First time visitor? Learn more.

Obama did not (and still doesn’t) view himself as an American

by Rodan ( 64 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Communism, Fascism, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Liberal Fascism, Multiculturalism, Progressives, Socialism, Tranzis at May 9th, 2012 - 8:00 am

My impression of Obama is that he never had an American mindset. His formative years were spent in Indonesia, where his nanny claimed he admired 3rd world Liberation Indonesian strong man, Sukarno. His campaign rhetoric is indistinguishable from Juan Peron, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, Idi Amin and Hugo Chavez. Obama does not see himself as an American president, but as some global divine philosopher king in the mold of Plato’s The Republic. He has a Pharaonic attitude that makes him above being American.

A new biography that interviews college friends confirms Obama’s non American mindset. He had an Internationalist mindset. Even more startling, Obama did not identify with being black. It was only when he decided to get into politics that he discovered his black identity.

The excerpt focuses on Obama’s brief time in New York after his graduation from Columbia University. The son of a Kenyan father and an American expatriate mother, Obama emerges as a man questioning whether he viewed himself, or wanted to be viewed by others, as an American. Not in a citizenship sense — Obama was born in the United States and that was that — but in the sense of how he saw the world and wanted to be seen by it.

Obama had a lot of Pakistani friends; Maraniss writes that if Obama and his girlfriend socialized as a couple, “it was almost always with the Pakistanis.” Obama appeared to identify with his friends as fellow non-Americans. “For years when Barack was around them, he seemed to share their attitudes as sophisticated outsiders who looked at politics from an international perspective,” Maraniss writes. “He was one of them, in that sense.”

But Obama was ambitious. Appalled by the “dirty deeds” of “Reagan and his minions” (as he wrote in “Dreams from My Father”), Obama became increasingly interested in, as Maraniss writes, “gaining power in order to change things.” He couldn’t do that as an international guy hanging around with his Pakistani friends; he needed to become an American.

So he did. One of those Pakistani friends, Beenu Mahmood, saw a major change in Obama. Mahmood calls Obama “the most deliberate person I ever met in terms of constructing his own identity,” according to Maraniss. The time after college, Mahmood says, “was an important period for him, first the shift from not international but American, number one, and then not white, but black.”

Obama recently invoked Reagan’s name to bash Republicans. Yet his hatred of Ronald Reagan is what motivated him to get into politics. He didn’t identify with being black and he adopted a black identity for politics. Clearly Obama is a chameleon and does not view himself as an American. He views himself as a citizen of the world. That’s why he had a campaign stop in Berlin when he was running in 2008.

At this blog we had Obama pegged. He comes from the 3rd World Liberation wing of the Transnationalist Progressive Movement.  Mitt Romney should use these facts about Obama’s mindset against him.

Bonus: Here’s a video of Mitt Romney mocking the fictional character Julia, created by the Obama Regime.

Could this be the Obama campaign’s Murphy Brown moment? I am starting to think this election is 1992 in reverse.

Tags: ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

64 Responses to “Obama did not (and still doesn’t) view himself as an American”
( jump to bottom )

  1. MikeA
    1 | May 9, 2012 8:32 am

    I love that first picture. Where did you get it?


  2. 2 | May 9, 2012 8:34 am

    Obama himself said he considers himself a “Citizen of the World”, implying that merely being American isn’t good enough for the likes of him. There was plenty of ammunition against Obama that McCain left unfired. Will Romney use it? Only time will tell. I think we can win this one if we try. If Romney wants it bad enough to fight for it like he fought for the nomination.

    And as an aside: we got you, motherfucker! To Dick Lugar. Mourdock killed him last night! That bodes well for the November election. Now if we’ll win the June recall election in Wisconsin…


  3. 3 | May 9, 2012 8:44 am

    I actually visited that Julia site. The damn cartoon character doesn’t even have a fucking FACE!


  4. 4 | May 9, 2012 8:47 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    60%, motherfucker!


  5. 5 | May 9, 2012 8:54 am

    @ Macker:

    I know! That has to be nearly unprecedented. I love it. That bodes well for us in the fall. Indiana should fall to Romney, and Romney might even have coat-tails there. Or maybe Mourdock will have coat-tails and pull Romney across the line. Indiana is a traditionally Red State. That is another small chucnk of the Electoral College that Romney can count on. I am beginning to be hopeful about the fall. I do think we can win it all, if Romney and the Republican Establishment fight to win. We’ll see how that goes…


  6. citizen_q
    6 | May 9, 2012 9:00 am

    It was only when he decided to get into politics that he discovered his black identity

    And discovered the many advantages of being an “oppressed” minority that could be leveraged to advantage.


