RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Republican/Tea Party nutter Circulates Racist E-mail Targeting Obama

And...



Again:


Not "right wing extremist" in origin.

And perfectly okay to do to McCain.

But when Obama takes 3 years to produce the documentation all other candidates readily provided, it's suddenly "racist".

Well played...

Actually Pro, what I'm saying is far more rational than the RACIST RACIST RACIST crap you and others are ranting:




A rational argument you've been evading for 17 pages now.

Its ok wondy, just admit you're a racist. Admitting you have a problem is the first step in making yourself a better person.

A great example of how the media is pushing the birther story over everything else --larger points-- that Trump is making.

It's not Trump who is focusing on this, it's the media who won't let it go!



I love the way Stephanopoulis tries to handle him, and how Trump snatches control way, and takes the interview where he wants it to go.

Classic liberal media. And nice reversal by Trump.

Dave...I haven't even had an opinion on this whole thing. My line about "sometimes people are just racists" was the only thing ive said and even that was more just a general statement about people being racists. Because sometimes they just are. It happens. I don't give a damn about this woman and whether or not shes a racist one way or the other. so don't place me in their group. thank you

dont laugh Pro. He'll think we're in on this together.

YOU ARE BOTH ENABLERS OF EVIL!!!

Congratulations, bruh!!! wish you many years of happiness...even once the sex stops, you get old and fat and you start being waaaaaaaay more interested in porn than you used to be....

everything but the sex stopping has already happened...


thanks for the happy wishes man

The avatar, love it!

Problem?

David,

so...last night, im watching bill maher on hbo. had a guy on the panel named andrew brietbart...i've heard his name before but wasn't really familiar with him. i associated him with the right wing tea party branch of the republicans but, never heard him speak or read any of his stuff. he more than held his own in front of a tough crowd. as i was listening to him, so much of his rhetoric sounded really familiar...down to listing a group of black candidates that the right would find suitable.

i realized about halfway thru the panel section that basically he was saying pretty much the same things you are saying.

i understand that people are always going to be informed by what they read and hear. i tend towards liberal in most things so i'm going to trend towards sites and shows that fuel my beliefs. i expect no different from you. but as i watched this guy and saw the similarity in his rhetoric and your writings, i've come to a conclusion:

you are not a reasonable person.

you will always deny even the most despicable tactics used by your side. you attempt to obfuscate and twist the debate by trying to equate the sustained, tactical hatred of your side with isolated instances on the left. but, since you keep complaining that the oiunts you brought up haven't been addressed, i will do so now.

regarding clinton's "getting us coffee" statement...that's not even the worst thing he said during the campaign. both bill and hillary made some racially charged statements during the campaign and both were excoriated by pundits on the left for them. they both lost much of the goodwill they'd built in the black community and they paid a price for their remarks. not the least of which was hillary not winning the nomination.

regarding mc cain, actually, the panama issue was originally brought up during the 2000 campaign by the republicans. wanna know what the difference is between his situation and obama's?

MC CAIN WAS ACTALLY BORN IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY!!!!!

now, of course, his citizenship was never really in question since at least 1 of his parents was an American citizen and that is all that is required to be a citizen. and they did play the race card with mc cain when the republicans said that his adopted bangladeshi daughter was really the love child between him and a black prostitute. surprised you didn't cite that...oh yeah, the republicans did that so that doesn't fit into your apologist's view of the right wing.

as far as you list of "acceptable" black candidates goes...thomas has spent so much time trying to be accepted by whites on the right, it's a wonder he hasn't had his skin bleached. watts has spent some of his carreer championing education for black kids and you know that most republicans don't want to hear any of that noise. not only that but, he fathered a baby with a white chick...fear of mndingo will be in full effect. i don't know much about cain or west except that both sarah palin and the tea party support them which means i can assume that they are for the exact opposite of what would be beneficial to the majority of this country. that leaves colin powell. i agree that this man could run as a repunblican and have support on both sides of the aisle. i think he could win. but he won't run...just like he didn't in 2000. wanna know why? because his wife feared that he would be assassinated. bet you petraeus and shwartzkopf wouldn't have that concern.

so, your points have been addressed.

