Forum IndexRegisterGamesSearchFAQBankMemberlistUsergroupsLog in
Why I'm Not A Republican
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 123, 124, 125  Next
 
Reply to topic    Afrocentric Online Forum Index » Da Corner View previous topic
View next topic

Why I'm Not A Republican
Author Message
DamnYouAll



Joined08 Mar 2005
Posts9973
LocationThrowin' some D's on it!!!
Bank0
Bones66448.94 Bones

Post Reply with quote
Shadow, let's dissect some of that article, shall we?

[b]1. Liberalism creates a feedback loop. It is usually impossible for a non-liberal to change a liberal's mind about political issues because liberalism works like so: only liberals are credible sources of information.[/b] And how is that any different from some conservatives? There are plenty of you out here who will completely dismiss something simply because it comes from a left leaning POV.

[b]2) Liberals sources of information are ever present. Conservatives are regularly exposed to the liberal viewpoint whether they want to be or not. That's not necessarily so for liberals.[/b] Ah, the argument about the "big bad liberal media" that just won't go away. First of all, most media is corporate owned, so no matter what side of the political spectrum you sit, you'll never really get the 100% truth about anything. Here's the problem with conservatives as it relates to the media: You all have allowed the inmates to take over the asylum. The more batshit insane a conservative is, the more press you all give him. I don't doubt that there are some sane, moderate conservatives out there, but they can't get a seat at the table because of the crazies.

[b]5) Liberals tend to view people as parts of groups, not individuals.[/b] If this ain't the pot calling the kettle black. How many times have we seen conservatives lump gays, immigrants, and several others into one group based on the actions of a few?

I'm sure PM can dissect this much better that I can, but this comment from the article pretty much sums up what we think today's batch of neo-cons: [b]Its simple NINETY FIVE percent of ALL liberals have an education of GED or LESS and a paycheck of 8.15/hr or less.. They are MORONS by design its not really their fault[/b]
Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:13 pm View user's profile Find all posts by DamnYouAll Send private message
PM



Joined16 Jul 2008
Posts4721
LocationSomewhere drinking YOUR milkshake!
Bank0
Bones25271.48 Bones

Post Reply with quote
To quote The Joker... HEEEERE WEEEE GO...

[quote="shadow777"]7 Reasons Why Liberals Are Incapable of Understanding The World

Even liberals who've accomplished a lot in their lives and have high IQs often say things on a regular basis that are stunningly, profoundly stupid and at odds with the way the world works. Modern liberalism has become so bereft of common sense and instinctually suicidal that America can only survive over the long haul by thwarting the liberal agenda. In fact, liberalism has become such a toxic and poisonous philosophy that most liberals wouldn't behave differently if their goal were to deliberately destroy the country. So, how does liberalism cause well-meaning, intelligent liberals to get this way? Well, it starts with...

1) Liberalism creates a feedback loop. It is usually impossible for a non-liberal to change a liberal's mind about political issues because liberalism works like so: only liberals are credible sources of information. How do you know someone's liberal? He espouses liberal doctrine. So, no matter how plausible what you say may be, it will be ignored if you're not a liberal and if you are a liberal, of course, you probably agree with liberal views. This sort of close-mindedness makes liberals nearly impervious to any information that might undermine their beliefs.[/quote]

One of the things that make progressives and liberals operate is that we are capable of being FLEXIBLE with our viewpoints. Contrary to popular opinion, progressives don't all march in lockstep to the drum beat of the Great Progressive Liberal Hype Machine. And what sort of doctrine is this author talking about? Is it the doctrine of equal pay for equal work? Contraceptive rights for women? Marriage equality? The irony of someone calling a liberal "close-minded" is gut-bustingly hilarious, considering that conservatives get their information from the Propaganda Arm of the Republican Party, aka Fox News. It has been scientifically proven that people who use Fox News as their source of information [url=http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2011/11/20342/]are worse off than people who don't watch the news at all[/url].

[quote]2) Liberals sources of information are ever present. Conservatives are regularly exposed to the liberal viewpoint whether they want to be or not. That's not necessarily so for liberals. Imagine the average day for liberals. They get up and read their local newspaper. It has a liberal viewpoint. They take their kids to school, where the teachers are liberal. Then they go to work, listen to NPR which has a liberal viewpoint on the way home, and then turn on the nightly news which also skews leftward. From there, they turn on TV and watch shows created by liberals that lean to the left, if they have any political viewpoint at all. Unless liberals actively seek out conservative viewpoints, which is unlikely, the only conservative arguments they're probably going to hear are going to be through the heavily distorted, poorly translated, deeply skeptical lens of other liberals.[/quote]

What's that old saying? "Truth has a liberal bias." And I know once again that this author is not talking about information being "...heavily distorted, poorly translated (and) deeply skeptical." When media outlets push the agenda that a sitting President of the United States may not be legitimate because some hack nut jobs create a controversy, they don't get the right to call someone else "skewed." When you have someone like Bill O'Reilly saying that Republicans were not invited to the March on Washington event, only to find out that they WERE, but chose not to go (some for legitimate reasons, like the Bush family and health concerns for G-Dub and Original Recipe George; and others like Eric Cantor who instead visited oil lobbyists), your credibility plummets. When you give SARAH FRICKIN' PALIN an outlet to spout her weapons-grade idiocy, you don't DARE have the audacity to talk about skewed viewpoints.

Once upon a time, there were some conservative values that were worth listening to. But the problem is that the common-sense members of the Republican Party (Colin Powell, John Huntsman, and a few others I can't remember right now) have been marginalized by the Evangelicals and the Tea Potty Lunatics. The GOP inmates now run the asylum. Or are you going to tell me that AIDS rings (really... rings that give people AIDS) and rape babies make for legitimate conservative view points... yeah, right.
Mon Sep 02, 2013 3:50 am View user's profile Find all posts by PM Send private message
DamnYouAll



Joined08 Mar 2005
Posts9973
LocationThrowin' some D's on it!!!
Bank0
Bones66448.94 Bones

Post Reply with quote
This is somewhat old news, but the changes were recently approved, so this bit of insanity bears repeating.

Texas approves renaming slave trade as “Atlantic triangular trade”
Comments
Email
Print
Share on Facebook20352


The Texas Board of Education’s conservative members went on the deep end. As the one of the largest buyers of textbooks in the country, the board changed and re-wrote the history books. Smaller states who have no textbook buying power would essentially have to read and study the new Texas version of history.

