His name is Obama.

[PrayingForWar]

His mother Ann Dunham, divorced Obama's birth father sometime around 1963-4.

Ann then moved to Indonesia sometime between 1966 and 1967, and married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen. Young Barack was officially adopted by Lolo, and has records in the Indonesian school system with his name listed as "Soetoro".

In Obama's 2006 book "The Audacity of Hope" he discusses living and attending school in Indonesia from 1967-1971. Obama living in and attending school in Indonesia as a child is NOT up for debate--it is a well-established fact that he admits to himself in his books.

If you don't even know that part, then I see little point in even discussing ANY issues regarding current US politics with you, to be honest. You REALLY need to get out more...

Depends on whether or not he renewed his Indonesian Passport before he entered Occidental college, in order to secure "foreign student scholarships". If he did, that would mean he renounced his US citizenship, because at that time, the US and Indonesia did not have a "dual citizenship" agreement...

But we'll probably never know, because he has spent nearly $1million to defend against lawsuits to get the records of his past, and has finagled court orders to seal most of his records...

View attachment 5887

Just when you think the "birther" crap has been marginalized, now we're back to his other "records". If anyone thinks that at this point some "smoking gun" proof of obozo's eligibilty to be president will be presented before that idiot gets voted out of office, I'll suggest you stop huffing the air duster you're supposed to clean your keyboard with.

If you're suffering from delusions that anything he's signed into law is automatically reversed if some "smoking gun" is produced, you're probably still under the influence of chemicals, just more along the lines of THC than something commonly found in aresol cans. Even in this highly unlikely senario, the SCOTUS would be tied up for decades until anything got straightened out. Lets just dump the idiot and be rid of him in616 Days, 13 Hours

I loathe everything that this man stands for, but his name is Obama, and it is juvenile to call him anything else.

When someone plays games with his name, it does not make me dislike his policies any more. I do, however, lose respect for the person using such a junior-high tactic.

We should try to win arguments with rationality.

As far as I'm concerned the "man" should be held in utter contempt by any rational person. The arguement has been won, the results are clear. %40 of our population is retarded or dependent on government. %20 vote for the most popular pagent contestants, the other %40 vote with their noses held for whomever the republicrats select.

We can only hope the trend towards conservatives continues, since it's all of a sudden trendy to support constitutional freedom and fiscal discipline, and the repubicrats select a candidate who's actually going to promote these principles. Our biggest gripe with Bush was his adherence to "working together" with the socialists. You don't "work together" with burglars, a drunken killer, or leftist thugs and call it "compassionate" conservativsm. If not for this idiotic platform, we would not be here even with obozo's stupidity.

That's how the vacuous "Hope and Change" rhetoric won the election. I for one have negative respect for the "man" elected president. I refuse to give him the dignity of using his proper name, or leaving out any opportunity to ridicule him and his mindless acolytes, or even a chance to irk these idiots by using their own tactics against them. As sensitive as they are, it's pretty funny to see them lose their minds when the same tactics used to marginalize Palin are used against their moonbat messiah.

Lighten up Eye95, it's all in good fun.

 

[eye95]

The name-calling is not done in fun. It isn't even done rationally. There is a distinct smell of bile in it.

Too often, rhetoric is designed to get rah-rahs and +1s from folks who already agree with the poster. What use is that?! Rhetoric should be designed to sway people who have not made up their mind or who tend to disagree. Name-calling will make almost all of these people shake their heads and dismiss the juvenile drivel.

Just state the case. It is compelling. Obama is a bad president. He is precisely the kind of president that we critics tried to tell the American people he would be: one who would consolidate power in the federal government, specifically in the presidency, one who will tax and spend the economy into the dumper, and one who has no respect for the rule of law, giving us a government of man and not of law.

No name-calling is necessary. Nor is it helpful.

 

[zack991]

That's how the vacuous I refuse to give him the dignity of using his proper name, or leaving out any opportunity to ridicule him and his mindless acolytes, or even a chance to irk these idiots by using their own tactics against them. As sensitive as they are, it's pretty funny to see them lose their minds when the same tactics used to marginalize Palin are used against their moonbat messiah.

