Fear of a Black President

The only one with a illusion around here is you. You talk about "killers and non-killers" as if you can identify who they are. Your reality is based on an illogical fear of the unknown. Your reality begins and ends with fear; you should learn to get a grip on reality - but I doubt you are capable.

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

snood wrote:
Did it become irrelevant before there was only one viable black major party nominee in the history of the country, or since?

Before!

Way before! It all started to be officially irrelevant July 4, 1776 with these words:

Quote:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

The only one with a illusion around here is you. You talk about "killers and non-killers" as if you can identify who they are. Your reality is based on an illogical fear of the unknown. Your reality begins and ends with fear; you should learn to get a grip on reality - but I doubt you are capable.

This silly slander of yours, like your previous silly slanders is absent a rational rebuttal, and continues to reveal that your perception of reality is illusory.

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
The only one with a illusion around here is you. You talk about "killers and non-killers" as if you can identify who they are. Your reality is based on an illogical fear of the unknown. Your reality begins and ends with fear; you should learn to get a grip on reality - but I doubt you are capable.

This silly slander of yours, like your previous silly slanders is absent a rational rebuttal, and continues to reveal that your perception of reality is illusory.

You're the one lacking any rebuttals. It's obvious to all except you. It's not slander when it's the truth/factual.

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

snood wrote:
Did it become irrelevant before there was only one viable black major party nominee in the history of the country, or since?

Before!

You missed, I think perhaps, the irony in either yes or no answers to my question.

0 Replies

When you charge anyone with slander, you must show proof. I'm waiting.

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

You want a competent first black candidate that could easily win over McCain? Choose Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams. Even Bill Cosby would be a whole lot better.

So after all the attacks on the experience Obama lacks, we'd choose Sowell, Williams, or Cosby?

I don't think you are a racist ican, but you seem to think that either racists don't exist, or that race isn't being used against Obama. I've witnessed both in modern day, and neither are irrelevant.

You're pretending like Obama's politics aren't being discussed. They are being discussed, thoroughly. I've heard plenty about this. The title is about the fear of a black president, and as illustrated, many people do have this fear.

ican711nm wrote:

Your persistent racial demagogy is disgusting. Being the first black candidate does not make Obama a better candidate. What could make Obama a better candidate would be a genuine change to his platform that is good for America.

I call BS.

The Republican sound byte politic attack dog does nothing but attack Obama if he softens on a particular issue or moves to the center. Ever since the creation of the "flip-flop" meme, the republicans have seriously crippled ALL politicians in their ability to be flexible on their stances.

Barrack is NOT the first black candidate, he is the first who will make it to the voting booth. His platform IS why he is in the lead, not his skin. You may hate his platform, but I've seen your politics, and your distaste reeks of partisan loyalty, so I'm not really moved.

T
K
O

0 Replies

snood wrote:

ican711nm wrote:
snood wrote:
Did it become irrelevant before there was only one viable black major party nominee in the history of the country, or since?

Before!

You missed, I think perhaps, the irony in either yes or no answers to my question.

I meant 'before' or 'after' answers.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

ican711nm wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
The only one with a illusion around here is you. You talk about "killers and non-killers" as if you can identify who they are. Your reality is based on an illogical fear of the unknown. Your reality begins and ends with fear; you should learn to get a grip on reality - but I doubt you are capable.

This silly slander of yours, like your previous silly slanders is absent a rational rebuttal, and continues to reveal that your perception of reality is illusory.

You're the one lacking any rebuttals. It's obvious to all except you. It's not slander when it's the truth/factual.

This silly slander of yours, like your previous silly slanders is absent a rational rebuttal, and continues to reveal that your perception of reality is illusory.

0 Replies

ican, You have again failed to show where the slander is. Instead, you have chosen to attack me. You're a weakling in mind and spirit; a neocon with nothing better than to parrot the party line.

You said I slandered you; show me?

0 Replies

snood wrote:

snood wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
snood wrote:
Did it become irrelevant before there was only one viable black major party nominee in the history of the country, or since?

Before!

You missed, I think perhaps, the irony in either yes or no answers to my question.

I meant 'before' or 'after' answers.

I assume you meant before or after Obama's answers.

Osama's race was irrelevant before Osama was born. As I previously posted, it started to be made irrelevant back in 1776.

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

ican711nm wrote:
snood wrote:
Did it become irrelevant before there was only one viable black major party nominee in the history of the country, or since?

