Poor wittle President Thin-skin –
Meanwhile:
Liberals Rail Against Clint Eastwood’s “Racist” Empty Chair Skit; But Not Piers Morgan’s?
This is too precious.
Breaking News!!!! Clint is yelling racist slurs at the chair.
#RNC
— Samantha Gibbs (@LiberalChick89) August 31, 2012Eastwood Chair Rant so racist white man manipulating mouth of black man like puppet getting him to say swear words
— Mike Elk (@MikeElk) August 31, 2012OUCH! good i missed it RT
@mikeelk: Eastwood chair rant was RACIST, white man putting dirty words into mouth of black man like a puppet
— Liza Sabater (@blogdiva) August 31, 2012Eastwood chair rant was RACIST, white man putting dirty words into mouth of black man like a puppet
— Mike Elk (@MikeElk) August 31, 20126 retweets from moron followers.
“It was like Amos & Andy meets Waiting for Godot.” –
@meeshellchen on racism of#eastwooding
— Mike Elk (@MikeElk) August 31, 2012Ok, the Godot thing is clever.
Romney trying to take away grants hell now Obama need to sit in the chair for another term Romney seem racist
— Jα’Mεяiα(@_iRunThisShxt) August 31, 2012
If you haven’t seen it here is the whole raaaaaaaaacist speech
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRsfCteQxCE[/youtube]
@retire05:
I refer you to post 297 which details your continued dishonesty.
@Nan G:
Maybe maybe … but Obama’s Anglo ancestors were slave holders in the US.
@Richard Wheeler:
No that was you here at # 249 @Richard Wheeler:
you wrote:
OK now that we clear that up let’s return to #295 @Mike O’Malley:
Richard you can cease selectively using Strom Thurman to promote a broad brush narrative defaming the modern post-civil rights era Southern Republican Party as racist.
It was during the Johnson Administration that Black American advancement was crippled by Progressive Democratic welfare subsidies, destroying the traditional black family and locking an ever growing number of Black single mothers into destructive economic dependency on the Democratic Party. No accident this was.
@Tom:
Let’s review this, shall we?
In post #278, I said that George Washington was more religious that any current Republican, citing my reason for saying that (Washington’s public display of prayer and religious faith).
In post #279, you refer to “a person who did not acknowledge the divinity of Jesus is more religious than practicing Republican Christians. One can only assume that you are referring to Thomas Jefferson, and the wrongly held belief that Jefferson was not a Christian.
I returned to give you examples of Jefferson’s own letters which referred to his Christianity and his acceptance of the doctrine of Jesus Christ over all others, which you ignored because it did not fit with your argument.
You are a loser, Tom, and pathetic, little whining loser who has no rebuttal, just another slur to sling at those who show you don’t know your butt from a biscut and are terribly ignorant of history. Not once have you offered any proof that my claim was, in fact, wrong by exampling ANY current Republican who is so public about their faith in Jesus and Christianity as was Washington. And don’t come back with Republican ministers as an example, since you know I am speaking of Republicans who hold public office.
You need to sue the teachers who taught you history because you are a total failure of their efforts.
Mike I suggested you ADDED to the Thurmond story.
Semper Fi
@retire05:
Two questions: is Thomas Jefferson much more religious than any contemporary Republican? What is it like to be publicly proven dishonest (and thus a sinner according to your religion), by me no less?) 🙂
Answer the first question, or ridicule yourself in front of everyone yet again. Your choice.
@Tom:
Tom, what is it like to reveal yourself as a sniveling weasel who can only lob insults but has not rebuttal to any point made to you?
Damn, man, are you even over 16 physically because you certainly are not an adult mentally.
@retire05:
Do people of integrity stand by their words? Does your word mean anything? Here Is your chance, again: is Thomas Jefferson much more religious than any contemporary Republican? Yes or No.
@Tom:
Why do you act like a petulant child? If you disagree with anything I said, counterpoint my statement. Don’t just stomp your feet and call me dishonest.
I did not use the example of Jefferson, YOU DID, I used George Washington. CAN YOU AT LEAST BE HONEST ABOUT THAT?
So……………..until you can debate HONESTLY, which up until now you have not done, I will simply consider you the petulant child you act like and dismiss you.
