Obama Racist? Didn't Know He Was Only President of Black People.

Originally posted by openlocks
reply to post by Wotaneyed

 

I also would like to point out that MLK's name is stolen from Martin Luther, the German Protestant reformation leader. Why is it that not a single white American has a holiday named after themselves but a known communist does?

You see people, this is the ignorant and racist fellows you have shacked yourselves up with. MLK stole his name now, apparently you can do that,

, and he was a communist,

. I guess this guy has never heard of parents naming their children after people they idol, and I guess he didn't realize MLK was a registered Republican.

SMH... you guys...

After Nazi Germany and at a time when the KKK was heavily composed of protestants does it make sense to you that a black communist would embrace that name? It does make sense that it would be taken for vengeance and to sew confusion... but not in veneration. Your forked tongued defamation attempt on me was just that, since you could not come up with a reasoned argument you resorted to name calling.

Originally posted by xuenchen

Originally posted by openlocks
reply to post by Wotaneyed

 

I also would like to point out that MLK's name is stolen from Martin Luther, the German Protestant reformation leader. Why is it that not a single white American has a holiday named after themselves but a known communist does?

You see people, this is the ignorant and racist fellows you have shacked yourselves up with. MLK stole his name now, apparently you can do that,

, and he was a communist,

. I guess this guy has never heard of parents naming their children after people they idol, and I guess he didn't realize MLK was a registered Republican.

SMH... you guys...

Just to clarify....

MLK was born "Michael Luther King"......

He changed his name later.

Martin Luther King, Jr., (January 15, 1929-April 4, 1968) was born Michael Luther King, Jr., but later had his name changed to Martin.

MLK

0thers have done the same.

Malcolm X = Malcolm Little

Louis Farrakhan = Louis Eugene Wolcott

0bama = ??? ??? ???

edit on Jul-28-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)

It says that his father changed his name in the message I posted! Please read before educating me or else you lose credibility! It's funny that no other points are being argued here.

"10) What was Martin Luther King's real name?"

"Answer: Michael King, Jr. In 1935 his father, Michael King, declared
to his congregation that he wound henceforth be known as Martin
Luther King and his son would be known as Martin Luther King, Jr."

I should also add that the anti-semitism in Martin Luther's writings makes that name change much more suspect particularly since the NAACP was a Jewish effort.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


What if it was a white republican doin all this, would it make a difference?

Originally posted by dakota1s2
reply to post by gncnew

 

What made you vote for him? Hope and Change? Not to wear you out, but.........without due diligence all you have left is rhetoric. Yes he can read a prompter well...he said things that we all want to feel good about. But his history is really, really scary for our country. He is what he is! A racist, a Muslim, a communist and a real big liar.

Hopefully you have seen your mistake....You and others like you who didn't care what he was about and only his message, have cost this great Country of ours almost everything.

Please, I am only upset because we didn't see this coming and a lot of people still listen to the spin. This rant is not about you but a group of people who either don't care or just plain ignorant.

Simper Fi

Simple question...simple answer:

Why did he vote for him?

bush


Please give the obama voter a break. Very few of us understand that presidents are mere tools, puppets for nwo 'change', and that obama would necessarily be bush, in blackface. The media know and love this, since they get to pretend that the election actually matters.

Moreover, I think the OP brings an excellent observation to the table.

The only 'change' I want is a restoration of the government working FOR the people.

Barring that, I pray God shuts their ass right down.

They know who they are.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Thank you for the reply.
Indeed, I am not from the US, but from across the pond.
Thanks for putting together Hilray, Barack and Michelle's quotes.
However, I still do not see how they can be called communist. Socialist comments they are, but not pointing out that they are communists.
Regarding my knowledge of communism, I thank you for your suggestions, but I have lots of commuinst relations here in Europe. And being communist is not very well seen in Europe either.

Then, one question which you did not answer - hope I don't sound agressive, I really just want to know, for my own culture/knowledge - what is bothering you in Obamacare.
I really do not the details of this system - eventhough I except it to be inspired after the European healthcare systems - and I'm really interested in knowing/understanding why you guys do not like this system.
some discussions which I had with an American friend are already a hint for me: in US, any common system (as in everybody pays something for a community service) is very badly viewed.
Are there any further reasons?

Interesting for me, as in Europe our healthcare systems are based on community, and were working really fine (especially the French one), until the right wing governments (Chirac, Sarkozy) dismantled and privatised more and more parts from it.
People are very protective of these systems in Europe.
For info, when my American friend arrived in Europe, he thought this system was pure bolchevism.

so, again, I am really interested by the reason why you guys abhorre Obamacare - I'm not saying you should not, this is your country & money after all.
I believe there lies one of the main difference between Europeans and Americans.

Edit: sorry, didn't see your second reply.
So, his thing is more than just social security/socialised medical care? Hmmm, I'm going to spend an hour or two researching more details about Obamacare.
And the thing that annoys you with his system, correct me if I'm wrong, is that by having one centralised government system, this goes against private businesses? Fair point.
And very interesting too, because that is the exact opposite of the what 99% of European people think.
As for communism, it is the nationalisation (most of the time without financial compensation) of the means of production. In theory it should lead to the common ownership of these means of production.
Communism does not allow for private business.
Socialism is some sort of "toned done" communism, allowing private businesses to exist. However under socialism those businesses are closely watched by the government.
This is why, from the Obama quotes you provided, I would say they have a socialist tone, but not a communist one.
And even if US is sliding to the left (too much to the left in your opinion), it is still extremely far from being a socialist country.
If you believe that US is becoming a socialist country, then we Europeans are Stalinist countries.