[/COLOR]

This, I love when the exact tactics they uses against conservatives comes back and bites them, yet when they where doing it to us they claim is our right. People say you have to respect the president and respect is earned never given. He certainly has not earned the respect when he still does the same name calling tactics as his Administration claims is so wrong to be done to him. He certainly does not respect the American People or the US Constitution

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

View attachment 5887

Just when you think the "birther" crap has been marginalized, now we're back to his other "records". If anyone thinks that at this point some "smoking gun" proof of obozo's eligibilty to be president will be presented before that idiot gets voted out of office, I'll suggest you stop huffing the air duster you're supposed to clean your keyboard with.

If you're suffering from delusions that anything he's signed into law is automatically reversed if some "smoking gun" is produced, you're probably still under the influence of chemicals, just more along the lines of THC than something commonly found in aresol cans. Even in this highly unlikely senario, the SCOTUS would be tied up for decades until anything got straightened out. Lets just dump the idiot and be rid of him in616 Days, 13 Hours

As far as I'm concerned the "man" should be held in utter contempt by any rational person. The arguement has been won, the results are clear. %40 of our population is retarded or dependent on government. %20 vote for the most popular pagent contestants, the other %40 vote with their noses held for whomever the republicrats select.

We can only hope the trend towards conservatives continues, since it's all of a sudden trendy to support constitutional freedom and fiscal discipline, and the repubicrats select a candidate who's actually going to promote these principles. Our biggest gripe with Bush was his adherence to "working together" with the socialists. You don't "work together" with burglars, a drunken killer, or leftist thugs and call it "compassionate" conservativsm. If not for this idiotic platform, we would not be here even with obozo's stupidity.

That's how the vacuous "Hope and Change" rhetoric won the election. I for one have negative respect for the "man" elected president. I refuse to give him the dignity of using his proper name, or leaving out any opportunity to ridicule him and his mindless acolytes, or even a chance to irk these idiots by using their own tactics against them. As sensitive as they are, it's pretty funny to see them lose their minds when the same tactics used to marginalize Palin are used against their moonbat messiah.

Lighten up Eye95, it's all in good fun.

After your avtar is finished throwing away the Communist logo, can you see if it will throw the above quoted post, please, thank you.

 

[since9]

We the people would do well to remember that it is us who have brought ourselves to this point. Not bush or clinton, or even obama. It is we the people. If things are bad or need fixing then we need to fix it. not look to who is president now or in the future.

Bingo. Not only have we done it to ourselves, but we did it to our children over the last couple hundred years. Too much promise of a better life and not enough personal responsibility. We've steadily eroded the sound moral foundation upon which our country was built to the point where many people no longer accept our spiritual roots. I grew up saying the Pledge of Allegiance every morning. We learned about our Constitution, about the history of our country, the Revolutionary, Civil, Great, and next war which came along. We sang hymns in church which brought home the basis of our heritage. I watched the nightly news with my folks during the Vietnam War, and watched a couple of idealistic hippy neighbors party the evening men first landed on the moon. When I went over later to share the news, I got a "yeah, right" for my trouble.

The American People elect fiscal midgets like Obama because they're no longer capable of making intelligent fiscal decisions themselves. The American People elect representatives who cannot respect our 2A rights because they never learned the hard lessons of history. They elect people who spend way too much money on the police and the military because they've been hoodwinked into wrongly believing throwing money at an issue is the proper way to fix it.

The only way we're going to fix the very serious ills of our country is to a better job educating our children, and none of the mamby-pamby set of what passes for "morality" and basket weaving in the schools these days, but solid food. Real facts. Real science. Real accounting and finance. Real engineering. Real math. Real history.

The dumbing down and spiritual bankrupting of America hasn't worked. How about we try something else? How about we try what made our country great. We can go forwards, without going backwards.

 

[PrayingForWar]

The name-calling is not done in fun. It isn't even done rationally. There is a distinct smell of bile in it.

Too often, rhetoric is designed to get rah-rahs and +1s from folks who already agree with the poster. What use is that?! Rhetoric should be designed to sway people who have not made up their mind or who tend to disagree. Name-calling will make almost all of these people shake their heads and dismiss the juvenile drivel.