  7. 7 | May 9, 2012 9:01 am

    @ Macker:
    Another one of the faceless masses that vote democrap.


  8. 8 | May 9, 2012 9:05 am

    @ MikeA:

    I googled Obama Chavez.


  9. 10 | May 9, 2012 9:06 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Last night was a huge message. It was a big defeat for Wilsonian Tranzi Republicans. McCain and his gal pal Ms. Lindsey are crying.


  10. 11 | May 9, 2012 9:07 am

    @ citizen_q:

    I did that as a headline last night. Its too funy!


  11. 12 | May 9, 2012 9:08 am

    Macker wrote:

    The damn cartoon character doesn’t even have a fucking FACE!

    That is the way the Democrats view their voters: faceless masses of dependants, incapable of self-sustaning independance. They despise the individual, and encourage people to identify withBalkanized groups that they play against one another in a zero-sum game to win votes.


  12. 13 | May 9, 2012 9:11 am

    @ Rodan:

    Last night was huge! I also read on Breitbart that Walker in Wisconsin got about as many votes as all of the Democrat candidates combined! That bodes well. I am starting to feel somewhat good about this election. Romney looks like he will fight. It is early yet, and he may yet self-destruct, but he is making a credible start of the game. Old Snakehead is worried. Anything that worries Carville encourages me.


  13. 14 | May 9, 2012 9:13 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    That’s why Biden’s Gay Marriage comment blew up in their face. Obama is damn if he does, damn if he don’t.


  14. 15 | May 9, 2012 9:17 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    This is 92 in reverse. Romney is sticking to the economy and fiscal issues. Its the Democrats who are playing social issues and they have revealed themselves as extremists. I always said, let them play the social issues card because their true agenda gets unmask. The Republicans should sit back and let the Democrats hang themselves.

    Romney on Hannity last night said he wants to focus on helping the Middle Class and not Wall Street. Some Conservatives may not like that, but that is brilliant rhetoric.

    The one thing that worries me is the electoral college advantage the Dems have. They call it the Blue Wall. That’s what Romney should focus on, breaking the Blue wall.


  15. citizen_q
    16 | May 9, 2012 9:17 am

    @ Rodan:
    Sorry been busy this morning in meat space. Just got on-line.


  16. 17 | May 9, 2012 9:21 am

    @ citizen_q:

    Oh no, just pointing out I did that! That is hysterical! A criminal gets 40% against Obama!

    :lol:


  17. citizen_q
    18 | May 9, 2012 9:25 am

    LOL! What a great day! Here is another item on Drudge from Breitbart.

    Elizabeth Warren Ancestor Rounded Up Cherokees For Trail of Tears

    For over a quarter of a century, Elizabeth Warren has described herself as a Native American. When recently asked to provide evidence of her ancestry, she pointed to an unsubstantiated claim on an 1894 Oklahoma Territory marriage license application by her great-great grand uncle William J. Crawford that his mother, O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford, Ms. Warren’s great-great-great grandmother, was a Cherokee.

    After researching her story, it is obvious that her “family lore” is just fiction.

    As I pointed out in my article here on Sunday, no evidence supports this claim. O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford had no Cherokee heritage, was listed as “white” in the Census of 1860, and was most likely half Swedish and half English, Scottish, or German, or some combination thereof. (Note, the actual 1894 marriage license makes no claim of Cherokee ancestry.)

    But the most stunning discovery about the life of O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford is that her husband, Ms. Warren’s great-great-great grandfather, was apparently a member of the Tennessee Militia who rounded up Cherokees from their family homes in the Southeastern United States and herded them into government-built stockades in what was then called Ross’s Landing (now Chattanooga), Tennessee—the point of origin for the horrific Trail of Tears, which began in January, 1837.


  18. citizen_q
    19 | May 9, 2012 9:27 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ citizen_q:
    Oh no, just pointing out I did that! That is hysterical! A criminal gets 40% against Obama!

    The real question is who is the worse criminal?