@retire05:
It’s really quite sad. Your credibility is in ruins. Your integrity, dust. You were the sanctimoneous moralists, always lording your moral superiority over everyone. Muslims, atheists, liberals: they were all imferior to you. The perfectly righteous church lady sat in judgement. But she forgot the most basic of moral lessons: she didn’t practice what she preached. The dishonesty is one thing, but what drives it? Pride. One of the Seven Deadly. When a person is consumed by Pride, anything is possible. This is what we see time and again from you. And all for what, I wonder? To lose so much and still lose the argument. That is pretty sad too.
@retire05:
Stop trying to change the subject. I am perfectly willing to debate you once you stand by your statement. I cant debate sand, which has the consistency of your resolve and your conviction. So let’s go back to the beginning, YOUR BEGINNING: is Thomas Jefferson much more religious than any contemporary Republican I can name? Try answering for a change . Then we can go from there.
@retire05:
See that, that is an easily disproven LIE. You said “Founder”, not Washington. Despite your equally dishonest efforts to downgrade Jefferson, he’s still safely in the pantheon. So why are you lying about what you wrote and insulting me? Have you no sense of decency?
@Richard Wheeler:
Yes I did.
You introduced Sen. Thurmond and I added facts to demonstrate that in Senator Thurmond’s case, what appears to be black and white isn’t quite so black and white but shades of grey. I have much respect for Sen. Thrumond’s oldest daughter. I’d have more respect for Thurmond senior if he had acknowledged his daughter during his long life time. Things have changed over both of their long lives. For an absentee father who made a serious mistake in his youth he provided for his daughter and she became an accomplished woman. Strom Thurmond the segregationist did more for his illegitimate daughter than many an African American male in the post-civil rights era.
So you’ll stop selectively using Strom Thurman to promote a broad brush narrative defaming the modern post-civil rights era Southern Republican Party? OK?
.
It is politically useful to pretend that the GOP in the 70’s and 80’s was scooping you all those white segregationists to build a voter block and ignore the counterpoint, how the Democratic Party created for itself a monolithic Black voter base. It all started in the 1960’s. Rev. King lost control of the Civil Rights movement as violent Black radicals emerged. Rev. King followed them to the Left. The Liberal/Progressive white power structure was terrified by the emerging violent Black radicals. It discovered however that many of them were corrupt and could be bought with foundation monies and taxpayer funds. Moreover the Liberal/Progressive white power structure was promoting the Sexual Revolution, and as the Sexual Revolution began to rapidly unravel the Black American family the Liberal/Progressive white power structure was ready and able to use taxpayer dollars to entrap Black single mothers in welfare dependency to the Democratic Party. Throw in awful public schools, affirmative action, inner city municipal corruption, a heavy dose of racial demagoguery (such as GOP=KKK or GOP=Nazis) and in short order the Democratic Party captured 90+% of the Black vote. It is no accident that competent surveys find the Black Americans are today the most intensely racialist group in American society
But the South? What of those white Southern bitter clingers? In the South most “white” churches are actually racially mixed and many traditionally Black Church actively recruit white members. Black and white inter-racial marriage? It is almost twice as prevalent in the former segregationist South as it is today in the liberal Northeast.
@Tom:
In post #261, I did say “Founders.” Do you think Jefferson was the most important of all Founders or the only one who we can compare to? Again, you seem to know little of our historical beginnings as a nation.
Now, get back to me when you actually want to debate from an intellectual, and informed, position.
retire05
tom is is playing his usual game,
not worthy of energy spent.
bye
Mike O’Malley
you also are being played by troll as retire is,
bye
Bees is right, Retire. Tom is a troll and he’s playing with you. Remember, tom was the one who came here solely to blame the GOP for using the Gifford shooting to smear the dems. Like I told him, that’s like blaming the rape victim for being raped. That is the “person” you are dealing with.
@Hard Right:
Sorry, but I don’t remember that part of Tom, although I am not surprised. Like all liberals, he just throws out b/s and has no answers. Petulant juveniles, all of them.
@Hard Right:
Tom has pretty much one note to play. He makes reciprocal charges. Whatever you accuse the Progressive/left of Tom takes and flips the accusation over an so accuses conservatives. Whatever you accuse Tom of he flips over and accuses you of.
