ican711nm
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 04:57 pm
... "the report describes how the United States 'discriminates against the disabled, homosexuals, women, Native Americans, blacks, Hispanics and those who don't speak English.'"

The report is false. The United States does not discriminate against the disabled, homosexuals, women, Native Americans, blacks, Hispanics and those who don't speak English. Neither the United States federal government and or any of its state governments 'discriminates against the disabled, homosexuals, women, Native Americans, blacks, Hispanics and those who don't speak English.'

If you truly do think the United States'discriminates against the disabled, homosexuals, women, Native Americans, blacks, Hispanics and those who don't speak English, then supply some evidence to support what you think.

Remember, what the United States does is not equivalent to what a small number of individual Americans may do.


ican711nm
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 05:06 pm
@okie,
Okie, welcome back!

Should we report to the UN that Leftist Liberals in this forum discriminate
Rightist Conservatives? Probably Not ! That too is not part of the UN agreement!
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 05:12 pm
@ican711nm,
ican, I missed out on the news, is this something regarding Obama submitting a complaint or something about the United States? This sounds so bizarre as to be completely and totally almost mental. How could a president do this, any president? Did this really happen? Tell me more.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 05:14 pm
@okie,
Quote:
pretty much proving the man has no love for his own country


Bullshit. It proves nothing of the sort.

For example, I love America. Very much. However, I will admit that we have problems that continue to need to be addressed. Because I'm willing to admit that, are you going to claim that I don't love America?

Quote:

We also have I think cyclops and pom trying to claim Moveon.org is some kind of mainstream grassroots organization, while saying the Tea Party movement is not


I specifically told George that I do not consider MoveOn to be a grassroots organization. You should go back and re-read what people wrote before making accusations. However, you are correct that I allege that the Tea Parties are not either; and there's plenty of evidence to show that they are not.

Quote:
Anyway, my apologies to folks like cyclops and pom to be away for two or three days, so that your favorite punching bag was not available during that time. pom, I hope your mental health does not depend upon having someone available that you can regularly call a liar, idiot, stupid, and as having no English proficiency and not knowing how to write intelligently?


You're not my favorite punching bag, Okie; Hawkeye is my favorite punching bag. I think about you sort of affectionately, because I know you have a good heart even if your political ideas would lead to the destruction of the world as we know it.

Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 05:15 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

ican, I missed out on the news, is this something regarding Obama submitting a complaint or something about the United States? This sounds so bizarre as to be completely and totally almost mental. How could a president do this, any president? Did this really happen? Tell me more.


Here, educate yourself -

http://www.thenation.com/article/154445/us-profile-human-rights-grows-united-nations

It was a required report on a council that we set up.

Cycloptichorn
okie
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 05:20 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
So he singles us out, while his friends and buddies, people like Hamas that apparently donated to his campaign, advocate abuse of women, and strapping bombs on their children? This is so bizarre as to be weird, cyclops. Can these people even have a brain that are in office now?
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 05:22 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

So he singles us out, while his friends and buddies, people like Hamas that apparently donated to his campaign, advocate abuse of women, and strapping bombs on their children? This is so bizarre as to be weird, cyclops. Can these people even have a brain that are in office now?


For Christ' sake, Okie. It was an internal review that countries do about themselves. Every country on the council is doing one about themselves.

Read the article before complaining!!!!! It's too tempting for me to make jokes about 'people who have a brain' when you don't bother to read the article.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 05:23 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
You're not my favorite punching bag, Okie; Hawkeye is my favorite punching bag. I think about you sort of affectionately, because I know you have a good heart even if your political ideas would lead to the destruction of the world as we know it.

Cycloptichorn

Obviously we disagree, as I believe my political ideas match with the founders of this country and folks like Abraham Lincoln, which would bring freedom and liberty to every human being on the face of the earth, actually just affirming what God gave to every human being when he created us, individual freedom, liberty, and responsibility.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 05:24 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
You're not my favorite punching bag, Okie; Hawkeye is my favorite punching bag. I think about you sort of affectionately, because I know you have a good heart even if your political ideas would lead to the destruction of the world as we know it.