Just state the case. It is compelling. Obama is a bad president. He is precisely the kind of president that we critics tried to tell the American people he would be: one who would consolidate power in the federal government, specifically in the presidency, one who will tax and spend the economy into the dumper, and one who has no respect for the rule of law, giving us a government of man and not of law.

No name-calling is necessary. Nor is it helpful.

We'll just have to disagree on the neccessity, since I find the need to be as insulting as possible to the mindless trolls who promote the moonbat messiah. You're right that it isn't "helpful", in that it does nothing positive to promote our ideas. In fact it certainly is counter-productive when insulting behavior goes too far. I'm guilty, cases closed. Yet I have no remorse.

 

[PrayingForWar]

After your avtar is finished throwing away the Communist logo, can you see if it will throw the above quoted post, please, thank you.

I wanted to put your avatar in place of the commie logo but it wouldn't fit. Since they both pretty much represent the same insane marxist agenda there really was no need to make it fit. I wouldn't throw away the post, since it obviously did exactly what I wanted it too...

That is tweek an Obodrone.

 

[eye95]

You're saying it is necessary?? Incredible. And disappointing.

 

[PrayingForWar]

Your saying it is necessary?? Incredible. And disappointing.

Neccessary to my own selfish desires. I thought I made that clear. Call it childish or whatever you like, but it's an awful lot of fun to see moonbats lose their "minds" when their own tactics are used against them. I'm being repetive here, but humor sticks very well, and obozo is the gift that keeps on giving.

 

[Gunslinger]

I like your post.

I am voting for President Obama in 2012. With a big grin on my face as I hit the "Obama" button (or whatever form of voting will be present when I vote).
.

Sounds good, Chaz. Wonder where your polling place will be in 'Frisco? Hopefully not too long a walk for you from the "district."

 

[jbone]

No name-calling is necessary. Nor is it helpful.

That's a lack of reality!
Name calling in politics has worked hand-in-hand since well before me, you, PC and the now BHO hypersensitivity some are blindly subscribing to.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Neccessary to my own selfish desires. I thought I made that clear. Call it childish or whatever you like, but it's an awful lot of fun to see moonbats lose their "minds" when their own tactics are used against them. I'm being repetive here,
but humor sticks very well, and obozo is the gift that keeps on giving.

*sniggers*

 

[zack991]

That's a lack of reality!
Name calling in politics has worked hand-in-hand since well before me, you, PC and the now BHO hypersensitivity some are blindly subscribing to.

Its too funny that Obama himself, and his minions have spewed some very hateful things, yet when the same is done in return to them they jump around like a bunch of drunken children acting like the world has ended. They say people are being racist and are not playing fair.Yet don't we dare use the same tactics about President Obama that would be made out to be just another racist white bible thumping gun owner.

 

[PrayingForWar]

Its too funny that Obama himself his minions have spewed some very hateful things, yet when the same is done in return to them they jump around like a bunch of drunken children acting like the world has ended. They say people are being racist and are not playing fair.Yet don't we dare use the same tactics about President Obama that would be made out to be just another racist, white bible thumping gun owner.

That's another reason why I have no remorse for saying whatever I want about the bed wetters, or the moonbat messiah. I know Eye95 doesn't like it, and if you want to elevate yourself from it, so be it. As far as I'm concerned, the arguement was presented before the election, obozo proved we were right on nearly every issue. He's been incompetent at his best moments, otherwise he's a disaster. No amount of reason or logic will pursued the clueless mouth breathers who still support this clown.

If there are any fence sitters who read my insulting posts and decide on that basis BHO should get a second term based solely on that, I question their ability to leave the asylum they're confined to on voting day.

During my daily travels and discussions with strangers however, believe it or not my comments are more restrained. If after using the most lucid arguements I can muster, the only responses are the same moonbat barking points I'm used to hearing from our local moonbats, I change the subject or go somewhere else.

 

[eye95]

Yeah, who cares if you come off childish and irrational? Who cares if you turn folks off to your POV and even to the POV of others who agree with you politically, but won't use juvenile name-calling? Who cares if such behavior does nothing to decrease support for Obama and turns people off to his opponent?

It feels good to call him a name. It feels good to get folks who already agree with you to give you +1s and other rah-rah comments.

Incredible.

We need a head-shaking smiley.