For example I laughed Tom off and said he does his American cultural studies at Huffington-Post and Tom immediately flipped it over and reciprocated with a charge that I do my American cultural studies in Wikipedia.
He’s sort of like an insult-bot.
Kim’s Insult-Bot Has Words for You ‘Black-Hearted Dwarves’
@retire05:
That’s ok. I do. I was beyond gobsmacked. I could not believe that he would come here and do something so vile. Frankly, I would not p*ss on him if he were on fire. That is how offensive I found his comments to be. If you search I’m sure you’ll see what I mean.
What was interesting was how he expressed his deep hatred of Conservatives, then claimed to have Conservative friends. It was clear they really weren’t his friends in his eyes, but a way to bolster his false belief in his own tolerance. greg doesn’t believe the BS he posts, but tom does. I’m not sure who is worse as a result.
@Mike O’Malley:
You are quite right. Hence why I call him a troll. He thinks he is playing us, but all he is doing is winning us converts when we smack one of his ignorant claims into orbit. Their egomaniacal love of self is one of our greatest allies.
TO ALL
FOX IS REPLAYING 9/11 IN PROGRESS NOW
@Hard Right: @Hard Right:
Prove I lied, blowhard. Like I proved Retire did in 312. You defend a dishonest person based strictly on ideology: that’s who you are.
@Mike O’Malley:
Insult bot, Mike? Really? In the early 90s that might actually have passed for contemporary humor.
@Mike O’Malley:
That’s interesting, Mike. Perhaps you can explain why the South has produced one governer or US senator since Reconstruction, and the deep South zero. That includes three states where blacks are over 30% of the population. Not that they don’t appreciate them in the Church choir, or the sack.
And liberal, blue Massachusetts, black population under 8%, has a two term black governor.Guess where all the US senators came from? Feel free to explain.
@Tom:
I defended no one, but merely highlighted what kind of person you are and pointed out your “calibre”. Others here see it as well.
What you did with the Gifford’s shooting was particularly disgusting and I will not let you or others forget it. I am making it a point to educate those who are new or have forgotten what you did. You may not like the way I frame it, but it’s 100% accurate. Your fellow leftists were smearing the GOP as the ones to blame for the shooting, yet when we pointed out how it wasn’t our fault and was dishonest to say so, you came here and accused the GOP of using the incident to attack the dems! That is like attacking a rape victim simply because they dared to defend themselves and explain how it wasn’t their fault.
You’re angry because I’m forcing you to look at yourself and you can’t stand what you see. That is your problem, not mine.
@Hard Right:
Hard Right’s “brain”: This calls for a rape analogy!
Super classy. Let’s get serious though. Are you talking about a legitimate rape here?
How about owning up to what you did? Everyone makes mistakes. Can you admit yours?
@Hard Right: #317
I have mentioned before that I wonder if some of the liberals have a game going to see who can get the most comments, and how long they can keep one conversation going. I have also mentined that some people like to start an argument just to see what they can start. I have had some tell me that to my face. If others want to jump in the mud with the liberals, they can. I just don’t like the mud spattering into my email “In Box.” The email pragrmmers need to creat a “Mud Box” so that the mud can go DIRECTLY there.
I wondered about that. Normally I would ignore the obvious trolls, but there are those new to politics we can bring over to our side by showing how wrong and dishonest the left is. So my response isn’t for the leftists, it’s for them.
@Hard Right:
During the last presidential campaign (2008) it was reported that Organizing for Obama had hired people to sit in their pajamas and post pro-Obama responses on conservative [leaning] blogs. OFO even advertised for those jobs on Craig’s List.
Makes you wonder if Tom The Troll is not being paid by the Obama campaign.
@Tom:
Some years ago Clarence Page and I spoke. We came to some sort of agreement that Black Americans in American society for various cultural reasons demographically track behind Irish Catholic demographic blocks. I think one will find a similar situation to that posed by Tom decades ago when Irish Catholics tended to vote as a demographic block. Moreover, the Democratic Party furiously and relentlessly seeks to destroy any conservative African American politician than might emerge at a state or national level. One need look no further that the Progressive/left’s rage and fury at Congressman Allen West and Clarence Thomas (a potential US Senate and POTUS candidate decades ago). The Democratic Party leaders know that a successful attractive Black Conservative politician is a dagger aimed right at the heart of the Democratic coalition.