now...i'm done with this dialouge. all those years ago, i considered us friendly. i always thought you to be a thoughtful, intelligent guy even if we didn't always see eye to eye. if you recall, i defended you several times against charges that you were racist. i truly thought that you were just like most white people...tired of the whole issue since it doesn't really relate to your lives. that said, i thought that you could at least see it and acknowledge it when it is blatant or even when it's a bit more subtle.

now, i feel as if i don't know you anymore. while i don't doubt that your animosity towards obama stems from political dfferences rather than racial ones, your continued denial of the obvious racist tactics and attitudes of the tea party, birthers, etc makes me wonder if you don't secretly harbor the same views towards minorities. your over reaction to knut's observation that some people are just racists is very interesting.

maybe it's just this board that has done it to you. posting here, where you find a lot of validation for you views...even though it seems as if even the people that agree with your politics don't like or respect you...has caused you to step over that fine line from advocate to zealot.

what happened to you, man.? you used to be beautiful....

Man, Bastard... what you just posted... And... I'm the one who's unreasonable and a zealot ?!?

You've got to be kidding me. You threw so much baseless mud at me, and then I'm the unreasonable one. Yeah. Right.





I know Breitbart as the guy with the website BigGovernment.com, a blog/news-site that I've visited a few times, but I don't have time for every conservative source.
Breitbart broke the ACORN scandal story that ended up having the U.S. Census Bureau sever ties with ACORN, and shortly after, Congress likewise cut billions in funding for ACORN. And now many branches of ACORN are getting federal funds again by simply changing the name of their branch organization.
Likewise, Breitbart also oversaw the hidden-camera busts of Planned Parenthood (again possibly cutting off federal funding as a result), and on hidden camera again exposed partisan remarks by a high-level executive at NPR.

I hadn't heard Breitbart's remarks naming black candidates that Republicans would support. I haven't heard any conservative source say the same thing I have.
If Breitbart shares my views, that's news to me. But I've been saying the same thing since 2000, that the "Republican=racist" argument is false, because polls have shown since 1992, 1996 and 2000 that Colin Powell would be the popular candidate of choice, if only he would run.



Non-sequitor. You just said Breitbart defended himself well and was reasonable... but I'm unreasonable for making virtually the same case?



Again, you lash out with sweeping generalizations about how I "always" do this and that, but you don't cite examples or make a case for that.

I resent being called "unreasonable" when I've cited examples and made my case logically.
By condescendingly labelling me "unreasonable" and other insulting terms, you are escalating the heat of this debate, and it is YOU who are being unreasonable.



I'll grant there was some scorn of the Clintons among the media and Democrat elites in 2008.

But that was only because they favored Obama. And I would argue that late--democrat-primary states that went for Hillary Clinton were labelled unfairly as "racist" and "redneck" simply for choosing Hillary over Obama. (EXAMPLES: Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky)

Interesting how "racist" was not applied when HISPANIC voters favored Hillary Clinton in the Puerto Rico primary. It would be politically incorrect to call hispanic voters "racist", but perfectly fine to falsely slander white voters that way.
Now, THAT is a case made.



But it was the Democrats who slandered McCain as "not a qualified U.S. citizen" in 2008.

McCain was born at a U.S. Naval base overseas, that is clearly defined as U.S. territory. And therefore U.S.-born.



I believe I've covered that many times in past discussions, where I said that McCain should have been the candidate in 2000 (that was his time), and he was unfairly leveraged aside by the W.Bush campaign.

You and other liberals here like to pretend that I "always" defend the Republican, no matter who it is.
But these boards are FILLED with past posts where I was critical of W.Bush on many issues: Amnesty for illegals, Harriet Miers nomination, invading Iraq with less than what Shinseki and other generals advised, keeping Rumsfeld in charge of a stalled war from 2003 till Nov 2006, allowing huge domestic spending that exceeded spending on the war on terror, and on and on.

Did I support W Bush on some issues?
Yes.
I supported staying the course and using the troops and resources necessary to win the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and supported the surges that virtually every Democrat opposed.

That apparently to you is "always supporting the Republican, no matter what".
Look at my previous posts before you hack out that kind of misrepresentative garbage.