Again, no agressivity on my side, just trying to understand US, and discuss about our different point of views.

Originally posted by davidmann



Simple question...simple answer:

Why did he vote for him?

bush


Please give the obama voter a break. Very few of us understand that presidents are mere tools, puppets for nwo 'change', and that obama would necessarily be bush, in blackface. The media know and love this, since they get to pretend that the election actually matters.

Moreover, I think the OP brings an excellent observation to the table.

The only 'change' I want is a restoration of the government working FOR the people.

Barring that, I pray God shuts their ass right down.

They know who they are.

Very good point, a good example - even proof - of that is Europe, our governments keep on changing sides, from left to right, from right to left, and the countries are still going down into the recession the same way, whoever is the president/chancellor/prime minister.

reply to post by Wotaneyed

It says that his father changed his name in the message I posted! Please read before educating me or else you lose credibility! It's funny that no other points are being argued here.

If you actually studied the man instead of searching out conspiracy theories about him to attempt to validate your racist worldview, you would learn that his birth certificate reflected his fathers birth name since he was a Jr., but never did anyone in his family call him Michael.

And about all your other 'points', well, let's just say after reading the ridiculousness of your first two statements I kind of just skipped them.

Originally posted by dayve
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

What if it was a white republican doin all this, would it make a difference?

Well Axelrod is standing right behind Obama and he is white, although not Republican. When I look at Obama I see the whole marxist group of radicals standing with him. These programs are coming from the radical left, and Obama is the Front Man. If it wasn't Obama it would have been Hillary because their goals are the same, to bring socialism and communism to this country.

Originally posted by openlocks
reply to post by Wotaneyed

 

It says that his father changed his name in the message I posted! Please read before educating me or else you lose credibility! It's funny that no other points are being argued here.

If you actually studied the man instead of searching out conspiracy theories about him to attempt to validate your racist worldview, you would learn that his birth certificate reflected his fathers birth name since he was a Jr., but never did anyone in his family call him Michael.

And about all your other 'points', well, let's just say after reading the ridiculousness of your first two statements I kind of just skipped them.

This is all about income redistribution. Some people never get the message though.

reply to post by acmpnsfal
What you call an argument I merely call a statement. Do your parents make choises? Freedom of speech, my statement applies where I say it applies. Who are you to say when a statement applies or doesnt? Are you a Mod?

Originally posted by dayve
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

What if it was a white republican doin all this, would it make a difference?

No! that's the whole point crazy! This isn't because he's black, it's that he's made a policy specifically identifying ONE ethnic group.

It also wouldn't matter if it was ONLY for whites, Hispanics, Asians...

The only "ethnicity" that I can even understand specific policies adopted for are the Native American population considering that they often live on reservations that are federally declared "states" of their own. (and yes, I put it in quotes because that's a gross over-simplification).

Originally posted by gncnew

Originally posted by dayve
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

What if it was a white republican doin all this, would it make a difference?

No! that's the whole point crazy! This isn't because he's black, it's that he's made a policy specifically identifying ONE ethnic group.

It also wouldn't matter if it was ONLY for whites, Hispanics, Asians...

The only "ethnicity" that I can even understand specific policies adopted for are the Native American population considering that they often live on reservations that are federally declared "states" of their own. (and yes, I put it in quotes because that's a gross over-simplification).

So then, you're saying the government shouldn't grant University's large sums of money to study and research cures for Skin Cancer because 98% of the people who get it are White, or Sickle Cell Anemia because 98% of the people who get it are Black. Hmmmm.... interesting.

Oh, and PS, your whole spiel about Native Americans being worthy of federal help but other historically oppressed ethnicity's, like BLACKS, are not worthy only proves once again that YOU ARE A RACIST!

Originally posted by openlocks

Originally posted by gncnew

Originally posted by dayve
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

What if it was a white republican doin all this, would it make a difference?

No! that's the whole point crazy! This isn't because he's black, it's that he's made a policy specifically identifying ONE ethnic group.

It also wouldn't matter if it was ONLY for whites, Hispanics, Asians...

The only "ethnicity" that I can even understand specific policies adopted for are the Native American population considering that they often live on reservations that are federally declared "states" of their own. (and yes, I put it in quotes because that's a gross over-simplification).

So then, you're saying the government shouldn't grant University's large sums of money to study and research cures for Skin Cancer because 98% of the people who get it are White, or Sickle Cell Anemia because 98% of the people who get it are Black. Hmmmm.... interesting.

Oh, and PS, your whole spiel about Native Americans being worthy of federal help but other historically oppressed ethnicity's, like BLACKS, are not worthy only proves once again that YOU ARE A RACIST!

edit on 30-7-2012 by openlocks because: (no reason given)

Ridiculous... seriously ridiculous. You're grasping at anything now. Giving money to research programs and CREATING DEPARTMENTS OF GOVERNMENT specifically for one race are not apples to apples comparisons and you know it.

You're desperate just not to be wrong at this point, and it looks pathetic.