  19. 20 | May 9, 2012 9:30 am

    @ Rodan:

    Yeah, and Gay MArriage went down to defeat again last night in North Carolina. Obama can’t come out in favor of gay marriage now. He can’t afford to lose NC. OTOH, if he doesn’t, he looks like a hypocrit. “Evolving” position doesn’t cut it. Everybody knows that means he just won’t say his position before the election. HE also has to know that gay marriage is a loser in the African American community. They won;t vote for Romney, but they will stay home. In truth, Obama has given them no reason to vote for him other than his skin color. Form some, most even, that will be enough, but they might decide to stay home because of gay marriage if Obama comes out for it. And I read the other day that Gay Money was replacing Wall Street money in the DNC. Oh, my! Obama is damned no matter what he does on the issue. I am sure he wishes it would just go away, but it won’t. And it is a safe social conservative position for Romney to take. Anybody that would vote against him based on his position against gay marriage wouldn’t vote for a Republican anyway. I think the Democrats are going to regret bringing the issue up. They are like Wiley Coyote! Everytime they turn around they hit a wall.


  20. 21 | May 9, 2012 9:36 am

    @ Rodan:

    The Blue Wall is real, but Obama faces the same thing in the South. With the exception of Virginia, North Carolina, and possibly Florida, the South is solid Republican. That includes Texas to offset California’s obscene number of Electoral votes. I don’t think this will be a blow-out election like Dick Morris does (he thinks Obama is toast). I think it’ll be very close no matter who wins. But I am encouraged. Last night was a big win for the Right. Next month in Wisconsin will be a major decision, one way or another. If Walker wins, it’ll be huge. It puts a chink in that Blue Wall if Walker wins.


  21. 22 | May 9, 2012 10:11 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    With the exception of Virginia, North Carolina, and possibly Florida.

    I would feel better if it was the Democrats on the defensive. yet once again we are on the defensive.


  22. 23 | May 9, 2012 10:12 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    If I were Romney I would run this Biography in ads in Black districts.

    first the shift from not international but American, number one, and then not white, but black.

    That is very damning. Obama only views himself Black for political reasons.


  23. 24 | May 9, 2012 10:22 am

    @ Rodan:

    It might hurt him a little, but I don’t really see wasting the effort to persue black votes this cycle. The 5-10% of Conservative blacks will vote Republican, and the rest will vote Democrat. The only thing we can do is hope some of them stay home in disgust. What is the black unemployment rate now? 15%? 20%? It is much higher than the white unemployment rate, but I don’t expect that to translate into Republican votes. I think there is much more electoral gold to be had persuing the Latino vote. Unemployment is bad in that community as well, if not as Depression-level spectacularly bad as the black community. People need jobs, not welfare.The need to beat Obama this time around is paramount, and we need to convey that urgency to some traditionally Democat constituencies. Catholics seem a natural pick-up this time around, and that will play in the Latino community as well.


  24. 25 | May 9, 2012 10:34 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I think there is much more electoral gold to be had persuing the Latino vote.

    You get it and I get it. But it seems the Republican Party just decided to wash their hands of the Hispanic vote. Romney played footsie with a very nasty element in the GOP during the primaries. He has alot of bridges to repair. It can be done, but he will have to throw the Nativists under the bus. That’s 15-20% of the GOP. I don’t know how he will do it.

    Bush pulled it off in 04 getting 44% of the Hispanic vote, because the Nativists were marginalized. Now they have power in the GOP and too many Conservatives are scared to take them on. One of the reason I am leaving the Republican party after the election.

    Romney has his work cut out in the Hispanic community.

    Too many in the GOP think they can rack up numbers with the White vote. That’s crap since 40% of Whites are Marxists or Progressives. There’s a ceiling there. the GOP needs 40% of the Hispanic vote to win. That’s what happened in 04 and 2010.

    It can be done, Bush proved it, but the GOP was different back then.


  25. lobo91
    26 | May 9, 2012 10:42 am

    @ Rodan:

    Personally, I find the entire discussion distasteful.

    I think we should leave the identity group politics to the left.

    We should be able to get 100% of the non-America-hating vote.


  26. 27 | May 9, 2012 10:42 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    The only thing we can do is hope some of them stay home in disgust.

    That’s why I think it should be pointed out that Obama only claims to be Black for political reasons. They should set up some pac and run ads in the Black Community questioning Obama’s Blackness!


  27. 28 | May 9, 2012 10:49 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    I think we should leave the identity group politics to the left.

    I actually do agree with that. But the Left plays that game. Some in the GOP do it as well by playing up White resentment. The identity shit is nasty and all it does is divide people.

    The way to end identity politics is to eliminate race/ethnicity from the census. That’s how you do away with it.

    We should be able to get 100% of the non-America-hating vote.