Your unsubstantiated, and rather viciously personal opinion of Thomas.

And I'm "unreasonable", right. But nooo, nooo, not POSSIBLY you!



Again, your rather vicious and unsubstantiated personal opinion of the man.

If I made a similar comment about a mixed-race baby of a black person, it would no doubt be portrayed as racist. But hey, it's perfectly PC and acceptable when a black man or liberal says it.



I have no idea what that means. But it again sounds like projecting racist thoughts or intent onto white conservatives, when only liberals have actually said it.



Your opinion. And based on what?

Since you just said you know nothing about their political views or histories, that's obvious: based on nothing.

How very reasonable of you.
How unreasonable of me not to agree with your uninformed sweeping opinion of them. For certain, I must be a zealot for doing so.



And you opine about the sadness of my "wild conspiracy theories"[/b] ?
That's pretty wild and speculative.

The fact that Obama --a black and far less moderate political figure than Powell-- is alive without a single assassination attempt in his two-plus tyrannical years as President, ramming an agenda down the throats of an American public that 60 to 70% in polls say they don't support and want repealed.
The fact that OBAMA has not been attacked, extreme as he is, makes clear the hysterical slander that white racist extremists would assassinate the far more moderate and highly qualified Colin Powell.

Several years ago, I mentioned Colin Powell and you said "Well, he's not really one of us..." (i.e., he's not "black enough")
Do you remember that?
Which one of us is being unreasonable?



If by "addressed", you mean your "reasonable" opinionated opinion, vs. my fact with specific example, yeah, I guess so...




Hey, I think that cut both ways, I believe I defended you as well. I enjoyed our exchanges, and consider you a friend, one of the first I made online. I hope we can get past this disagreement to the kind of discussions we used to have.

I fail to see why you are sweepingly dismissing me as "unreasonable" and speaking of me sweepingly as a "thoughtful, intelligent guy" in the past tense.
Your talking about my opinion in a sweepingly dismissive --and condescending-- way does not exactly encourage mutual respect or a "reasonable" response.

But even so, I have remained more reasonable than your example, and despite your sweeping labels, have backed up my opinion far better than you have, far more respectfully.

And far more reasonably than you give me credit for.




"Like most white people"?

My opinion on race is largely unchanged from 10 years ago. I'm tired of being accused of racism, and seeing whites/conservatives sweepingly accused of racism, where a double standard is applied, and minorities and liberals can say whatever they want without being called on it.

But if one white or conservative makes a poorly chosen remark... not even a an overtly racist remark, just a questionable and ambiguous remark, the worst is assumed, and it's front page news for two weeks.

When a liberal or minority does it, it might be reported, but will be mentioned once, on page A-15.

An early example I remember was 20 years ago, where Ross Perot addressed a dominantly black audience and trying to engage the audience, said "you people".
A media that wanted to tear him down while building up Bill Clinton leaped on this tiny ambiguous word-choice. And I've seen that on a regular basis for 20 years since.



I frankly feel I don't know you!
The guy I had great dialogues with 10 years ago would never sweepingly and condescendingly dismiss my opinion the way you have in the last few posts.

You have an opinion. I have an opinion. Let's learn to deal with it.

Do you remember when we could --when you could-- respectfully disagree without sweepingly labelling me a zealot, unreasonable, a right-wing partisan who defends every republican talking point?
For the nine-plus years, both here and the DC boards, I clearly have not supported "every" Republican point, and my previous posts back that up.

As for my reaction to Knut's remark, he's here to joke around, and while I do post sarcasm and humor, it's a lower ratio than he likes.
Knut's remark I just reacted to was ambiguous. Sometimes Knut's tried to give me friendly advice, but frequently he's just trolling on me. The one time I PM'd him privately to clarify what he was trying to say, he mocked me with it and used it to further troll on me. His remark here, brief and ambiguous as it was, seemed to be piling on the liberal perception of "it's definitely racist" side of the debate here.



I bolded the two contradictory phrases in the same sentence of your post. Following your logic, how do I find "validation for [my] views" and simultaneously those people "don't like or respect" what I say?
That's an insulting portrayal, and then you threw in the word "zealot" to describe me as well. Nice!

