https://forums.metalsludge.tv/forums/
https://forums.metalsludge.tv/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=270483
brotherplanet wrote:You really should take the word black out and not play the race card. I know many conservatives who hate him and not one of them has ever mentioned his skin color.
In fact, and this surprised me when I first noticed it. Most of the racists I know are Democrats.
Now, I'm not saying there are no Conservative racists, but really, using the race card is kinda lowbrow.
Anyway the short answer is... He's a Democrat.
When Bill Clinton was President he made a comment about the Republicans (especially the ones in Congress) that was spot on...
"They will never forgive me for winning."
I'm old enough to remember the Reagan years. They were against Clinton but they were at least willing to work with him and subordinate their personal feelings to their country's best interests. They hate Obama with a viciously personal passion and would spite us all rather than work for solutions to our problems as it would involve compromise and the possibility of providing Obama with political benefit.brotherplanet wrote:
What??? Are you old enough to remember the Clinton years??? If you're not, I get it, but fucking hell, man.... The conservatives were salivating like a pit bull with rabies when it came to that guy.
Why are you taking this so personally? Are you a conservative Republican despite all your protests to the contrary? This is quite puzzling as you claim to be an Independent.Sorry, but you're the one fixated on race.
Are you really this simpleminded?Seriously, if Obama loses the election are you going to say it's because he's black? That would mean every white person and Latin person and Jewish person and Asian person who voted for him the last time but not this time would have had to miraculously become a racist over the last four years.
I think Obama hates America less than you do, Speddy.Constantine wrote:Most Americans were happy they had a first black president and believed in him. After awhile he proved to be an unamerican muslim communist nazi scum...
Riiigggghht!?!?
Danzig in the Dark wrote:I'm old enough to remember the Reagan years. They were against Clinton but they were at least willing to work with him and subordinate their personal feelings to their country's best interests. They hate Obama with a viciously personal passion and would spite us all rather than work for solutions to our problems as it would involve compromise and the possibility of providing Obama with political benefit.brotherplanet wrote:
What??? Are you old enough to remember the Clinton years??? If you're not, I get it, but fucking hell, man.... The conservatives were salivating like a pit bull with rabies when it came to that guy.
Why are you taking this so personally? Are you a conservative Republican despite all your protests to the contrary? This is quite puzzling as you claim to be an Independent.Sorry, but you're the one fixated on race.
Are you really this simpleminded?Seriously, if Obama loses the election are you going to say it's because he's black? That would mean every white person and Latin person and Jewish person and Asian person who voted for him the last time but not this time would have had to miraculously become a racist over the last four years.
I'm just imagining this.
Now, I'm not saying there are no Conservative racists, but really, using the race card is kinda lowbrow.
Luminiferous wrote:I think Obama hates America less than you do, Speddy.Constantine wrote:Most Americans were happy they had a first black president and believed in him. After awhile he proved to be an unamerican muslim communist nazi scum...
Riiigggghht!?!?
You hate America, it's president and it's people. Your record is quite clear on here Speddy..ConstantlyLying wrote:I always defended America and warned my intelligenmt american friends of the evil waiting upon them.
You're going to keep crying about that Speddy? Stuperload's gone. No tears were shed by me when it vanished. I'm still here. I never left.ConstantlyWhining wrote:So how are doing in your role as a Superload mod Lamenifurious? Everything you touch turns to gold riiiiiigghtt!???!?!?
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=269956&start=30Constantine wrote:Remember when you lied saying you were loyal to Metal Sludge and not a Superload mole?
This is what Republicans say when confronted with their own latent racism. They hate to be confronted with the ugly truth and imply it to be impolite and unseemly to point it out.brotherplanet wrote:Now, I'm not saying there are no Conservative racists, but really, using the race card is kinda lowbrow.
The question was "What Has Obama Done That Has Made Conservatives So Angry?" The answer is still that he is a black Democrat. Obama has even been accused of being a Muslim due to his father, therefore unfit for office. The idea we should discriminate against someone over religious background, that's bigoted too.brotherplanet wrote:Again, since you didn't answer the question... If he loses are you going to say he lost because all the people who helped put him in the White House the last time, but not this time, suddenly became racists?
Dude, the only reason they worked with Clinton was he partnered up with Newt, but you forgot all about the Impeachment???
You forgot the Senate then put him on trial and they had to vote whether or not to THROW HIM OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE!
Remember that?
You've got a serious case of selective memory going on there.
