand to Hand Violence with people he disagrees with...he is about FREE SPEECH and using that speech to ignite the minds of voters and TRUE AMERICANS who don't like where the country is headed....and I mean that whether OBAMA is President or not...even if McCain is President the country is headed in the wrong direction....but just because SAVAGE disagrees doesn't mean "violence"...it is a different perspective you all disagree with....AND THE WORLD TURNS:)
Of course, you also have the possibility of Savage haing "alliances" with White Supremacists seeking to "evacuate" as "refugees" all remaining specimens of Unreconstructed Afrikanerdom out of South Africa haste posthaste (as if implying that die Afrikaner Volk van Suid-Afrika was in "clear and present danger of persecution" based on both racial and religious issues--many Afrikaners have traditionally subscribed to Calvinist teachings--by a "Communist-influenced" regime "having reckless and utter disregard for White Racial Heritage and Integrity").
Especially where fundraising is involved, never mind the possibility that funds thus raised will wind up being diverted @ the last minute to Other Worthy Issues.
Wow. I have no clue what you are talking about here. Your links are from an unsourced blog called "the exaggerator," and they do not even make mention of Michael Savage. On the other hand, my link is to a major news outlet, and shows very clearly the link between Obama and Odinga. Obama campaigned for Odinga while in Kenya. Odinga visited Obama when he was here in the US a number of times. Odinga admits as recently as 2008 that Obama was on the phone with him twice daily. Obviously, Odinga's track record is pretty horrific, and the people he supports are the people we are currently at war with. You have no connection between between your "Afrikanerdom" and Savage, besides what you want there to be in your head.
Interesting hit piece, Johnny. It lacked pertinent quotes, corroborating evidence and sources. But you go on, believe what you will.
I was at a friend's house this weekend, and this one guy showed up who I have met about 3 times in the past. I typically avoid talking politics with new friends because it serves as a way to divide people who normally are very nice, but he found a way to bring up politics, and it turned ugly. When I brought up the Ayers thing, he literally shrugged it off, and told me I watch too much Fox news and have no facts. I then thold him it was a fact that a prominent democrat in pennsylvania has filed lawsuit against Obama, alleging that Obama is not a citizen. The guy says I'm talking crazy, so I ask him why Obama will not produce his actual paper birth certificate (electronic isnt valid in court), and he has no answer then. Finally, since this guy is particularly interested in the Obama economic policy, I asked him why, if Obama stands for the poor and middle class, and helping them out by getting more money into their pockets; why does his own half-brother live on something like a dollar a month over in Kenya? In other words why is Obama proposing that handouts in America are necessary, when he can't even send a few dollars from his own riches to his own family? At this point, the guy raised his voice, got in my face and told me his brother is a crack head, and he doesn't support him. I wasn't about to get in a fight over this, so I was just like...that has nothing to do with Obama, sorry. That little experience I had this weekend made me realize the absolute denial and closed-mindedness these Obama supporters live in. And, I need to add that I really hate McCain...he is a hypocrite as well, and has his own shady associations. I certainly will not be voting "for McCain" but rather against Obama. But yeah, to sum it up, these Obama supporters will not tolerate these facts about their candidate; there is nothing that can change their mind, or even make them think about why this man deserves their full support.
Talk about craven cognitive dissonance. You take one personal anecdote and apply that situation to the whole of Obama's supporters? That's really weak.
And I find it funny that, along with trying to force your beliefs about abortion on the rest of us, you now have the temerity to tell Barack Obama how to conduct his family affairs. Truth is it isn't any more your concern than Sarah Palin's unwed pregnant daughter is my business.
Ayers today is a contributing member of society, when he was doin' his dirt in the 70's, Obama was 8 years old. And I'm going to tell you every time you continue this word association that you are supporting a candidate that pals around with a woman who married an America hating, gun fetishist, Alaskan secessionist.
Your "obama was only 8" defense is weak, and becomes useless based on developments in recent times. 1998, Obama was working with Ayers, when Ayers and Dorhn were interviewed by Connie Chung. At that time in 1998, they both made it very clear that they were not sorry for what they had done and wished they had done more. Obama worked with this guy who still held radical anti-American sentiments. Ayers is not some great turn-around story, he still hold the same beliefs as he did in the 70s, and apparently Obama has no problem with working closely with someone who has those views.
You give that kind of judgement a pass, I do not.
Sorry, homeslice. 1998 isn't 1968. Ayer has paid his debt to society, just like the domestic terrorist G. Gordon Liddy, and has gone on record to say he wished that his group had done more to adhere to the tents of MLK (who by the way was also considered a terrorist by the right-wingers.) And get it right, Ayers held anti-Viet Nam sentiments, perhaps even anti-government policy sentiments. Which, by the way, should be something you could get behind given your support of a woman who married a secessionist.
"You said in a previous post that I called Obama a Domestic Terriorst....YOU Lied...I said he was friends with a Domestic Terriorst"
How interesting.
You're a touchy little fella ain't ya? You take the time to lift words of mine, from a totally different and unrelated thread, but you don't have the time to paste what you claim I said? How very pathetic of you.
For the record, I am more than happy for you to expose your ignorance, so don't try to flip the script. Disagree with me all you want. It's a free blogosphere, you can continue to condone those people, like Savage, who incite violence against liberals.