Moreover, given the racialist nature of African American block voting it is difficult for an African American conservative to get a start in electoral politics in the corrupt Progressive/left local political machines and then grow a Black voter base into a coalition with white conservative Southern voters.
@retire05: @Hard Right: @Smorgasbord: @ilovebeeswarzone:
I’d like yah-all to notice the sexualized contempt in which Tom holds conservative Southern “Whites”.
@Tom:
as in:
.
From this evidence I’d speculate Tom is here because he hates you and it makes him feel good to confound conservative Americans. Hopefully this guess is wrong and Tom can show us so with good behavior.
Tom and Retireo5 The back and forth,back and forth. Might I suggest a leisurely walk or a trip to the gym.
The simple question seems to be Are any current Republican leaders as religious (demonstrably Christian) as our Founding Fathers—agreed we are speaking of Washington and Jefferson.O.K. SO FAR?
As retire 05 pointed out Washington openly demonstrated his Christian faith. O’Malley opined he was a liberal Christian in that he did not demean or demagoque Catholics.
Jefferson ( my favorite POTUS) was also a Christian though possibly not as demonstrative (devout?) as Washington. Still O.K.
Nan points out that upwards of 90% of Evangelicals (may I say white?) plan to vote Repub. in Nov. Close to 50% of Repub. primary voters this year identified as Evangelical.
Can we agree that Evangelicals are the most demonstrative of Christians—-certainly more than a Methodist like myself?
Would G.W. and T.J. be considered Evangelicals? I’d suggest no on T.J. and no on G.W.
A current Republican leader, a Proud Evangelical favored by a plurality of self identified Republican Evangelicals—-Rick Santorum. Don’t forget the lovely and effusive Michele Bachmann.
I submit both these current Repub. leaders do not take a backseat to our Founding Fathers in their Demonstrative Christian Zeal.
Your thoughts. Have a great weekend. Go Irish
@Mike O’Malley: ##333
I used to think that there was no place on this earth for people like this, then I realized that if we didn’t have people like this, we wouldn’t appreciate the really nice people as much as we should. So, thanks to people like this, I appreciate the nice people more than I would without them. So, they are serving a useful purpose after all, and this one is serving it quite well. I appreciate the nice people a lot more now.
I also have a problem with the high IQ people who like to flaunt it. Without us low IQ level people, they would have an AVERAGE IQ level. They should be thanking us for the different numbers. Without us, there wouldn’t be a Mensa for them to join.
Mike That yah-all sounde a little funny coming from a damn Yankee lol. Believe y’all or yawl is closer. Bees from Southern Canada? The Deep South has been short on Dem.Govs. and Senators—-The great Sam Nunn of Georgia comes to mind, Edwards,Clinton–not many. How bout a Latin or God forgive a Black?
The Solid South once Dem, is now Repub.
Smorg It’s those late,late night talk shows you frequent that’s got me nervous.
@Richard Wheeler:
And the startling ignorance raises its’ head once again.
Google is your friend Rich. Although the chances are small, it might keep you from making a fool of yourself.
@Richard Wheeler:
chuckle!
We may hope I never lose my Jersey accent 😉
@Smorgasbord:
Without Mensa there would be no idiot savants in the original French mean of the term. 😉
@Richard Wheeler:
No, I intended to convey that Washington was a liberal Christian. I also intended to point out that Washington was not anti-Catholic as were other Founding fathers such as Jefferson and Adams. Those were two different thoughts. Forgive my poor draftsmanship.
I’ve largely stayed out of this debate because it was descending into uselessness.
However…
During the years leading up to and during the American Revolution the American People generally became intensely religious. And that religiosity was diverse mix of rather creative Protestant Christian sentiments. The first Declaration of Independence, of sorts, was published in Massachusetts in 1975 and was so overtly religious that it made the revolutionaries a laughing stock among the elite in Europe. Duly embarrassed the Constitutional Congress met and asked Thomas Jefferson to draft a 2nd Declaration of Independence because Jefferson was adept at Enlightenment thought and literary motif so that the European elite would take the Continental Congress seriously.
Now how does one compare the religiosity of the leadership of the Revolution and the Republican Party today? Are there competent authorities who have set their hand to this task? I don’t know. But comparing man for man in an effort to find out? That’s going to be a tiring and perilous task.