The changes are ideological and distort history, but conservative Board of Education argue they are correcting a long-standing liberal bias in education. Read the running history of this very interesting “culture war” here and if you want details, read the exact changes here.


Tools of “Atlantic Triangulation Trade”
One of the most controversial changes is to deny the slave trade. The Texas Board of Education wants to refer to the slave trade as the “Atlantic triangular trade”. What the he** is the “Atlantic triangular trade”? What do you call the millions of African-Americans whose ancestors came here as slaves? Descendants of triangulates?

Capitalism can only be referred to as “free enterprise system”, largely because of the negative connotations of the word “capitalism”. Personally I don’t think there is anything wrong with capitalism but they should consider teaching that unfettered greed can be bad for society.

The board has diminished Thomas Jefferson’s role in history because of his belief in the separation of church and state. Students also are required to learn that America’s founding documents were influenced by various intellectual traditions, “especially biblical law,” and principles laid down by Moses. From the tenor of the changes, the board approved the foundation for a fundamentalist Christian theocracy. It would be kinda like Iran, only it would be the right Christian kind. Social conservatives, creationists and religious fanatics who dominate the Texas State Board of Education want to redefine the Constitution as an explicitly Christian document and highlight the role of God in the establishment of the US.

The board approved dropping references to a landmark court case that barred schools from segregating Mexican American students. Joseph McCarthy’s campaign against suspected communists is now to be toned down. Like McCarthy was just a curious senator, right?

The amendments also cast the United Nations in a critical light, with students asked to evaluate whether the UN and its committees undermine US sovereignty – a tune for conservatives. Students would be required to learn about the “unintended consequences” of Title IX, affirmative action, and the Great Society, and would need to study conservative icons like Phyllis Schlafly, the Heritage Foundation, and the Moral Majority.

Maybe we should add that Hussein has weapons of mass destruction so we had to spend trillions on an unnecessary war in Iraq? Nah… that will never make it.

In fact, in the transcripts of the board discussions, they specifically did not want to include President George W. Bush’s controversial 2000 election outcome nor the election of the first African American President Barack Obama. On the other hand, the board added positive references to the Moral Majority, the National Rifle Association and the GOP’s Contract with America.

The board will not even listen to Rod Paige’s plea to reconsider the changes. Paige is the first African-American to serve as education secretary… President George “Dubya” Bush’s education secretary.

More than 1,200 historians and college faculty members from across the nation have signed a petition calling the standards academically shoddy.

The Texas Board of Education voted today his week and approved all of the changes.
Mon Sep 02, 2013 11:05 pm View user's profile Find all posts by DamnYouAll Send private message
shadow777



Joined15 Jul 2007
Posts4122
LocationThe Dark Shadows
Bank0
Bones25393.12 Bones

Post Reply with quote
[quote="DamnYouAll"]Shadow, let's dissect some of that article, shall we?

[b]1. Liberalism creates a feedback loop. It is usually impossible for a non-liberal to change a liberal's mind about political issues because liberalism works like so: only liberals are credible sources of information.[/b] And how is that any different from some conservatives? There are plenty of you out here who will completely dismiss something simply because it comes from a left leaning POV.

Most things from the left are crazy? Why would any right thing person, want to change their minds set to something that is crazy?


[b]2) Liberals sources of information are ever present. Conservatives are regularly exposed to the liberal viewpoint whether they want to be or not. That's not necessarily so for liberals.[/b] Ah, the argument about the "big bad liberal media" that just won't go away. First of all, most media is corporate owned, so no matter what side of the political spectrum you sit, you'll never really get the 100% truth about anything. Here's the problem with conservatives as it relates to the media: You all have allowed the inmates to take over the asylum. The more batshit insane a conservative is, the more press you all give him. I don't doubt that there are some sane, moderate conservatives out there, but they can't get a seat at the table because of the crazies.

BAT shit?
Do i really need to name names? Chris Matthews, that dumb ass lesbian racheal mad at every got thing , All ways out of touch AL BAby Sharpton. ADerson Cooper,

[b]5) Liberals tend to view people as parts of groups, not individuals.[/b] If this ain't the pot calling the kettle black. How many times have we seen conservatives lump gays, immigrants, and several others into one group based on the actions of a few?

The same way all Liberals group any action by any Conservative as the whole doing it.

I'm sure PM can dissect this much better that I can, but this comment from the article pretty much sums up what we think today's batch of neo-cons: [b]Its simple NINETY FIVE percent of ALL liberals have an education of GED or LESS and a paycheck of 8.15/hr or less.. They are MORONS by design its not really their fault[/b][/quote]

NOw! Does not your response in your last statement prove my point in my retort to all Liberals?

Quote>>>
but this comment from the article pretty much sums up what we think today's batch of neo-cons:
Tue Sep 03, 2013 2:41 am View user's profile Find all posts by shadow777 Send private message Send e-mail
shadow777



Joined15 Jul 2007
Posts4122
LocationThe Dark Shadows
Bank0
Bones25393.12 Bones

Post Reply with quote
One of the things that make progressives and liberals operate is that we are capable of being FLEXIBLE with our viewpoints. Contrary to popular opinion, progressives don't all march in lockstep to the drum beat of the Great Progressive Liberal Hype Machine. And what sort of doctrine is this author talking about? Is it the doctrine of equal pay for equal work? Contraceptive rights for women? Marriage equality? The irony of someone calling a liberal "close-minded" is gut-bustingly hilarious, considering that conservatives get their information from the Propaganda Arm of the Republican Party, aka Fox News. It has been scientifically proven that people who use Fox News as their source of information are worse off than people who don't watch the news at all.

Name me one Liberal who has an open mind about any subject, that does not march to the Liberal drumming?

Equal pay for equal work is bogus, women don't put in the same time as men, and yet demand the same pay, Based on what they have a Vagina? IF women want contraceptive, let them pay for them. Marriage should not be allow for sick mind folks.

And last? Funny! how I get my news and i may watch Fox news once a month

It has been scientifically proven that people who use Fox News as their source of information are worse off than people who don't watch the news at all.