Cycloptichorn

Obviously we disagree, as I believe my political ideas match with the founders of this country and folks like Abraham Lincoln, which would bring freedom and liberty to every human being on the face of the earth, actually just affirming what God gave to every human being when he created us, individual freedom, liberty, and responsibility.


Do you think there's a single fool who thinks that he is foolish, Okie?

Everyone thinks that their thoughts match the founders. Everyone. You are no different than anyone on any part of the spectrum here in America, and all can point to one part or another of history to prove it.

Cycloptichorn
okie
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 05:34 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Do you think there's a single fool who thinks that he is foolish, Okie?

Probably not, cyclops, I can agree there. So it goes back to the fact that all of us here are just posting our opinions, thats all. As Bush used to say, we can agree to disagree, that is what a democracy is about, but we need to try to debate with some degree of honesty and truly good intentions, and I do not believe the left does that consistently, they use what they know to be demagoguery and false accusations of things like bigotry. They do not debate honestly on the merits of an issue.

Quote:
Everyone thinks that their thoughts match the founders. Everyone. You are no different than anyone on any part of the spectrum here in America, and all can point to one part or another of history to prove it.

Cycloptichorn

I think you might be right that most everyone thinks their thoughts match the founders, but I believe not all. In fact, many people I think believe the founders were bigots and perhaps even evil people. Also, I think it is evident that many people, especially liberals, believe not in solid foundational principles as spelled out in the Declaration of Independence and constitution, but believe those documents are subject to change as living breathing documents to be re-interpreted to fit modern day society and our supposed growth of intellectual wisdom and understanding.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 06:13 pm
Okie, here is what I was reacting to:
Quote:
For the first time in history, an American president has filed a complaint with U.N., against America.

What American President Would Do That?
By Carol A. Taber for AMERICAN THINKER, Sept. 01, 2010

Other presidents have been wrong. Other presidents have been misguided. Other presidents have been weak and pusillanimous and pathetic.

Only one truly disdains America. His name is Barack Obama.

How else to explain his latest outrage against the country that elevated him to the ranks of world leadership? Last week, the Obama State Department submitted a report to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights on the supposed human rights violations taking place in the United States.
According to the Washington Times, the report describes how the United States 'discriminates against the disabled, homosexuals, women, Native Americans, blacks, Hispanics and those who don't speak English.' There is the expected pandering to Muslims...the report notes that 'until recently, the U.S. engaged in torture, unlawfully detained terrorist suspects, and illegally spied on Americans communicating with terrorists' ... but the report assures readers that Mr. Obama has been putting a stop to all that.

Beyond the outrage felt by Governor Jan Brewer, whose move to protect Arizonans' human rights was offered up as an example of an abuse of human rights by Mr. Obama's State Department report (gotta protect those drug cartel murderers!), for many citizens, this report is a rank anti-American manifesto and the last straw. Many believe it to be outright evil, that there is no other word to encompass Obama's disgraceful and indefensible decision. This odious report has placed America -- all of us -- on a list of human rights violators that includes Iran, North Korea, and Sudan. And Mr. Obama and his administration have done it purposefully, intentionally, and with malice aforethought.

The truth, on the other hand, is that every demographic group mentioned in the report as victimized by America is better off in America than in any other country on earth. That's why they stay here. If they don't like America, they're free to leave at any time. We're not the Soviet Union or China, restricting population flow. European glories are only a plane ticket away.

But they don't leave. That's because the people of America have a higher standard of living, more opportunity for high-quality health care (at least for a little while longer), a better shot at a decent education, and more personal freedom to pursue occupations of their choice -- and life, liberty, and happiness -- than in any other place on the planet.

But according to Obama, splinter groups of Americans (including women, who compose a majority of the population) are hapless and defenseless victims of our "downright mean" country, a description coined by Mrs. Obama during Mr. Obama's campaign for president. The State Department report is a typical liberal look-at-America-through-a-toilet-seat perspective, construing every minor problem as systemic and considering all forms of law enforcement discriminatory. The report is unseemly and deeply offensive to the American people.