I think, or perhaps I guess, that Retire05 is correct that the Founders were more religious. But that’s not to say that the religious faith of men such as Mitt Romney ans Rick Santorum is not on par with the best of the Founders.
In Jefferson’s case I think retire05 is on unsure ground. Jefferson was a Deist and rejected the miraculous in the Gospels for example. Enlightenment Deists were men generally who seemed to be heading in the direction of agnosticism, in my view at least. Jefferson had profound respect for Jesus as a religious teacher and a moral teacher. So Jefferson was unlike many who claim him as a guide today. However, Jefferson got way to close to the genocidal anti-Christian French Revolution and it freaked out many 18th century Americans (with good reason). I suspect that Retire05 is citing essays written by Jefferson, that Jefferson wrote with a view to repairing his reputation and reassuring American’s that he was not a dangerous anti-Christian radical who could not be trusted with the Presidency.
@Mike O’Malley: #339
I had to look up the word “savants.” As soon as Densa gets going, I will be joining it.
Aye Will do. The Deep South aka. Cotton States or Lower South include Louisiana.Mississippi,Alabama,and your two favorite S.Carolina and Georgia. Agreed
I am speaking about the number of elected Dem, Senators snd Governors from these states since the early 6o’s let’s say 64 after the passage of the Civil Rights Act when Southern White Dems were leaving the Dem.Party in droves to become Repubs. As mentioned Sen. Strom Thurmond of S.C. made the switch in 64.
From 1964 to 2011 in the Deep South Governor elections and Senatorial elections the raw number and percentage of Dems elected? Are we in agreement so far? You wanna guess? Louisiana is your best with those crazy Longs lol. BTW I misspoke when I included Edwards of N.C. and Clinton of Ak.–BY def. not Deep South.
While we’re at it # of Black or Latin Governors or Senators elected Dem. since 64
Take your time. I’m going to Church–got double duty today. Have a blessed Sunday y’all.
Mike Thanks for your clarifying post re Religion, Very helpful.
@Richard Wheeler:
Like any good attorney (or debate opponent) I already know the answer. I knew it before you posted your incorrect assertion that the Deep South has been “short on Dem.Govs. and Senators” but do, please, research your position and post the source materials which support it.
Headed out of town for the day with my family so you’ll have plenty of time to work on it.
I’ll tell you this though…the answer is NOT what you think it is which makes your intransigence all the more amusing. You should know well enough by now that when I confront someone on their claims, it’s because I’m in command of the facts and arguing from the stronger position.
Ummm… you do realize that those “crazy Longs” belonged to your side right?
Since you brought up Louisiana though, here’s the Dim/Rep Governor ratio since 1964 in terms of the number of years served (and, yes, the links are to Wiki but I doubt there are any significant factual errors there regarding this issue):
And here’s Georgia, same time period, Governor’s Office as well:
I’ll leave you with this final note:
AYE
THAT WAS A FUNNY ONE, VERY EDUCATIVE TOO FOR THE TOM AND Richard WHEELER,
AND GREG, AND LIBERAL WOULD LOOSE HIS OBJECTIVITY IF HE GO SOUTH,
BYE
Richard Wheeler
expand on those crazy longs lol,
don’t let them catch you, they would mistake you for an alligator,
they make tasty stew with those,
you better stick with your place,
Smorgasbord
the word savants mean those in the know and more of,
bye
Mike O’Malley
on 332
is that why they had to go to KENYA to find one they can swear he is one of them,
they must pee in their pants now trying to convince the DEMOCRATS TO VOTE HIM ANOTHER 4 YEARS,
BECAUSE THEY FOUND NOTHING OF VALUE TO SELL HIM NOW THAT THEY GAVE HIM 4 YEARS TO PRODUCE SOMETHING VALUABLE FOR AMERICA TO BE HAPPY FOR,
I bet THE DEMOCRATS WHISH HIM GONE AND WILL VOTE HIM OUT, IF THEY HAVE AN OUNCE OF LOYALTY TO AMERICA,
Aye My contention is total # of elections of Senators and Governors in 5 Deep South States 1964-2011 will favor Repubs. You seem to be leaning on the Governors Don’t forget the Senatelol
I’ m also gone for the day but believe I am right We’ll see.
If you wanna go total combined years served that’s O.K remembering it’s 1964-2011.