Retort, YOu have me lauphing "PM"

You really should be ashamed for this response? That study was put out by a liberal College in a 90% liberal State. Also, it's two years old, UPDATE: Fox News hit out at the school responsible for the study on Thursday. A spokesperson for the network told The Hollywood Reporter, "Considering FDU’s undergraduate school is ranked as one of the worst in the country, we suggest the school invest in improving its weak academic program instead of spending money on frivolous polling – their student body does not deserve to be so ill-informed."


What's that old saying? "Truth has a liberal bias." And I know once again that this author is not talking about information being "...heavily distorted, poorly translated (and) deeply skeptical." When media outlets push the agenda that a sitting President of the United States may not be legitimate because some hack nut jobs create a controversy, they don't get the right to call someone else "skewed." When you have someone like Bill O'Reilly saying that Republicans were not invited to the March on Washington event, only to find out that they WERE, but chose not to go (some for legitimate reasons, like the Bush family and health concerns for G-Dub and Original Recipe George; and others like Eric Cantor who instead visited oil lobbyists), your credibility plummets. When you give SARAH FRICKIN' PALIN an outlet to spout her weapons-grade idiocy, you don't DARE have the audacity to talk about skewed viewpoints.

Retort>>> When the copy of his birth is produce, then and only then, will Obama deserve the title of President.
I post both of the March on Washington articles. You should read them both.

Once upon a time, there were some conservative values that were worth listening to. But the problem is that the common-sense members of the Republican Party (Colin Powell, John Huntsman, and a few others I can't remember right now) have been marginalized by the Evangelicals and the Tea Potty Lunatics. The GOP inmates now run the asylum. Or are you going to tell me that AIDS rings (really... rings that give people AIDS) and rape babies make for legitimate conservative view points... yeah, right.

Colin Powell is a middle of the road Republican, who needs them? The Tea Party will return the mind set of the Party?
Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:04 am View user's profile Find all posts by shadow777 Send private message Send e-mail
PM



Joined16 Jul 2008
Posts4721
LocationSomewhere drinking YOUR milkshake!
Bank0
Bones25271.48 Bones

Post Reply with quote
You know how people can say one thing and it completely ruins everything other point that they're trying to make?

[quote="shadow777"]Retort>>> [b]When the copy of his birth is produce, [size=18]then and only then, will Obama deserve the title of President[/size].[/b]
I post both of the March on Washington articles. You should read them both. [/quote]

This is that one thing.
Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:48 am View user's profile Find all posts by PM Send private message
DamnYouAll



Joined08 Mar 2005
Posts9973
LocationThrowin' some D's on it!!!
Bank0
Bones66448.94 Bones

Post Reply with quote
Shadow, are you fucking serious????? It's 2013, and you nutjobs are STILL hanging onto this whacked out conspiracy theory that is complete bullshit. President Obama is a US citizen, based on the fact that he was born in Hawaii, which is part of the USA. The birthers simply can't fathom the idea of a black president, so they've been floating this idea which has no standing whatsoever.

Even if Obama was born in a foreign country, the Constitution (you know, that document that you conservatives claim to worship) says that a person born overseas is considered a US citizen as long as one parent is a US citizen. Obama's mother was a citizen of Kansas, so even if he had been born in Indonesia, Pakistan, or the fucking moon, that means he is a US citizen as well.

What really kills me is how the exact same thing applies to Ted Cruz, yet nobody from the right is making the claim that he's not a citizen. Let's not forget that lady from a couple of weeks ago who said that she doesn't consider Canada "foreign soil."
Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:32 pm View user's profile Find all posts by DamnYouAll Send private message
DamnYouAll



Joined08 Mar 2005
Posts9973
LocationThrowin' some D's on it!!!
Bank0
Bones66448.94 Bones

Post Reply with quote
Barry Smitherman, Texas Attorney General Candidate, Says Abortion Will Bring Divine 'Reckoning'
The Huffington Post | By John Celock
Posted: 09/05/2013 10:50 am EDT | Updated: 09/05/2013 3:42 pm EDT

A Republican candidate for Texas attorney general told an anti-abortion group last week that China's so-called one child policy could unleash a plague on the country similar to the one described in the Bible.

Texas Railroad Commission Chairman Barry Smitherman, who is seeking the Republican nomination for attorney general, appeared last week before the Texas Alliance for Life to deliver a wide-ranging speech that largely centered on his opposition to China's abortion practices. He touched on a number of other abortion- and sex-related issues, arguing among other things that abortion rates have hurt the American economy. Smitherman's speech is posted at his campaign website and was reported by the Dallas Observer this week.

Smitherman discussed the Chinese policy, saying that it has hurt that nation, and then compared it to the Old Testament narrative about the enslavement of the Hebrews in Egypt. He noted that in the Bible, after pharaoh orders the drowning of the first-born sons of the Hebrews, some years later Moses warns the pharaoh that "10 plagues" would come to Egypt, including the death of the first-born sons, if he does not release the Hebrews.

"Attempts at genocide, like pharaoh's, do not go without inevitable 'reckoning.' In the case of the Egyptians, all their first-born, including pharaoh's son, were killed, and once mighty Egypt became merely a footnote in human history and a place where we used to visit (but not anymore since the 'Arab spring') the pyramids," Smitherman said. "In the case of China's one child policy, we have a modern-day example of what happens when a society does not honor 'life.' And like what happened to the Egyptians under pharaoh, this too, I predict, will end badly for the Chinese."

He also cited a Chinese professor as saying that the one child policy will bring about "Mother Nature's revenge."

Smitherman, who has four children, encouraged people to have lots of children in order to help the U.S. economy. He also argued that society needs to give more to help those with many children, and called for tax breaks for large families. He said that abortion caused a loss of 80 million Americans, which has impacted the economy.

"At a time when our federal debt is almost $17 trillion, having another $82.5 mm [sic] people, hitting their stride in the work force, would help to reduce our per capita debt obligations, but most likely would also produce meaningful additional GDP to propel our economy and I bet they would vote Republican," he said, according to the transcript posted to his website.

Smitherman told young men in the audience that they need to practice abstinence, but that they should be prepared to marry the woman if she becomes pregnant. But he encouraged them to marry at a young age in order to start having children.

Smitherman made headlines earlier this year for retweeting a tweet from a self-described "crazy writer" that included a photo that depicted nooses around the necks of Republican U.S. senators who voted to open debate on a gun control bill.