Worse, it's not just Obama and his thumb-sucking minions whining about America to other Americans -- at least that wouldn't be purveying false notions about America outside our borders. No, lying to Americans about the cruelty of their country isn't enough for Obama -- he must preach it to the world. Because in Obama's worldview, the world is the ultimate arbiter of America, even though that quaint document, our Constitution, specifically grants such responsibility to the American people alone.

It's nonsensical from a legal point of view, and Obama is a lawyer. One of the chief notions in legal academia is that a judge's political perspective shapes his decisions, no matter how hard he attempts to be objective. The same holds true for countries -- Iran will judge us through the Iranian anti-Semitic, anti-American, anti-freedom, fundamentalist Islamic perspective it uses for everything else. Yet Obama inexplicably sees the judgment of countries like Iran as important and wants to lay bare before the world each of our minute flaws -- some real, some imagined -- for careful examination and exploitation by our most implacable enemies, with much of that exploitation dangerous to our national security and to ordinary Americans.

Perhaps it's because Obama has spent most of his life in a Christian country that he doesn't understand how the world works -- over here, we don't cast the first stone. Instead, we target the most egregious human rights violators and try to curb their violations. Maybe Obama thinks the rest of the world will act in truly Christian fashion, too, and focus on the true human rights violators even if we expose ourselves to the tyrants, dictators, and mullahs. That would make him an idiot.

More likely, Obama just doesn't give a tinker's damn whether the world flays us because he thinks America's minor flaws are major ones. It is possible that Obama dislikes America because this is the country that produced his rootless life and gave leeway to his drunk, child-abandoning Kenyan father. More likely, Obama is displeased with this country because he spent his childhood wandering from identity to identity until he found one that justified his alienation -- identity as a Marxist racialist -- an elevated identity in the left's hierarchy of the victimized.

Whatever the reason, Obama has no soft spot for America. The unpresidential condescension he feels for our country and its religion- and gun-clinging citizens oozes from his pores and spills out of them in unguarded moments. And that disrespect -- the kind that comes only from those who are clueless about leadership -- gives both aid and comfort to our enemies and leaves those who wish to share in the bounty of our freedom and liberty in the dark.

What American president would do that?

Carol A. Taber is president of www.FamilySecurityMatters.org

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/what_american_president_would.html at September 01, 2010 - 12:33:41 PM CDT
Advocate
 
  1  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 06:35 pm
@ican711nm,
Please post the actual complaint made by Obama.
ican711nm
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 06:52 pm
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:
Please post the actual complaint made by Obama.

The actual complaint was made to the UN by the USA State Departmen. Hillary Clinton is Secretary of State and a member of Obama's cabinet.

the United States 'discriminates against the disabled, homosexuals, women, Native Americans, blacks, Hispanics and those who don't speak English.'
plainoldme
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 07:49 pm
@ican711nm,
According to SourceWatch:

Carol Taber is the founder of the conservative front group, Family Security Matters.

She claims to have published several women's magazines but declines to mention which ones.

From Wiki:
The American Thinker is a daily conservative internet publication dealing with American politics, foreign policy, national security, economics, diplomacy, culture, military strategy, and the survival of the State of Israel.[2] The American Thinker has been mentioned in other media including Le Monde,[3] The Guardian, [4], Inter Press Service,[5] Campus Watch,[6] and the New York Times.[7] The publisher of American Thinker is Thomas Lifson, and the Political Director is Richard Baehr. Key staff also include Rick Moran and J. R. Dunn.
Writing in The New York Times, Felicity Barringer credited American Thinker with initiating a public outcry over a California plan to require programmable thermostats which could be controlled by officials in the event of power supply difficulties.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 07:52 pm
@ican711nm,
I thought you said you were a pilot? Is your vision so bad that you need this giant typeface? It is difficult to read and annoying.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  3  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 08:14 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:


Do you think there's a single fool who thinks that he is foolish, Okie?