Danzig in the Dark wrote:I'm old enough to remember the Reagan years. They were against Clinton but they were at least willing to work with him and subordinate their personal feelings to their country's best interests. They hate Obama with a viciously personal passion and would spite us all rather than work for solutions to our problems as it would involve compromise and the possibility of providing Obama with political benefit.brotherplanet wrote:
What??? Are you old enough to remember the Clinton years??? If you're not, I get it, but fucking hell, man.... The conservatives were salivating like a pit bull with rabies when it came to that guy.
Why are you taking this so personally? Are you a conservative Republican despite all your protests to the contrary? This is quite puzzling as you claim to be an Independent.Sorry, but you're the one fixated on race.
Are you really this simpleminded?Seriously, if Obama loses the election are you going to say it's because he's black? That would mean every white person and Latin person and Jewish person and Asian person who voted for him the last time but not this time would have had to miraculously become a racist over the last four years.
I'm just imagining this.
No, it's not the answer, it's your lowbrow I have nothing else to say, answer. Sorry, but the race card has been played out so much it doesn't shut people up anymore.. You can't win an argument with it, especially when it's not about race.Danzig in the Dark wrote:This is what Republicans say when confronted with their own latent racism. They hate to be confronted with the ugly truth and imply it to be impolite and unseemly to point it out.brotherplanet wrote:Now, I'm not saying there are no Conservative racists, but really, using the race card is kinda lowbrow.
The question was "What Has Obama Done That Has Made Conservatives So Angry?" The answer is still that he is a black Democrat. Obama has even been accused of being a Muslim due to his father, therefore unfit for office. The idea we should discriminate against someone over religious background, that's bigoted too.brotherplanet wrote:Again, since you didn't answer the question... If he loses are you going to say he lost because all the people who helped put him in the White House the last time, but not this time, suddenly became racists?
Dude, the only reason they worked with Clinton was he partnered up with Newt, but you forgot all about the Impeachment???
You forgot the Senate then put him on trial and they had to vote whether or not to THROW HIM OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE!
Remember that?
You've got a serious case of selective memory going on there.
Danzig in the Dark wrote: I'm old enough to remember the Reagan years. They were against Clinton but they were at least willing to work with him and subordinate their personal feelings to their country's best interests. They hate Obama with a viciously personal passion and would spite us all rather than work for solutions to our problems as it would involve compromise and the possibility of providing Obama with political benefit.
FullMetalWhackit wrote:It's simply the times we live in. It's been a long time since the country has been this polarized. The venom spewed towards W from the left was at least as vicious as what Obama is getting now from the right.
brotherplanet wrote:FullMetalWhackit wrote:It's simply the times we live in. It's been a long time since the country has been this polarized. The venom spewed towards W from the left was at least as vicious as what Obama is getting now from the right.
True. They called his a Fascist and Hitler.
Yes they have.tin00can wrote:brotherplanet wrote:FullMetalWhackit wrote:It's simply the times we live in. It's been a long time since the country has been this polarized. The venom spewed towards W from the left was at least as vicious as what Obama is getting now from the right.
True. They called his a Fascist and Hitler.
And what has the right called Obama? Fascist, socialist, communist, nigger, Muslim, America hater, appeaser, panderer, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, coward, traitor, and on and on.
Except for that little birther issue which you support like a racist dumb ass. Birtherism is a consequence of white people refusing to accept the legitimacy of a black president. Even faced with overwhelming proof, they refuse to accept the fact that Obama is qualified for the office.brotherplanet wrote: Yes they have.
It's even ground, hence Danzig has no argument based on race.
Not yet.brotherplanet wrote:
Sorry... they IMPEACHED Clinton and tried to throw him out of the White House.
They've done NOTHING like that to Obama.
Let the president be duly warned.
Rep. Walter B. Jones Jr., R-N.C., has introduced a resolution declaring that should the president use offensive military force without authorization of an act of Congress, “it is the sense of Congress” that such an act would be “an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor.”
Specifically, Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution reserves for Congress alone the power to declare war, a restriction that has been sorely tested in recent years, including Obama’s authorization of military force in Libya.
In an exclusive WND column, former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo claims that Jones introduced his House Concurrent Resolution 107 in response to startling recent comments from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.
“This week it was Secretary of Defense Panetta’s declaration before the Senate Armed Services Committee that he and President Obama look not to the Congress for authorization to bomb Syria but to NATO and the United Nations,” Tancredo writes. “This led to Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., introducing an official resolution calling for impeachment should Obama take offensive action based on Panetta’s policy statement, because it would violate the Constitution.”
In response to questions from Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., over who determines the proper and legal use of the U.S. military, Panetta said, “Our goal would be to seek international permission and we would … come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress – I think those are issues we would have to discuss as we decide what to do here.”