@Mike O’Malley:
You claim Jefferson was a Deist. On what do you base that assumption, because nowhere in any of Jefferson’s writings does he claim to be a Deist. Quite the contrary, Jefferson was a member of the Anglican Church, was married there, and in his letters said that he leaned toward the Unitarians, but there was no Unitarian church in Virginia.
And I seriously doubt that Jefferson was overly concerned with his religious reputation. Jefferson was a man of many sides. Quite quick to give his political viewpoints, reluctant to give his religious viewpoints, and refused to discuss his personal life. Also, to claim Jefferson rejected the theory of miracles, based on his action of creating what some call the Jefferson Bible is to reject Jeffersons actual reason for cutting out the words of Christ to put them in a blank book, listed in order by event.
Jefferson’s letter to Charles Johnson, stating clearly that he was a Christian, was written AFTER Jefferson had left the Office of President, so there would have been no political expediency in declaring such since he had no more intentions of running for President again. Did Jefferson believe in miracles? He believed in Divine intervention which altered the normal progression of events, so yes, I believe that a miracle is nothing more than Divine intervention in what would have been the normal progression of an event. Call that what you wish.
And while Jefferson did support the French Revolution, he also believed that it would be an event much like the American Revolution, and he later distanced himself from the human slaughter that was the French Revolution, especially among civilians.
I am not a Jeffersonian. His opinions changed as he gained years. He was a strick Constitutionalist until he became President. He abhored slavery, yet maintained slaves, and even upon his death did not free all his slaves when it was within his power to do so. He also believed that the United States would remain an agrarian society, and could not envision massively large cities.
Thomas Jefferson is used by those who would claim that no representation of religious faith should be exhibited in the public square, although Jefferson’s words that would support that can be found nowhere in either the Declaration of Independence, or the U.S. Constitition. The Danbury Baptist letter (not part of our U.S. Constitution) was twisted in meaning by Justice Hugo Black, KKK member and highly anti-Catholic, because he felt the Catholic Church was gaining too much power in the United States and he intended to sent a shot across the Church’s bow to let them know, he, not it, was the power in the United States. To read Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists is to know that Jefferson was assuring them that no “state” religion would be created, and that they were free to continue to worship as they chose. Hardly the viewpoint of Justice Hugo Black.
Jefferson is an interesting fellow, but certainly not the only Founder that held influence. John Adams and Benjamin Franklin held great sway over what would be written in the Declaration of Independence, but Jefferson was asked to write the actual document due to Jefferson’s flourishing writing style (he was not a great speaker, ironically) and it was Franklin that gave us “life, liberty and the persuit of happiness” as Jefferson had originally written “life, liberty and property.” Gouverneur Morris is credited with penning the U.S. Constitution but many contributed to its design. Probably the most influence was given by James Madison. Jefferson was only one participant.
Jefferson is the one “Founder” that the left loves to point to simply because by twisting him into something he was not, it fits their agenda.
@Richard Wheeler: Two of the insinuations you seem make here is that the South is too prejudice to elect blacks to office and that the North is devoid of racial prejudice. As to the first, in order to be elected to office, you would have to first, run for office. In order to back your claim, you would need to show us how a large number of blacks ran for office on a platform that would normally be embraced by Southern voters and lost because of their color. The South, being more conservative than the North, is a lot less likely to elect someone whose politics are left of center, regardless of their skin color.
To support your second insinuation, you would need to look at how well blacks were received in the North. It would seem to reason that the largest black outmigration from the South would have been in the years following the CW because they had been enslaved in the years prior and the violence against them was at an all time high after the CW. What you will find is that in the 50 years after the CW, blacks trickled out of the South. As a matter of fact, there were cases during the CW where escaped slaves actually returned to the South because of the way they were treated in the North. Blacks didn’t begin leaving the South in large numbers until the early 1900’s as part of a larger migration of people going from rural areas to the urban industrial centers of the North. If they were so welcomed in the North, they would have moved right into white neighborhoods with no repercussions. Obviously that didn’t happen. The neighborhoods in the North were racially segregated then as most of them are now. Look at population centers in the North today, most neighborhoods are either all or predominately black or all or predominately white. There aren’t very many neighborhoods that are 50/50.
Just out of curiosity, how many black neighbors do you have?