Everyone thinks that their thoughts match the founders. Everyone. You are no different than anyone on any part of the spectrum here in America, and all can point to one part or another of history to prove it.

Cycloptichorn


Every now and then you write something that makes me think that, in spite of all, you just might be worth your ****.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Wed 1 Sep, 2010 09:37 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I've been thinking about this since I read it several hours ago. Does anyone really think their thoughts match those of the FF? I've been to Williamsburg and Monticello and to Madison's house, then a private home shown to the public by the lady of the house. We went to Washington's estate but for some reason, my mother declined to go into the house. Pity.

It is difficult not to admire the talents of Thomas Jefferson. There are a few in each generation that have as many abilities as he did. He also had more than a few blind spots. Do I identify with him? No. Do I feel my thoughts mirror his? No.

Would I have identified with him had I been an age peer? Interesting thought. I would guess I would take some of the same philosophical principles he began with and I would run with them in a different direction. But, then again, no one ever knows perhaps, does one?

What so many who look back with nostalgia at the FFs forget is that they were not a co-operative group. Jefferson was at odds with Washington and Hamilton.

These were men . . . not gods or demi-gods . . . of their time and their lives were shaped by those times just as our lives are shaped by the current events which rock our world.

We can look at their lives and accomplishments as roll models, guides, but in a limited way.

Would Jefferson by a global warming denier? Would the way the FFs dealt with the Barbary Pirates predicate how, lifted into our times, they would deal with today's terrorists, particularly terrorists who are Muslims, as the pirates were?
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Thu 2 Sep, 2010 07:51 am
From John McWorter via Salon.com:

Who cares whether one in five people think Barack Obama is a Muslim?

Yes, that’s even more people than a couple of years ago, based on results from a Pew Research Center poll last week. But even so, though this misconception is a personal insult to a president many of us think warmly of, does it really matter? In the grand scheme of things?

Because the grand scheme is what should be on our minds, not score-settling and mud-slinging in the present moment. The foot-stomping frustration over the notion of Obama as Muslim—complete with the now-standard verbal footnote “And what would be wrong with it even if he was!”—is giving too much attention to the mere.

The Obama-as-Muslim issue is not the only one of late in which too many who ought to know better are yielding to the temptations of the mere. As it happens, the other Muslim-related issue in the headlines these days, the Ground Zero mosque controversy, is another one of them. Indeed, all arguments against its construction capitulate to the mere, and the mosque—sorry, Center—must be built.

The notion of the mosque in question is actually viscerally unpleasant to me to an extent. I dislike that some Islamists may interpret it as a Muslim victory flag in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. But I know that this sentiment is mere, and cannot inform my considered opinion on the matter. As a nation truly devoted to plurality, we can make no gesture more dignified and even superior than a mosque near Ground Zero, asserting our distinction between Islam and the murdeous perversion of it espoused by a pathetic few.

Will some of the fans of those few see the mosque as a victory flag? We can be sure of it. Is the mosque’s imam Feisal Abdul-Rauf, “moderate” though he is, categorically contemptuous of the terrorist actions of Hamas and like-minded others? Probably not—i.e. he likely wouldn’t pass the stringent test Reuel Marc Gerecht proposed in these pages. But the man is seeking to not entirely alienate more radical Muslims; inevitably he will round off some corners in his public utterances. But that is a matter of present-day cultural politics, while the mosque and the larger statement it makes will live on. As to 9/11 victims’ families opposed to the mosque, are they in an emotional position to dissociate the mosque from fanatic Wahhabism? Understandably not—but as such we cannot use them as counsel on an ecumenical gesture based on the abstraction of overarching principle.

Which brings us back to Obama’s supposedly being a closet Muslim, in that here, too, the overarching issue is what ought to concern us rather than the follies of the moment. Over what, precisely, do they arch, these follies? For one, it’s unclear to me why anyone is surprised that people have a way of believing what they want to believe. Those who think Obama is a Muslim are primarily conservatives, according the poll data, and thus the Muslim canard is linked to a general dislike of the man and/or his policies.