Smitherman was appointed to the Railroad Commission by Gov. Rick Perry (R) in 2011 and was elected to the seat in 2012. Republicans state Rep. Dan Branch and state Sen. Ken Paxton are also seeking the attorney general nomination.
Thu Sep 05, 2013 9:17 pm View user's profile Find all posts by DamnYouAll Send private message
PM



Joined16 Jul 2008
Posts4721
LocationSomewhere drinking YOUR milkshake!
Bank0
Bones25271.48 Bones

Post Reply with quote
In the run-up to this war strategic strike in Syria, conservatives are looking to re-write their own history... including that of St. Ronald of Reagan. One conservative declared that St. Ronald would have stood up to despots using chemical weapons. The REAL Ronald Reagan [url=http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/09/05/odonnell-reagan-let-saddam-buy-and-use-chemical-weapons/]sold chemical weapons, including anthrax, to Iraq[/url].
Sat Sep 07, 2013 12:39 pm View user's profile Find all posts by PM Send private message
DamnYouAll



Joined08 Mar 2005
Posts9973
LocationThrowin' some D's on it!!!
Bank0
Bones66448.94 Bones

Post Reply with quote
Interview With A Delusional Black Tea Party Fanatic (VIDEO)
Author: Egberto Willies September 9, 2013 7:03 pm



Aaron Johnson, Tea Party Patriot
This interview with a Black Tea Party fanatic will blow your mind. The level of delusion and indoctrination is frightening. Aaron Johnson, Tea Party Patriot. Photo by Egberto Willies.
It was a drizzly evening. I had just gotten back from an entire day session at the Economic Justice Forum sponsored by the Houston Peace and Justice Center and the University of Houston Student Government Council. The Kingwood Festival was in full swing with most patrons waiting for the last event, “The Beetles”.

It was my time to man the Kingwood Area Democrats booth, so I got there about half hour early to peruse the grounds. One of our members pointed to an adjacent booth and told me that this vendor had moved from his assigned location smack in front of a fire hydrant and close to our booth. It was a radical Tea Party guy. She told the organizers and the cops about his infraction, however nothing was done. The most vocal citizens in this town are Tea Party sympathizers. The was to be expected.

Our member stated that the guy was rather radical with provocative merchandise. When I looked over I saw a Black man manning the booth. The booth was some distance from the Tea Party booth (some of the Tea Party folks here in town are ‘friends’ of mine) so I was not sure who he represented. It was a great opportunity for an interview. After all, a black Tea Party person is an anomaly given the fact that the racist element (here, here, and here) in the Tea Party is rather pronounced.



Mr. Aaron Johnson was the Tea Party Patriot manning the booth. He consented to the interview and gave permission to use it at will. Mr. Johnson is passionate and I had the feeling he believes everything that he is saying. In speaking to him before the interview I found him to be a family man who loves his family and the fact that he was out there manning the booth alone, a hard worker.

That said, Mr. Johnson showed a level of delusion I have not even seen in the ranking Tea Party leaders here in Kingwood, Texas. He believes the mere fact the President’s middle name is Hussein means that he is Muslim. (I should have asked him if given his name Aaron Johnson if his first name made him Hebrew and his last name made him Anglo Saxon). Inasmuch as he believes in the superiority and mercy of the Christian religions, he says America should not intervene in Syria because one should allow the enemy to kill each other.

Off camera he told me the president should be impeached. When I asked him why, he gave a dubious list of things the president did including the appointment of czars that his folks deemed unconstitutional. Suffice it to say when asked for specifics he had no answers other than scripture.

The interview is quite entertaining. As I asked the questions, I had to fight internally to maintain my composure. It was an immense sense of pity for him at the same time with anger for him being so weak minded that he allowed his complete brainwashing. I invited him to lunch but his brain may be permanently and irreversibly rewired. At this point it has become an illness. That is the danger of the Tea Party. The leaders know better. The followers are just pawns in the game to allow a few to maintain the status quo, the American Plutocracy.

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pX03Uv2BLw]Here's the video.[/url]


Read more: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/09/09/interview-with-a-delusional-black-tea-party-fanatic-video/#ixzz2eUpNg2I1
Tue Sep 10, 2013 2:28 pm View user's profile Find all posts by DamnYouAll Send private message
nspyrd



Joined08 Sep 2004
Posts3400
Locationthe here & now
Bank4294967295
Bones16524.68 Bones

Post Reply with quote
Wow... he sounds a lot like a former AO transplant that y'all booted offa here a couple years ago! Wink He buys 95% of the tea party/Fox rhetoric hook-line and sinker! (he's a black tea party patriot and STILL questions the President's birth certificate)
Tue Sep 10, 2013 5:09 pm View user's profile Find all posts by nspyrd Send private message
BishopTuTu



Joined17 Jan 2002
Posts43669
LocationMD
Bank4294967295
Bones86572.28 Bones

Post Reply with quote
This negro here...


[quote][b]Allen West Out At PJ Media

Sources say he had an anti-Semitic exchange with a staffer, calling her a “Jewish American princess.” [/b]

posted on September 26, 2013 at 3:46pm EDT

Former Congressman Allen West is leaving his job at Pajamas Media after an altercation with a female staffer in which he allegedly called her a “Jewish American princess,” BuzzFeed learned on Thursday.

“In order to focus on political interests, Allen West will transition from his full-time role as director of programming for Next Generation.TV to a twice-a-month contributor of written commentary on PJMedia.com, effective October 1, 2013,” PJ Media financier Aubrey Chernick wrote to staff in an email from Sept. 16. “I wanted our staff and consultants to have this information first. However, PJ Media is not announcing this publicly for several weeks, so please do not share this news with anyone outside of the company until you see our public announcement.”

In a message to staff, West wrote: “Shortly, I will be giving up my position as director of programming at Next Generation.TV to get back on the front lines to expand the message of constitutional conservatism across our country.”

[b]Two sources familiar with what happened told BuzzFeed that West had gotten into an argument with a female employee and called her a “Jewish American princess” while telling her to “shut up.”[/b]

Reached by phone, West told BuzzFeed he was leaving his job voluntarily, though one source familiar with the situation told BuzzFeed he had been fired. He did not deny that an exchange with the employee had occurred, but said it hadn’t led to his leaving the company.

“No, I didn’t get fired,” West said. “I’m leaving to pursue political aspirations. That’s it. There’ll be a statement that comes out and it’s effective in October.”