    The sad part is that good 40-45% of the public hates this country. That is due to the Left controlling Academia and the Culture. Winning elections is not enough. The Right needs to take over school boards and College Campus. We need to win back the popular culture as well.

    We need to adopt the Left’s view of politics. Conservatives are always looking for an Austerlitz, one glorious win. The Left uses Mao’s people’s war strategies. They will accept temporary defeats as as long as they win in the end. A case in point is the Equal Rights Amendment. They are bringing it back!


  28. 29 | May 9, 2012 10:51 am

    We get a shout out from teh Other McCain this morning. Pretty cool.


  29. 30 | May 9, 2012 10:55 am

    @ lobo91:

    You’ve got to win elections to govern. It really is that simple. We can be all nobel, and pretend that these divisions don’t exist, and lose, or we can try to win I’m not saying that we have to pander or do something unethical, but things like running Spanish-language ads in Florida are a no-brainer. It is the way the game is played now days. If Romney is really in this to win it, he’ll play every angle that offers him an advantage. You can rest assured that Obama will.


  30. lobo91
    31 | May 9, 2012 11:01 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I have no problem with running ads in Spanish in markets where it might be useful.

    I do have a problem with running ads promising people some particular goodies that you think their ethnic group wants.


  31. 32 | May 9, 2012 11:01 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    See 28.

    The way to end all this is to eliminate all racial and ethnic classifications from the census.

    The Right needs to take a long term view of politics. Too often Conservatives are looking for some Austerlitz knock blow to the Left. Progressives use Mao’s people’s war strategy and can accept temporary defeats as long as they can achieve their objective.

    Even if we win in 2012, the war is not over. They control Academia and the Culture.


  32. 33 | May 9, 2012 11:02 am

    @ lobo91:

    As I said in my 28, eliminate racial/ethnic classifications from the census. That will begin to end the group stuff.


  33. 34 | May 9, 2012 11:08 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Even if we win in 2012, the war is not over.

    Absolutely. This is all-out total war. We have to defeat them utterly. One of the most positive things of the 2010 election was how many Statehouses we won. We need to go further. We need to get down to the school-board and County COmmission level politicians. These are people who get elected in small-turnout elections, and yet they are people who make decisions that impact our lives in some ways the most. We need to fight the Left at every level of our society.


  34. lobo91
    35 | May 9, 2012 11:09 am

    @ Rodan:

    Even if we win in 2012, the war is not over.

    If we don’t win, the chances of an actual war go way up.


  35. lobo91
    36 | May 9, 2012 11:14 am

    MSNBC is calling Lugar’s primary loss a “Republican Rebellion”


  36. 37 | May 9, 2012 11:17 am

    @ lobo91:

    Yup, it will be the 99% vs. 1%, but not in the way the Left thinks it will be.


  37. 38 | May 9, 2012 11:18 am

    @ lobo91:

    :lol:

    They must be lamenting his loss.


  38. 39 | May 9, 2012 11:18 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    Even if we win in 2012, the war is not over.
    If we don’t win, the chances of an actual war go way up.

    Way way up.


  39. 40 | May 9, 2012 11:19 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    We need to adopt Mao’s people war mentality the Left has. Too many on our side think an Austerlitz will do in the Left. Think of all the defeats the Left has suffered in election, yet they always manage to get their agenda through. They are a patient and determined for.


  40. 41 | May 9, 2012 11:20 am

    @ doriangrey:

    Hey do you agree with what I wrote in my 28?

    Conservatives are always looking for an Austerlitz, one glorious win. The Left uses Mao’s people’s war strategies. They will accept temporary defeats as as long as they win in the end.

    WHat’s your take on my observation.


  41. lobo91
    42 | May 9, 2012 11:21 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ lobo91:

    They must be lamenting his loss.

    They are. Mourdock is on now, and the idiot host is trying to say that it’s somehow illegitimate for him to stick to conservative principles, since “60 percent of Americans aren’t conservatives.”

    I wonder if it’s occurred to him that about 65% of Americans aren’t liberals?


  42. 43 | May 9, 2012 11:26 am

    @ lobo91:

    I wonder if it’s occurred to him that about 65% of Americans aren’t liberals?

    They live in a bubble and think most AMericans are Leftists.

    I was doing some reading and what turned the tide against Lugar was that his main residence was in DC. Mourdock used that against him and that’s where Lugar’s downfall is.

    Make no mistake, this was a huge win for the Tea party. I was celebrating last night. Murdock is a state Treasure so he has is a known quantity in Indiana. The more Conservatives elected to the House and Senate, the more Romney will have to govern from the Right.