From the above link: "Inside the house, officers found "Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder" by radio talk show host Michael Savage, "Let Freedom Ring" by talk show host Sean Hannity, and "The O'Reilly Factor," by television talk show host Bill O'Reilly."
And if I recall the span of history, it's been we liberals like Jack and Bobby, MLK and Medgar Evers who have been silenced by authoritarian thugs.
Save it kid, you're flailing.
No response? Typical.
As if it matters here is the exchange you're talking about. Boy, you are crazy:
I love it! I love it when I get slammed in this forum:) Keep it up guys....Fact is Obama's associations in the past to a DOMESTIC TERRIORIST would without a doubt not allow him to be in the SECRET SERVICE. Unfortunately I have to run to a meeting but I'll be back in here later to touch on some of my more MORONIC points that all you can snide at...MAN I LOVE THIS SITE:) :)
Posted Friday October 10, 2008 1:35:00 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by roundhouse in reply to CPA5
Man you're filthy with eliminationist rhetoric. You realize that kind of talk only promotes acts of violence against Mr. Obama. Furthermore, if you want to go there, I guess you understand that Palin has her own history of palling around with anti-American terrorist secessionists, like Mark Chryson.
I get it though, you sick bastards are desperate to change the subject because you have nothing but failure to cite for the last decade of conservative governance. Obama has real solutions for empowering and uniting our country. McCain/Palin, on the other hand has nothing but divisive hate speech and more irresponsible tax cuts for the same punks who have driven this country to financial ruin.
You must be so proud of your Republican criminal class.
Posted Friday October 10, 2008 2:05:03 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by CPA5 in reply to roundhouse
First off, what are talking about 'Eliminationist' rhetoric....because Obama has had ties to a 60's radical (who by the way is still a radical and is now using the public education system to spew his rhetoric) and I point out that these ties would pre-clude him from being a Secret Service agent....how is that a eliminationist view point.....how does that promote violence? (seriously now) I have said nothing about violence....in fact I don't even call anyone names here on this forum...you all call me names and even worse...but yet I am the one promoting violence....that just isn't right.
Secondly, Roundhouse, if you think it is the fault only of Republicans and the President that our country is in this mess...that is just a little blinded. I think it is the fault of: Republicans, Democrats, G.Bush, B.Clinton, current and past Senate, current and past Congress, Greed on Wallstreet, CEO Greed, Mortgage lenders who were greedy, unresponsible people who took loans they couldn't afford, as well as people who live WEEEEELLLLL beyond their means.....and I probably forgot a few others....but catch my drift I think alllllooooottt of people have had their hands involved in this current mess.
I hope this isn't too violent for you:)
Posted Friday October 10, 2008 3:02:22 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by roundhouse in reply to CPA5
It's hate speech. Plain and simple. It's rhetoric that draws the listener to the conclusion of eliminating the dangerous enemy within. I mean what is the penalty for treason? What do we do to terrorists? You're stupid if you think the intention of calling Obama a terrorist is not an invocation of violence.
The right is violence. Own it.
But hey, it's all the authoritarian right has left: call Democrats terrorists and try to make them share disproportionate blame for the failure of supply side economics. No, the conservative market fundamentalist ideology has ruined our economy, the conservative go it alone cowboy foreign policy has left us isolated in a world that will require cooperation to neutralize terrorism.
I suggest you practice some of that personal responsibility you Republicans are quick to mouth and slow to display. I suggest you own up to your Republican failures, it's the first step toward finding real solutions.
Posted Friday October 10, 2008 9:33:45 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Once again no where in the above to I call OBama a terrorist or that he should come across violence in any way. I am pointing to his judgement and character thru his associations....Now if think that a President of the US should be looked at in terms of his Character or Judgement...well then...I'd say that is foolish.
You can scream "violent speech" all you want...me personally, I'd say we are trying to engage in healthy conversation...I don't want violence for anything or anyone...I do believe you have a right to believe what you want and me what I want....but why can't we bring up touchy subjects without you screaming VIOLENCE?
......OOOPPPPSSS "Now if think that a President of the US should be looked at in terms of his Character or Judgement...well then...I'd say that is foolish."
I meant to say if you Don't Think a president should be looked at in terms of his character and judgement...sorry
Sonny, whose the one screaming in all caps? You aren't even trying to get it. For some reason you think by pointing out that when people say Obama hangs with people who hate America that it's the same thing as saying you called him a terrorist. Show me, kid. Show me where I accused of straight up calling Obama a terrorist.
But to link Obama to terrorists, as you are very keen to do, is eliminationist rhetoric. It's not calling him a terrorist, you have not called him that. But just because you aren't ballsy enough to outright call Obama an outright terrorist (you are a scared rabbit, after all), doesn't mean making an issue of it isn't inciteful. it's a lie, it's dangerous and only succeeds in shutting own discussion by demonizing the opposition.
It's pathetic what you do. You don't want to face the fact that conservative war-hawk ideology has left us isolated in a world that needs to be unified in the fight against extremism. You don't want to face up to the fact that conservative market fundamentalism has left families economically insecure. You'd rather attack Obama's character.
So be it. It's what I expect from rabid partisan extremists.