Asked specifically whether he referred to the employee as a “Jewish American princess,” West said simply, “There was an exchange, that’s all.”

West, a conservative firebrand who served one term in Congress, joined PJ Media’s Next Generation TV in January, where he hosted a web show with former Daily Caller reporter Michelle Fields and L.A. radio host John Phillips.

Chernick did not return a request for comment about West’s departure.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/allen-west-out-at-pj-media[/quote]
Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:19 am View user's profile Find all posts by BishopTuTu Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
aisha



Joined04 Mar 2002
Posts13144
LocationWhy? You wanna come over?
Bank0
Bones26969.84 Bones

Post Reply with quote
Awww Allen, you learned the hard way that the Jewish mafia don't play that. Laughing
Fri Sep 27, 2013 4:29 pm View user's profile Find all posts by aisha Send private message
QTPie



Joined17 Jan 2002
Posts74993
LocationSinnin' and fallin' short.
Bank4294967295
Bones999999999.99 Bones

Post Reply with quote
Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
Fri Sep 27, 2013 4:38 pm View user's profile Find all posts by QTPie Send private message
DamnYouAll



Joined08 Mar 2005
Posts9973
LocationThrowin' some D's on it!!!
Bank0
Bones66448.94 Bones

Post Reply with quote
Tea Party Supporter Has Set A Date For The Armed Overthrow Of The Government
AUTHOR: NATHANIEL DOWNES SEPTEMBER 26, 2013 3:30 AM



To the cheers of Tea Party members everywhere, Larry Klayman called for a coup to overthrow our elected government, and replace it with a new dictatorship. Now he has expanded this, and given the dates for the armed insurrection in Washington DC:

[b]Last Wednesday, the great usurper, Barack Hussein Obama, after having been indicted by an Ocala, Florida citizens’ grand jury, was convicted by a people’s court of defrauding the American people and Floridians by proffering them with a fake birth certificate. See www.citizensgrandjury.com. As readers of this column and www.wnd.com know too well, Obama is not a natural born citizen eligible to be president of the United States, as he was not born in this country to two American citizen parents. However, to justify his fraud and his elections to the highest office in the land, and after years of inquiry, in 2011 the Obama White House posted on its website a birth certificate purporting to show him having been born in Hawaii. The problem is however, according to forensic experts, the birth certificate is altered and forged.

The day of reckoning has come. Obama, having failed to plead in response to the indictment that was served upon him, waived his right to a jury trial. Thumbing his nose at We the People, as the citizens’ prosecutor, I appeared before a citizens’ court judge and presented evidence from Cold Case Posse investigator Michael Zullo showing that Obama tricked voters into electing him in 2008 and 2012. As a result, the citizens’ judge found him guilty on two counts of falsifying information to federal and state election officials. He was thus sentenced to the maximum prison term for these offenses of 10 years, and ordered to immediately surrender himself into the custody of the citizens of the United States and Florida.

Of course, Obama will not willingly obey the law of the people. He will attempt to hide behind the iron fences of the White House, perhaps cowering under his desk for fear that the people will rise up and demand his ouster.



On November 19, 2013, a day that will hopefully live on in the history of our once great republic, I call upon millions of Americans who have been appalled and disgusted by Obama’s criminality – his Muslim, socialist, anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, anti-white, pro-illegal immigrant, pro-radical gay and lesbian agenda – among other outrages, to descend on Washington, D.C., en masse, and demand that he leave town and resign from office if he does not want to face prison time.

I further propose that we borrow the techniques perfected and used by such epic crusaders such as Mahatma Gandhi, to show Obama and his enablers that the American people are more than fed up and will not take it any more. The millions who are being summoned to our nation’s capital should, like Gandhi did in India and South Africa, peacefully shut the city down, by blocking roads and massing in front of the White House chanting for Obama to get out of our nation’s capital. In addition, I propose bringing the victims of his reign of terror to a podium across from the White House in Lafayette Park to give their testimony on how he has singularly severely harmed and in some instances even killed their loved ones through his actions.

In the words of Thomas Paine in the days leading up to the first American Revolution, “these are the times that try men’s souls.” The nation under Obama and even his inert and castrated political opponents, the Republican Party, have driven our country into the bowels of impending doom. The moral and ethical fabric, our economic underpinnings, and our national confidence and prestige are in the tank. Russia has become the leading world power, however evil and compromised under its communist KGB leader Vladimir Putin. The United States is a mere shell of its prior self under real modern leaders like Presidents John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, to name just a few.

We must act now. Our Founding Fathers pledged their sacred honor, fortunes, and lives to form a new nation under God. They knew that the odds of defeating the British were not great, save for His Divine grace and intervention. Now, 237 years after they signed the Declaration of Independence in my native city of Philadelphia, the nation has come full circle to the tyranny that has been imposed by a new despot, one far more evil than King George III. King George III may have been a greedy “control freak,” but at least he was a Christian. The United States is being run by a Muslim bent on furthering an Islamic caliphate who seeks to destroy our spirituality and the body politic of our Judeo-Christian roots.

Life is not easy. It requires risk and sacrifice. If as a nation we want to restore our freedom, and we are on the verge of being enslaved under Obama’s socialist Muslim inclinations, we must take our fight to a new level. Tea partiers, bikers, construction workers, police officers, school teachers, farmers, truckers, clergy, housewives, husbands, students, doctors, lawyers and all elements of our society who see our nation slipping away into the abyss, must now stand tall and descend on the capital, much like the Egyptians recently did in ousting another radical Muslim, their then president Mohammed Morsi. If the Egyptians can seek to rid their country of the poison of the Muslim Brotherhood without any real history of democracy, then we Americans, who know what democracy is and have practiced it prior to the ascension of the great usurper, can and must succeed.

Obama has now been convicted of having defrauded the American people into electing him as president. Even more so than Nixon during Watergate, he has no legitimacy to remain president and must be forced to resign. If We the People do not demand justice and remove him from office, then we will be furthering his fraud and we will have no one but ourselves to blame for the death of the greatest nation ever to have been on this earth.