So: people who don’t like Obama are fond of the idea served to them by right-wing media that he is lying about his religion. Shocking indeed! But not, actually—when he also happens to have spent some years of his childhood in a Muslim country and has an Arabic middle name. Indeed, not so long ago there was the publicity over his membership in Jeremiah Wright’s church, and Wright does not exactly go about titling himself Imam. Yet if you are fond neither of Obama (nor of thinking a whole lot at all), you might make a lazy equation between the reverse racism of Wright’s sermons and those of Louis Farrakhan and suppose that a Black Muslim might feel at home at Trinity United in Chicago.

Try to put yourself in the head of someone like this. How likely will that person be dissuaded by some functionary blandly asserting that Obama prays to God daily? After all, that person is as reflexively skeptical of the media as anyone.

But I’d argue that these people simply don’t matter. Most people who think Obama is a Muslim are vanishingly unlikely to vote for him. Even among Independents, how many will vote for Mitt Romney in 2012—or even a Republican congressional candidate this year—out of pique at Obama’s having turned out to be a Muslim, as opposed to his decisions on much more important issues, like the economy?

To wit: what historical imprint will people who think Obama is a Muslim have? Granted, to many of them, “Muslim” is an insult, associated with reductive views of Islam just as much of the opposition to the Ground Zero mosque is. But the insult and the feelings behind it are mere—in current as well as future significance.

In seeking an analogy, it occurred to me that almost certainly, there must have been widespread rumors that Franklin Roosevelt was Jewish. Legions hated him as passionately as many today hate Obama and often even more so. In Roosevelt’s time, the Jewish charge would have been the precise equivalent, in implications, of the Muslim one today.

And wouldn’t you know, it turns out there was exactly such a rumor—which didn’t matter one bit in terms of Roosevelt’s legacy. It was a product of ignorance a long time ago. Today we’re dealing with some more ignorance, a hallmark of this thing called humanity. But today will be a long time ago before we know it. The Obama folks are to be applauded for their relative lack of interest in “combatting” this silly rumor. The rest of the media should follow suit, and Obamaphiles at functions and play dates should find something to share disillusionment about that actually matters.

In fact, ideally Obama would go as far as to do something he has studiously refrained from in public: speaking Indonesian. He spoke it as a child and certainly can hold a conversation in it now (the most authoritative discussion on this is here). He is one of our few presidents to be fluent in a second language: Martin Van Buren was raised in the Netherlands and slipped into Dutch when angry, and Herbert Hoover could speak some Mandarin—and now we have an Indonesian-speaking President.

Almost certainly we never see it because Obama feels that speaking it would fuel the fires of the Muslim rumor. Well, he should care little enough about such foolishness as to go ahead and speak a good paragraph of it with cameras rolling. It would mean that he is comfortable showing America and the world that he spent formative years in a Muslim country, was integrated deeply enough into it to speak its language, and is aware enough of the impotence of the rumor that this makes him a Muslim to feel no need to hide any of this. The clip would roll on assorted chatter sites as further evidence that he is a Muslim—the quintessence of the mere. Meanwhile Obama could continue in the larger, and realer, task of leading the free world.

okie
 
  1  
Thu 2 Sep, 2010 09:37 am
@plainoldme,
Heres a man that may think Obama is Muslim. Is he coming to that conclusion for no reason, pom? As he points out, the Muslim call to prayer is one of the sweetest sounds on earth according to Obama. Is that something a believer in Christ would say?

I don't agree with all the man says, in fact I don't even know who he is, I found the Youtube video on the net because I did the search for what Obama said about the Muslim call to prayer being one of the sweetest sounds on earth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQz2naHi910
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Thu 2 Sep, 2010 09:53 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

Heres a man that may think Obama is Muslim. Is he coming to that conclusion for no reason, pom? As he points out, the Muslim call to prayer is one of the sweetest sounds on earth according to Obama. Is that something a believer in Christ would say?


Why not? Muslims believe in Christ too! It's the same god that they pray to! Do you not understand that?

Cycloptichorn
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1770
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.51 seconds on 07/21/2025 at 07:18:26