  43. lobo91
    44 | May 9, 2012 11:30 am

    @ Rodan:

    I was doing some reading and what turned the tide against Lugar was that his main residence was in DC.

    That’s his only residence.

    The address on his Indiana drivers license is for a house he sold in the late ’70s.


  44. 45 | May 9, 2012 11:31 am

    @ lobo91:

    It is more like 75% of Americans aren’t self-described “Liberals”. The Leftist viewpoint is magnified by the power of the MFM and academia. They are really a minority of the population. I think it is interesting to watch the Left veer farther and farther away from the political middle in order to please their various factions. Look at their persuit of gay marriage. 30 States have now outlawed it in some manner or another, including Liberal California, but that doesn’t deter them at all from pushing it. We’ll see if Romney decids to make any hay with that. I’d think at least a strong State’s Rights position on the issue would be advantageous to him. They might not like that in Massachuttes, but if Romney wins, he’ll be the anomoly candidate that wins while losing his home State. Because there is almost no way he’ll win Massachuttes. If he does, Obama is in desperate trouble…


  45. 46 | May 9, 2012 11:34 am

    @ lobo91:

    I see you knew about that issue. That really was what got Mourdock’s momentum going.


  46. 47 | May 9, 2012 11:40 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I’d think at least a strong State’s Rights position on the issue would be advantageous to him.

    That’s all he should say and just hammering on the economy/fiscal issues. Let the Democrats waste their time with Gay Marriage.


  47. lobo91
    48 | May 9, 2012 11:44 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I think they vastly overestimate the number of gay people, too. They’re an almost insignificantly small minority group, but since they’re vastly over-represented in the media and entertainment industries, they’re able to raise their profile.


  48. 49 | May 9, 2012 11:46 am

    @ lobo91:

    The Left lives in an elitist bubble.


  49. lobo91
    50 | May 9, 2012 11:46 am

    Now they’re talking about how it’s going to look for Obama to accept the Dem nomination at a venue named for Bank of America, in a right to work state that just passed a ban on gay marriage.


  50. 51 | May 9, 2012 11:51 am

    @ Rodan:

    An interesting take on gay marriage from the Washington Examiner:

    The bottom line is that same-sex marriage advocates are asking President Obama, who has been very supportive of other LGBT issues, to endorse a policy that remains unsupported as a single issue, low on the priority list for American voters, and something he can only affect from the sidelines. Which is why endorsing gay marriage doesn’t make sense for Obama, despite pressure for him to do so.

    A messy convention fight about an issue only far-left liberals care about would mean general election death for Obama. He has to make this issue disappear, and the sooner he does it the better.

    We, OTOH, don’t want this issue to go away. It shouldn’t be our primary focus, but any time we can undermine Obama on the issue we should. If we get a real debate moderator, this would be an excellent position for Romney to draw a distinction between himself and Obama. We probably will get lousy debate(s). I am figuring that Obama will only do one, with rules so advantageous to him (and moderators like George Stephenopolous who are totally his people) that we almost might as well not have it. That is another place that Romney can possibly shine. He should make the debates an issue. What is Obama hiding from?


  51. 52 | May 9, 2012 11:51 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ doriangrey:
    Hey do you agree with what I wrote in my 28?
    Conservatives are always looking for an Austerlitz, one glorious win. The Left uses Mao’s people’s war strategies. They will accept temporary defeats as as long as they win in the end.
    WHat’s your take on my observation.

    Yea, I would say that is accurate to a degree. There is one flaw in your reasoning though. You cannot win any war, if you do not know you are fighting a way, just as you cannot defeat an enemy you will not or cannot identify.

    Conservatives by and large have gone to the exact same public schools that liberal progressives went to and just like the liberals were indoctrinated in those schools.

    You can see the brutal evidence of that indoctrination when you bring up the subject of Senator Joesph McCarthy, who nearly as many conservatives still believe was an evil man as liberal progressives, despite history having 100 percent vindicated him and shown that he was 100 percent right.

    McCarthy isn’t the only thing (not by a long shot) that conservatives have been brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing. Most conservatives have been indoctrinated into believing that blovated opinion aside, the Mainstream Media (formerly the Fourth Estate) can still be trusted to deliver “Hard News” truthfully.

    They have been brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing that Thomas Jefferson’s “Wall of Separation” while perhaps not literally in the United States Constitution can none the less be found their metaphorically and in spirit.