In the words of one of our great Founding Fathers and an architect of our Constitution, “we must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.” Benjamin Franklin walked the walk along with the likes of George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson. Let us now walk in their footsteps and march into to Washington, D.C., this November 19th, and rid the nation of the criminal who lurks in our White House. Let us send a message to the other corrupt government officials of all political persuasions, that this is our nation, not theirs. Let’s “Occupy Washington” and restore freedom to our shores![/b]

For one, there was no jury involved. As established, his “Citizens Grand Jury” was not convened by a judge, therefore has no legal authority. As a result, there was no trial under any law. For someone who claims to be defending the Constitution, Mr. Klayman is ignoring the provisions within that grand document for the rule of law, and the establishment of trials.

To support himself, he cited “evidence” given by Michael Zullo of the “Cold Case Posse.” You can see Mr. Zullo’s evidence for yourself here:


Yup, more Birther nonsense. This is the same old racism, the same old threat. As when they were founded in 2002, the Tea Party has been the refuge of racists and bigots. The supporters of the Tea Party just can’t stand the idea of a black man as President. And studies back this idea up.

And now, this, a call to overthrow the democracy of the United States and impose their religiously-driven ideology onto the United States. On a schedule too. November 19th, they plan to march on Washington and, as pointed out in his previous call, they plan to send Obama to “72 Virgins,” a thinly veiled death threat. And, he has numerous allies ready to fight. After all, it was not even a few months ago that the NRA, long a supporter of such violent rhetoric, was caught handing out pamphlets calling for a violent overthrow and the usurping of democracy.

After all, as that flyer said:

ELECTIONS ARE NOT THE SOLUTION TO OUR PROBLEM; ELECTIONS ARE THE PROBLEM!
And when their violent overthrow fails, they will turn it into an insurrection. Some say that they are already doing so, comparing them to anarchists. Other Tea Party supporters have put out the call for armed assaults several times before. They do this whenever a decision does not match their narrow world view. The call is getting louder as time goes on.

And it’s only a matter of time before they snap, and then try and force their flawed and broken view of the world upon us all.
Mon Sep 30, 2013 6:19 pm View user's profile Find all posts by DamnYouAll Send private message
BishopTuTu



Joined17 Jan 2002
Posts43669
LocationMD
Bank4294967295
Bones86572.28 Bones

Post Reply with quote
He and his 'friends' are going to go up there and get arrested or killed.
Mon Sep 30, 2013 6:28 pm View user's profile Find all posts by BishopTuTu Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
bella



Joined17 Jan 2002
Posts25155
LocationSitting on the edge of insanity...
Bank0
Bones20518.48 Bones

Post Reply with quote
Laughing

He needs more people.
Also, too many words. Americans ain't gonna read that 1000 word manifesto.
Bullet points dude.
Mon Sep 30, 2013 7:17 pm View user's profile Find all posts by bella Send private message Send e-mail
faceman68



Joined17 Jan 2002
Posts6035
Bank0
Bones13682.54 Bones

Post Reply with quote
AlterNet [1] / By Alex Henderson [2]
comments_image
10 Past Republicans Who Would Never Make It in Today's Insane GOP

September 26, 2013 |
Forty or 50 years ago, the very thought of Dwight Eisenhower or Richard Nixon being too liberal for the Republican Party would have been hard to fathom. But what was considered conservative in the GOP of the 1950s, '60s or '70s would be considered centrist or moderate today. The power that extreme wingnuts exert on the modern GOP has been obvious during recent events in Congress, especially the ongoing debates surrounding the Affordable Care Act of 2010. Catering to the Tea Party and the GOP’s extremist base, Republicans shut down the government for the first time since 1995-1996.

The fact that killing Obamacare is such an obsession for House and Senate Republicans is ironic in light of the fact that in the past, many Republicans (including Nixon, Sen. Bob Dole and Mitt Romney) were proponents of universal healthcare via the private sector and proposed ideas similar to Obamacare. In fact, a criticism many liberals and progressives have had of Obamacare is that it is too close to Republican ideas of the past. So House Republicans have, in effect, been railing against what used to be a Republican idea.

House Republicans also pandered to the Tea Party when, on September 19, they pushed through a bill that calls for slashing billions of dollars from the food stamp program during the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression. The bill, which passed the house 217-210, was passed largely along party lines: only 15 Republicans voted against it, and not one House Democrat voted for it. In the past, that bill would have encountered a lot more Republican opposition; it’s hard to imagine Nelson Rockefeller, Thomas E. Dewey or Dwight D. Eisenhower favoring so deep an assault on the social safety net. But there is little room for either moderation or compassion in the GOP of 2013.

American politics have evolved in such a way that in 2013, the United States has two main political parties: a very centrist, even center-right party (the Democrats) and a hard-right authoritarian party (the Republicans). GOP strategists may say they are the party of Abraham Lincoln, Dwight D. Eisenhower and Teddy Roosevelt, but none of those presidents would get very far in today’s GOP—certainly not at the national level. The GOP has become the party of Ted Cruz, Iowa Rep. Steve King, Rick Santorum and Virginia gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli. Here are 10 Republicans who would actually be hated if they were trying to make it in today's GOP.

1. Richard Nixon

The word “liberal” was seldom used in connection with Richard Nixon in the late 1960s or early '70s. Nixon was a paranoid Cold War anti-communist and uptight moralist who helped push the U.S. Supreme Court to the right, railed against pornography and defeated Democrat Hubert Humphrey in the presidential election of 1968 by helping to usher in the GOP’s “Southern strategy” (which was designed to win over racist Southern whites who had left the Democratic Party because of the civil rights movement and LBJ’s Great Society). Nevertheless, there are many things about Nixon that would make him persona non grata in the GOP of 2013.

Nixon strengthened social security benefits, supported elements of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, and was instrumental in the creation of both the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in 1970. But perhaps Nixon’s greatest sin, in the minds of modern Republicans and the Tea Party, would be his support of universal healthcare. In 1974, Nixon and Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts worked out a healthcare reform deal. Kennedy, at first, proposed a single-payer healthcare system along the lines of Canada and the U.K., but when it became obvious he didn’t have the votes for that, the plan Kennedy and Nixon agreed upon would have been similar to the Affordable Care Act of 2010 but with more generous provisions. (“Nixoncare” was derailed by the Watergate scandal and Nixon’s resignation in 1974.) So when it came to healthcare reform, Nixon was to the left of President Barack Obama and way to the left of Paul Ryan or the Tea Party.