“Well, I’m almost breathless about that,” Sessions responded, “because what I heard you say is, ‘We’re going to seek international approval, and then we’ll come and tell the Congress what we might do, and we might seek congressional approval.’ And I just want to say to you that’s a big [deal].”
Asked again what was the legal basis for U.S. military force, Panetta suggested a NATO coalition or U.N. resolution.
Sessions was dumbfounded by the answer.
“Well, I’m all for having international support, but I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “They can provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”
The exchange itself can be seen below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... zNwOeyuG84
The full wording of H. Con. Res. 107, which is currently referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, is as follows:
Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a president without prior and clear authorization of an act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.
Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a president without prior and clear authorization of an act of Congress violates Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under Article I, Section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.
Really? When was Bush called a nigger?brotherplanet wrote:Yes they have.tin00can wrote:brotherplanet wrote:
True. They called his a Fascist and Hitler.
And what has the right called Obama? Fascist, socialist, communist, nigger, Muslim, America hater, appeaser, panderer, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, coward, traitor, and on and on.
It's even ground, hence Danzig has no argument based on race.
it's actually ridiculous and disgusting.FullMetalWhackit wrote:It's simply the times we live in. It's been a long time since the country has been this polarized. The venom spewed towards W from the left was at least as vicious as what Obama is getting now from the right.
bill maher is not upset, he's so limp on pushing buttons against obama.gtrjay wrote:Not to sound like a whiny cunt, but did anyone look at video clip? I know its 4 min, but it seems it was best described why Ted Nugent and others are upset with Obama, when people like Bill Maher are upset with Obama.
How can you call him a socialist when he has caved or compromised (dirty word) on almost everything!
Health Care - we would have had a public option, we didn't
Legalized Weed - we didn't
1% pay higher taxes - they don't
Clean energy policies - we don't
less drilling for oil (environmentalist cause) - he is drilling more
Point is, if you get to call him a socialist, shouldn't we at least have gotten the stuff that maybe, maybe would make that nasty word a little more true?
uh. (looks side to side...)Danzig in the Dark wrote: Really? When was Bush called a nigger?
absolutely fabulous wrote:bill maher is not upset, he's so limp on pushing buttons against obama.gtrjay wrote:Not to sound like a whiny cunt, but did anyone look at video clip? I know its 4 min, but it seems it was best described why Ted Nugent and others are upset with Obama, when people like Bill Maher are upset with Obama.
How can you call him a socialist when he has caved or compromised (dirty word) on almost everything!
Health Care - we would have had a public option, we didn't
Legalized Weed - we didn't
1% pay higher taxes - they don't
Clean energy policies - we don't
less drilling for oil (environmentalist cause) - he is drilling more
Point is, if you get to call him a socialist, shouldn't we at least have gotten the stuff that maybe, maybe would make that nasty word a little more true?
Health Care - we would have had a public option, we didn't well, could have done it with a majority of demos in congress and the house. don't see how the repubs are to blame for that...
Legalized Weed - we didn't. he never promised that! he also didn't promise gay marriage, but people ran with the idea he would. why??[/color]
1% pay higher taxes - they don't. he extended the tax cut. why? he didn't have to.
Clean energy policies - we don't. isn't it amazing how much he plunked into that, yet, it's not successful. wtf.
less drilling for oil (environmentalist cause) - he is drilling more
, most drilling contracts takes years to develop before fruition happens. how many restrictions did he propose in his presidency?[/color]
absolutely fabulous wrote:uh. (looks side to side...)Danzig in the Dark wrote: Really? When was Bush called a nigger?
he's been called every type of name.
This. While most won't say shit about it, his color antagonizes many registered republicans that much more. They had it out for him the moment that they realized he won. The birthers went batshit crazy, and a few idiots were even predicting a race war shortly after his inauguration. They were mostly the same few that were yelling "the sky is falling" during Clinton's time, always talking about the New World Order and gun grabbing, yet 18 years later, there was no New World Order takeover and everybody still has their guns.Danzig in the Dark wrote:He's a black Democrat.
People hated Bush for what he did or was believed he perpetrated. That is reflected in the epithets he garnered, like Fascist, warmonger and murderer. Republicans hate Obama for what he is or what they perceive him to be. That is reflected in the epithets he garners, like nigger, Muslim and foreign invader.brotherplanet wrote:Danzig... I love your "not yet," comment. Let us know when it actually happens.
absolutely fabulous wrote:uh. (looks side to side...)Danzig in the Dark wrote: Really? When was Bush called a nigger?
he's been called every type of name.
Shhh... All that stuff doesn't count here. "Nazi!" Hitler!" Fascist!" Those words mean nothing. It only counts if someone can use the race card... Silly you! Just ask danzig and joey, they'll tell you.