You're the one throwing all the insults, whereas I'm doing my damndest to be reasonable.

The RKMB boards are a bit tougher than most boards. Everyone here gets attacks at one time or another, and the ones who can't take it leave. As I recall, you left in a huff a few years ago when they piled on you. So I could as easily argue that they "don't like or respect" YOU.

Myself, G-man, Pariah, Sammitch, Jason, even BSAMS, Pro and the inner circle have been called on stuff and harassed at times. And it's not particular to the left or right opinions either.

I frankly think you're doing your best to provoke me by unfairly calling me a zealot and unreasonable, and speaking of my logic lamentedly in the past tense.
I haven't changed, only your portrayal of me has.

yes

Dave,

so...i was about a quarter of the way into a response to your last post when i realized that i was continuing the dialouge. so i deleted everything and decided to write this instead....

you are an unreasonable person. debating you has devolved into a waste of time as you have developed a very narrow and myopic view of the world. not only that but, you tend to play the role of victim whenever someone calls you out. you moan and whine whenever someone points out that you may, in fact, be full of shit. i'm not saying that you don't make a reasonable point now and again but, it's like searching for the one unbroken peanut in the excrement that is your rhetoric.

not only that but, i think you may have a touch of narcissistic personality disorder...given that you habitiually search out old posts that you've made and quote them to back up some new bullshit that you are currently posting....as if the original bullshit you posted in the past suddenly became profound just cuz it's old.

the funny part is, mostly nobody reads the bullshit you post the first time around so quoting and re-posting it just makes you seem that much more sad and pathetic.

so, here's where we stand...i'll show up here from time to time and comment as i see fit on subjects that interest me. you can respond or not as you wish but, i will not respond to you if you do. i feel that, by doing engaging you, i will be enabling you and feeding into your delusions. i don't wish to be responsible in any way at all for keeping you from seeking the help you need.

anyway, that's it. i wish you luck in your future endeavors.

I don't read anything he writes either. it amazes me anyone gets into a debate with him.

I just find something to laugh about then make him cry over it.

exactly, I just don't see why some people get bent out of shape over it.

So... you call me a bunch of names, but can't back up what you say with the slightest facts.

You accuse your political opposition of using secret code for calling the president a "nigger"... but I'm the one being uncivil.

You accuse me of being delusional, despite that I cite examples to support my views, while all you have is insults and paranoid scenarios (i.e., if Colin Powell were elected he would be assassinated, if someone disagrees with Obama it's because they can't stand that a "nigger is president"). I'm just repeating the excrement you just slung in my direction.

But I'm the unreasonable one. Right. You can think whatever you want. That doesn't make you any less wrong.

That is exactly what you do with everyone of your posts.

It is amusingly ironic, don't you think?

When the person accusing you of a bunch of shit is doing exactly what they accuse you of?

Its ok wondy. You're old enough to get Alzheimers soon so that pesky reality won't be a problem anymore.

it's like rain on K-nut's wedding day.

It's the good advice, that Snarf just didn't take.

well said

That's just because you're trying so hard to be one of the cool kids.

BSAMS, virtually all the points I've made are the same as yours. We even quote a lot of the same sources. I get harassed for it, you don't.

It's a case of clique-ish snobbery on your collective part, pure and simple. With no basis in reality.

The over-the-top shit that Pro and Bastard have posted here goes unchallenged by any of you. I owned up to my own more excessive remarks, and even laughed at them in retrospect.
Would that you held them to the same standard.

From Barack Obama's own words - He Searched out Marxist (Communist) Professors in college





Yep, only hating that Obama is a black man could explain opposing his presidency.

It couldn't possibly be his radical ideology, or policies as president expanding from that radicalism...

Not really. I'm cooler than anyone here.

besides Urg. And maybe SOM. Maybe

Okay. That's it.

WB, for god sakes, lighten up, stop taking the bait and tone down the rhetoric. You've been on this board long enough to know that we all push buttons here and a lot of it is just trash talk. Nearly everyone here knows it and nearly everyone here can laugh at himself once in a while.

You have accomplished something that no one else has done here with the possible exception of Wankie. You've turned the entire board against you.

Congratulations. I guess.