2. Earl Warren

To the Christian Right, the Warren Court of 1953-1969 went out of its way to erode family values in the United States. But Chief Justice Earl Warren was not a Democrat. He was a Republican ex-governor of California who was nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court by a Republican president: Dwight D. Eisenhower. The Warren Court handed down a lot of decisions that social conservatives detest, including the 1965 ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut (a right-to-privacy decision that struck down a Connecticut law forbidding the use of contraceptives by married couples), 1969’s Stanley v. Georgia decision (which said that mere possession of explicit porn is not a crime even if it is obscene) and the landmark 1957 ruling in Roth v. the United States. Roth established a whole new definition of obscenity that made it much more difficult to get an obscenity conviction for sexually explicit material. Christian Right activist Phyllis Schlafly, a major critic of the Roth decision, has complained that “the flood of pornography started with the Warren Court.”

These days, there is no way a Republican president would nominate someone as socially liberal as Earl Warren for the Supreme Court—and if a Republican who held Warren’s views ran for president, the Christian Right would see to it that he didn’t make it through the primary.

3. Dwight D. Eisenhower

Liz Cheney and many other neocons love to paint President Obama as a pacifist who is soft on national defense. This is ludicrous in light of the fact that Obama gave the order to kill Osama bin Laden in 2011 and ordered 17,000 more troops deployed in Afghanistan in 2009. But to neocons, the military-industrial complex can never be large enough or aggressive enough.

On January 17, 1961, it was none other than outgoing President Dwight D. Eisenhower who brought the term military-industrial complex into the public consciousness during his farewell speech. Eisenhower was hardly anti-military: he was a five-star general during World War II. But his words served as a warning against jingoism and a belligerent foreign policy. These days, no Republican would get very far in a presidential primary if he or she said what Eisenhower said 52 years ago: “We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.”

4. Barry Goldwater

When Barry Goldwater ran for president against Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964, he suffered a landslide defeat: Johnson won 486 electoral votes, Goldwater a mere 52. A key factor in Goldwater’s defeat was the Johnson campaign’s ability to paint Goldwater as a warmonger who would get the U.S. into a nuclear war (which is ironic in light of how greatly LBJ escalated the country’s involvement in the Vietnam War). But even though Goldwater was considered an arch-conservative in the 1950s and '60s, he became quite critical of the GOP’s direction in the 1980s and '90s—and a key factor was his disdain for the Christian Right.

These days, it is impossible to get through a Republican presidential primary without pandering to the Christian Right, but when the Rev. Jerry Falwell felt that Sandra Day O’Connor was too socially liberal for the U.S. Supreme Court, Goldwater angrily responded, “Every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass.” Goldwater denounced Pat Robertson as a dangerous extremist, and he had no problem with gay men serving in the military. In 1996, Goldwater told Sen. Bob Dole: “We’re the new liberals of the Republican Party. Can you imagine that?”

5. Nelson Rockefeller

Nelson Rockefeller, who served as governor of New York State from 1959–'73 and as vice-president under Gerald Ford from 1974-'77, wasn’t perfect by any means. He supported New York State’s Rockefeller drug laws, which brought about draconian prison sentences for nonviolent drug offenses. But many of his positions—pro-New Deal, pro-choice, pro-Medicaid, pro-environment—resulted in Rockefeller being labeled the "leader of the northeastern wing of the Republican Party.” The term “Rockefeller Republican” came to symbolize Republicans who were liberal-leaning or at least centrist.

In the 1960s and '70s, some GOP strategists argued that a party that could accommodate politicians as different as Nelson Rockefeller and Barry Goldwater was healthy because of its diversity. But those days are long gone, and today, Rockefeller would have a very hard time getting ahead in a party where Michelle Bachmann and Steve King are considered role models.

6. Theodore Roosevelt

If Teddy Roosevelt were alive today, many of the corporatists in the modern GOP (and some corporatist Democrats as well) would accuse him of being anti-business and anti-capitalist. But Roosevelt was neither: he simply wanted corporations to behave more ethically. Roosevelt served as vice-president under President William McKinley and became president in 1901, when McKinley was assassinated; he went on to defeat Democrat Alton B. Parker in the election of 1904.

When Roosevelt was in the White House, he had a reputation for being pro-union and anti-monopoly and could be vehemently critical of large corporations. A strong proponent of anti-trust laws, he firmly believed that government should step in to break up corporations into smaller companies when they become monopolies. One can only imagine how livid Roosevelt would be over the bankster bailouts of 2008 and the phrase “too big to fail.” Indeed, many of Roosevelt’s statements about mega-corporations and monopolies sound a lot like what one would hear at an Occupy Wall Street demonstration.

8. Thomas E. Dewey

Before Nelson Rockefeller came to be recognized as the ideological leader of the liberal/centrist northeastern faction of the Republican Party, that position was unofficially held by Thomas E. Dewey (who served as governor of New York State from 1943-'54). There are some things about Dewey that the Republicans of 2013 might like: he was a strong supporter of the death penalty, and when he was a special prosecutor in New York City in the 1930s, Dewey aggressively shut down numerous houses of prostitution.

But for modern-day Republicans, Dewey’s unforgivable sin would be his support of parts of the New Deal. Dewey was an outspoken supporter of social security and unemployment insurance, and in a 1949 speech, he warned fellow Republicans that if they campaigned on shredding the social safety net, “you can bury the Republican Party as the deadest pigeon in the country.” Dewey ran for president twice, losing to FDR in 1944 and Harry Truman in 1948. But today, his chances of winning the GOP’s nomination in a presidential primary would be slim and none.

8. Gerald Ford

In 1974, many Democrats were furious with President Gerald Ford for granting Richard Nixon a full and unconditional pardon for his activities in the Watergate scandal. But there were many things about Ford (who lost to Democrat Jimmy Carter in the 1976 presidential race) that would make it impossible for him to win a GOP presidential primary today. Ford offered a conditional amnesty program for Americans who had dodged the draft during the Vietnam War, which wouldn’t sit well with today’s neocons. The Christian Right still hates Ford for his support of the Equal Rights Amendment and his position on abortion. Although Ford opposed the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, he considered himself pro-choice and said he favored a “constitutional amendment that would permit each one of the 50 states to make the choice."