    They have been brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing that the 2nd amendment because it deals with “dangerous firearms” can be somewhat abrogated for the purpose of public safety.

    The culminating effect of these and hundreds of other little tiny lies and distortions of the truth is that most conservatives simply cannot recognize that there are what the United States constitution calls “Domestic enemies” attempting to subvert and contravene the Constitution of the United States of America.

    If you do not know you are fighting a war, or will not or cannot identify your enemy, you can not win.


  52. 53 | May 9, 2012 11:53 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I’m of the opinion just let Obama step in his own shit. He brought it up and keep asking what’s his stance on this? Why can’t he be a man and come out one way or another?


  53. 54 | May 9, 2012 11:54 am

    @ doriangrey:

    If you do not know you are fighting a war, or will not or cannot identify your enemy, you can not win.

    Yup, well said!


  54. 55 | May 9, 2012 11:55 am

    New Thread.


  55. lobo91
    56 | May 9, 2012 11:56 am

    @ Rodan:

    Why can’t he be a man and come out one way or another?

    I don’t think Michelle would approve…


  56. 57 | May 9, 2012 12:09 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ doriangrey:
    If you do not know you are fighting a war, or will not or cannot identify your enemy, you can not win.

    Yup, well said!

    You and I share far more issues of agreement than we disagree on. Your aversion to public display of religious values for example, while mildly annoying isn’t a deal breaker. It isn’t because I share the values of our founding father on that subject just as you, although your views are 180 degree’s opposed to mine, do.

    On that subject our founding fathers were as clear as they could possible have been. The government would take no position either for or against religion and would not institute any established official religion.

    We both share a common belief that the political class have anointed themselves as aristocrats declaring all but the wealthiest of our fellow citizens to be little more than their serfs suitable for nothing other than maintaining the facade that their power and wealth emanates from the will of “We the people”.


  57. 58 | May 9, 2012 12:17 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    Your aversion to public display of religious values for example,

    I don’t want Religious views imposed on people by politicians. That’s my beef. I don’t care when someone says their are proud of their faith. I get leery when-they seek to impose it. Also The whole family values thing is not relevant to me, I am worried about my economic well being. I go to Church for spiritual well being and don’t want a politician trying to be a Priest. SO that’s where we differ.

    On that subject our founding fathers were as clear as they could possible have been. The government would take no position either for or against religion and would not institute any established official religion.

    That’s my stance actually.

    We both share a common belief that the political class have anointed themselves as aristocrats

    They are Neo-Feudal lords who think they are above us. They need to be removed from Power. The Descendants of the Jacobins have become the new Ancien regime!


  58. The Osprey
    59 | May 9, 2012 12:18 pm

    ” Even more startling, Obama did not identify with being black. It was only when he decided to get into politics that he discovered his black identity.”

    That point was brought up in the great Ken Burns documentary style Youtube spoof “The Obamanable Snow Job”

    “He was never so black, see, till he became a Chicago politician. I, mean, if he was say, Irish, and a midget, a Irish midget, he be campaignin’ like a motha****in’ leprechaun.”


  59. 60 | May 9, 2012 12:18 pm

    @ lobo91:

    Obama bats for the other team.


  60. 61 | May 9, 2012 12:19 pm

    @ The Osprey:

    Obama is a fraud.


  61. Speranza
    62 | May 9, 2012 12:21 pm

    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a welfare check, a free cell phone with free monthly minutes, food stamps, section 8 housing, a forty ounce malt liquor, a crack pipe and some Air Jordan’s and he votes Democrat for a lifetime.


  62. 63 | May 9, 2012 12:26 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    I don’t want Religious views imposed on people by politicians. That’s my beef. I don’t care when someone says their are proud of their faith. I get leery when-they seek to impose it. Also The whole family values thing is not relevant to me, I am worried about my economic well being. I go to Church for spiritual well being and don’t want a politician trying to be a Priest. SO that’s where we differ.

    We don’t even differ on that as much as you suppose. I don’t want the STATE mandating religious values any more than you do. The problem is, that that is exactly what we having happening right now, it’s just that the religious values the state is mandating are those of secular humanist and atheists.

    The State has mandated and is enforcing immoral values and is attempting to force a gag order on religious institutes and individuals opposing those immoral values.


  63. 64 | May 9, 2012 1:08 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    The State has mandated and is enforcing immoral values and is attempting to force a gag order on religious institutes and individuals opposing those immoral values.

    I am totally against that as well.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David