Before!

Way before! It all started to be officially irrelevant July 4, 1776 with these words:

Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Big miss.

You would have missed less if you choose the moment that the slaves were freed.

You would have missed even less had you choose the moment our schools were integrated.

You would have missed even if you had picked the moment that Obama is elected or sworn in come this Nov and Jan respectively.

You miss.

T
K
Obama won't be the end of racial struggle, but he is and will be a huge leap.

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

snood wrote:
snood wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
snood wrote:
Did it become irrelevant before there was only one viable black major party nominee in the history of the country, or since?

Before!

You missed, I think perhaps, the irony in either yes or no answers to my question.

I meant 'before' or 'after' answers.

I assume you meant before or after Obama's answers.

Osama's race was irrelevant before Osama was born. As I previously posted, it started to be made irrelevant back in 1776.

I meant whether you say "Race was irrelevant before we had the first viable black major party nominee", or "Race was irrelevant after we had the first black major party nominee", the answer - even the belief that you can answer - is ironic.

And I meant you really, really do not at all get it.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

When you charge anyone with slander, you must show proof. I'm waiting.

You first have accused me of various stuff. In response I called your accusations slander. It is up to you to prove your accusations are true. There's an 'ol rule you are forgetting: the accused is innocent until proven guilty. You must show proof! I'm waiting!

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
When you charge anyone with slander, you must show proof. I'm waiting.

You first have accused me of various stuff. In response I called your accusations slander. It is up to you to prove your accusations are true. There's an 'ol rule you are forgetting: the accused is innocent until proven guilty. You must show proof! I'm waiting!

details = 0;

T
K
O

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

If he were to be elected and do the things he says he would do, he would reduce our economy to a socialist one just like the other socialist economies that have thus far failed or evolved into fascist dictatorships.

A broad brush to be sure, and one that clearly illustrates your profound ignorance. There are many countries that have policies that are much more liberal than anything Obama has suggested and those economies, unlike the US's, are not in the toilet.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

...
You miss.

T
K
Obama won't be the end of racial struggle, but he is and will be a huge leap.

For me personally, race became an irrelevancy when in the 6th grade I first read the Declaration of Independence. It has remained irrelevant ever since.

Race apparently continues to be a relevancy for you. Sad

I wish you success in making it irrelevant for you.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

ican711nm wrote:
snood wrote:
snood wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
snood wrote:
Did it become irrelevant before there was only one viable black major party nominee in the history of the country, or since?

Before!

You missed, I think perhaps, the irony in either yes or no answers to my question.

I meant 'before' or 'after' answers.

I assume you meant before or after Obama's answers.

Osama's race was irrelevant before Osama was born. As I previously posted, it started to be made irrelevant back in 1776.

I meant whether you say "Race was irrelevant before we had the first viable black major party nominee", or "Race was irrelevant after we had the first black major party nominee", the answer - even the belief that you can answer - is ironic.

And I meant you really, really do not at all get it.

For me personally, race became an irrelevancy when in the 6th grade I first read the Declaration of Independence. It has remained irrelevant ever since.

Race apparently continues to be a relevancy for you. I wish you success in making it irrelevant for you.

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

...
You miss.

T
K
Obama won't be the end of racial struggle, but he is and will be a huge leap.

For me personally, race became an irrelevancy when in the 6th grade I first read the Declaration of Independence. It has remained irrelevant ever since.

Race apparently continues to be a relevancy for you. I wish you success in making it irrelevant for you.

It's easy for race to be irrelevant when you aren't challenged on racial grounds. You're too fortunate. Don't mistake your life for anyone else's though.

T
K
O

0 Replies

JTT wrote:

ican711nm wrote:
If he were to be elected and do the things he says he would do, he would reduce our economy to a socialist one just like the other socialist economies that have thus far failed or evolved into fascist dictatorships.

A broad brush to be sure, and one that clearly illustrates your profound ignorance. There are many countries that have policies that are much more liberal than anything Obama has suggested and those economies, unlike the US's, are not in the toilet.

The governments and their economies that I was referring to are long gone. Many of those states that were socialist are now moving toward free enterprise and capitalism. Those governments and economies that persist with their socialism like Cuba and Venezuela are in the process of going into the toilet.

Here's something prescient on the subject: Wisdom circa 1778: Lord Woodhouselee (1747 - 1813)

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, and from dependency back to bondage."

0 Replies

Fear of a Black President

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know