 

[Washintonian_For_Liberty]

All I see when I see his name is Obambi.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Its too funny that Obama himself, and his minions have spewed some very hateful things, yet when the same is done in return to them they jump around like a bunch of drunken children acting like the world has ended. They say people are being racist and are not playing fair.Yet don't we dare use the same tactics about President Obama that would be made out to be just another racist white bible thumping gun owner.

That's being a little dramatic, isn't it? Yes, politics has always been rather negative, and it is not as negative as it was during other times in U.S. political history.

I disagreed with pictures depicting Bush II as Hitler, and I disagree with Obama being depicted as Hitler. With regard to the name, implications, or undertones, the reason that 'race' is such a big issue on both sides (not just Liberals, but also Conservatives) is because the history of 'race' in the U.S. has been a contentious one, and a long process of generations of people battling 'race' inequity.

The only time I have really went off about individuals referencing Obama is when it is apparent that the implication has a racial undertone. And I try to keep my responses directly towards what I perceive as racial undertones directed at posts that, by my perception, have racial undertones.

I grew up around a number racists (close family members), I know the language used, both overt, and forms of language that imply a racial, or racist factor in statements that are made about Negro Americans.

 

[eye95]

I wanted to respond to this post, but thought that it would be dragging the thread it was in even further off topic. It seemed more appropriate to this discussion, so I will reply here.

All I might say in response to that is that despite how I might personally feel about any current POTUS, I would still give my life for either him or his office if called upon to do so, and that "call" isn't one I might expect from the outside. It's simply a sworn duty, and as a duty sworn, I'd do it in a heartbeat, no questions asked.

It's the nature of the office, my stature as an officer appointed by a standing President of the United States of America, and that's pretty much that's that.

Most people don't get that. Some do. Good for them.

I really had to think about whether I'd put myself at risk to defend this president against a physical attack. My first gut-reaction was to say that I wouldn't. However, if the need arose for me to defend any non-provocateur, I like to think that I would.

If I were still on active duty, I'd feel a duty to defend him. I am retired (ironically, I retired so that I would have zero duty to another president), so I have no such "duty."

My dilemma is solved for the same reason that I would never find myself in the situation of defending someone like Michael Moore. I never intend to be anywhere near either of these two individuals.

Let their supporters use their guns to defend them. Oh...wait...

 

[PrayingForWar]

I wanted to respond to this post, but thought that it would be dragging the thread it was in even further off topic. It seemed more appropriate to this discussion, so I will reply here.



I really had to think about whether I'd put myself at risk to defend this president against a physical attack. My first gut-reaction was to say that I wouldn't. However, if the need arose for me to defend any non-provocateur, I like to think that I would.

If I were still on active duty, I'd feel a duty to defend him. I am retired (ironically, I retired so that I would have zero duty to another president), so I have no such "duty."

My dilemma is solved for the same reason that I would never find myself in the situation of defending someone like Michael Moore. I never intend to be anywhere near either of these two individuals.

Let their supporters use their guns to defend them. Oh...wait...

My loathing of the current POTUS, nor my duty would be a factor.

I would certainly defend him against attack.

This is why:




"When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, 'Look, here's what happened." –Joe Biden, apparently unaware that FDR wasn't president when the stock market crashed in 1929 and that only experimental TV sets were in use at that time, interview with Katie Couric, Sept. 22, 2008

 

[SavageOne]

Its too funny that Obama himself, and his minions have spewed some very hateful things, yet when the same is done in return to them they jump around like a bunch of drunken children acting like the world has ended. They say people are being racist and are not playing fair.Yet don't we dare use the same tactics about President Obama that would be made out to be just another racist white bible thumping gun owner.

I would have to point out that many on the right were doing the drunken children schtick when it was happening to Bush W.. Now THEY are the ones who are doing the exact same thing to Obama. If you're saying it's OK to do these things because they did them first who is really coming off as the child?

On a side note to race being brought up just because someone disparages Obama. If what we want is equality in the country then it must be equal for all things including ridicule. Disagreement does not equal racism. I am sure President Obama doesn't wish to be viewed as a Black President, only as President and that is how I view him. If I disagree with his views or policies, I am disagreeing with the President, no other qualifier need be added.