9. Raymond P. Shafer

When Richard Nixon asked Pennsylvania Gov. Raymond P. Shafer to be his running mate in the presidential election of 1968, his reasoning was clear: Shafer was known for being a northeastern Rockefeller Republican, and Nixon believed Shafer would bring some balance to the ticket and increase his chances of winning. But Shafer, a close ally of Nelson Rockefeller, declined Nixon’s offer (Spiro Agnew became his running mate instead).

The fact that Nixon sought a Rockefeller Republican as his running mate is quite a contrast to John McCain picking Sarah Palin in 2008 or Mitt Romney picking Paul Ryan in 2012. These days, someone as centrist as Shafer wouldn’t be considered for a GOP presidential ticket. Not only did Shafer support elements of the New Deal and call for more spending on public assistance in Pennsylvania, but in 1972, when Nixon appointed him as chairman of the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse, Shafer came out in support of marijuana decriminalization.

10. Arlen Specter

For many years, Arlen Specter was in an interesting position: he was a centrist Republican senator from Pennsylvania who was quite popular in overwhelmingly Democratic Philadelphia. Specter (who started out as a Democrat but was a Republican from 1965-2009 before becoming a Democrat again) was on friendly terms with many Democratic politicians, including former Philadelphia Mayor Ed Rendell.

But eventually, many of Specter’s positions—he was pro-choice, supported affirmative action and favored raising the minimum wage—made him much too moderate for his party. In 2004, he barely survived a GOP senatorial primary challenge from hard-right Pat Toomey, and in 2009, he returned to the Democratic Party rather than face Toomey in the 2010 primary (only to lose to Joe Sestak in the Democratic primary and watch Toomey narrowly defeat Sestak in the general election). Arlen Specter didn’t leave the Republican Party; the Republican Party left him.

See more stories tagged with:
gop [3],
republicans [4]
Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/10-past-republicans-who-would-never-make-it-todays-insane-gop
Links:
[1] http://alternet.org
[2] http://www.alternet.org/authors/alex-henderson
[3] http://www.alternet.org/tags/gop
[4] http://www.alternet.org/tags/republicans-0
[5] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Thu Oct 03, 2013 5:20 pm View user's profile Find all posts by faceman68 Send private message Send e-mail
DamnYouAll



Joined08 Mar 2005
Posts9973
LocationThrowin' some D's on it!!!
Bank0
Bones66448.94 Bones

Post Reply with quote
Kevin Jackson: ‘America Needs A White Republican President’
Oct 15, 2013 By Kirsten West Savali

In an article on his blog, The Black Sphere, Tea-Party activist Kevin Jackson opines that intra-racism has intensified in the United States since the election of President Barack Obama and, because of this, the nation needs a White, Republican president.


According to Jackson, it is blind, Black loyalty and not virulent, White racism that is fueling the ugliness that we’ve seen in the past six years. Black critics of President Obama are often called racists or Uncle Toms by their own people, unable to criticize the president without facing the wrath.

While some legitimate Black critics of President Obama are often — and erroneously — lumped in with conservatives who would rather choke on their own bigotry rather than accept a Black president, Jackson uses the intellectually dishonest argument that a White Republican would solve the racial divide we are currently facing, simply by virtue of being White.

Now ain’t that a kick in the head.

Doing the traditional GOP side-step, Jackson argues that Black people united in their quest for civil rights would be able to recognize the face of the government enemy, if he (or presumably she) were White, while conveniently forgetting that White supremacy — in Black or White face — is the backbone of the Tea-Party he represents.

Clearly suffering from a case of Romnesia, or the effects of Ted Cruz‘s spiked tea, Jackson says nothing of Nixon’s Southern Strategy, which changed the core and the motives of the Republican Party; nor does he mention the fact that President Obama has continued and expanded several of George W. Bush‘s policies, nor that The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a conservative healthcare law – miles away from the single payer option that liberals have been fighting so diligently toward.

While none of the above is to be lauded, it clearly shows that the White House (of Representatives) is obstructing the Black president in the White House because of racism, not politics.

And that identity politics and tokenism are flip-sides of the same coin.

Read an excerpt of Jackson’s article below:

[b]Admit it. You want a white Republican president again.

Now before you start feeling like you’re a racist, understand you are not.

Wanting a white Republican president doesn’t make you racist, it just makes you American.

In the pre-black president era, criticizing the president was simply the American thing to do. An exercise of one’s First Amendment right. Criticism had nothing to do with color, because there had never been a black president, or at least one whom people recognized as black.

So to criticize the president meant that you didn’t like his policies.

The election of a recognized black president was not supposed to change anything. In fact, it was supposed to (1) ease any perceived racial tensions, and (2) allow the government to focus on legislating without race. So America would be more free than ever to discuss the issues.

Not the case. And that is why having a white Republican president is best for the country.

Consider that nobody is ever accused of being racist for disagreeing with white presidents. Mexicans disagreed with most white Republican presidents over America’s immigration policy. Many deranged Mexicans believe we should open the country up to them, some saying that much of America belongs to Mexico anyway. They are not called racists.
Liberal blacks have disagreed with most Republican presidents since Eisenhower, yet these blacks are not considered racists. In fact, when blacks had sanity and disagreed with the policies of racist white Democrat presidents, nobody accused black people of being racists.

Fighting for one’s civil rights was not racist then, nor is it racist now. Blacks (and Republicans) were on the side of righteousness, when they disagreed with the racist policies of Andrew Johnson, and adopted by every Democrat president since.

Never has a black person been called racist, because they didn’t like one of the white presidents’ policies. Blacks were just exercising their First Amendment rights to speak freely. Blacks have disagreed with policy positions of about every Republican president in the modern era, including those who have helped them.[/b]
Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:47 pm View user's profile Find all posts by DamnYouAll Send private message
BishopTuTu



Joined17 Jan 2002
Posts43669
LocationMD
Bank4294967295
Bones86572.28 Bones

Post Reply with quote
That whole fucking article is a LIE. When Bush was President if people said ANYTHING contrary to him they were labeled UNAMERICAN or even a TERRORIST.

The dude who wrote that article is a racist and the people he's talking to are racists too.
Tue Oct 15, 2013 7:24 pm View user's profile Find all posts by BishopTuTu Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Display posts from previous:    

Reply to topic    Afrocentric Online Forum Index » Da Corner All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 123, 124, 125  Next
Page 124 of 125

 
Jump to: 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Design by Freestyle XL / Flowers Online.