Obama's youth training. [modified]
-
Seems like some parts of the USA have still not heard of the word hubris (let alone understood what it means).
Continuous effort - not strength or intelligence - is the key to unlocking our potential.(Winston Churchill)
GuyThiebaut wrote:
Seems like some parts of the USA have still not heard of the word hubris (let alone understood what it means).
Let me see if I can use it in a sentence. The meaning of the "hubris" (preceding it with "the word" was a wee bit redundant, don't you think?) was demonstrated to the world by the British Empire which committed it daily for a couple of hundred years and left as its legacy most of the problems in the middle east that plague us today. How's that?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
highly qualified, competent and far more accomplished conservative black politicians
This is an interesting point. I wonder how Condie would have fared, had she been interested?
-
Well, to be honest, if you were willing to discuss your point of view, I'd be happy to discuss it with you. So long as you appear to be blinded by irrational beliefs with no shred of evidence, then you insult me, I'll insult you, b/c that seems to be all you're willing to entertain. You have actually admitted to being racist in the past, but I do agree that it's wrong to use the race card to deflect criticism. Obama should be as open to public criticism as any elected official.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
Why is this guy still allowed to post on these forums? Are there no rules for conduct and behavior?
EliottA wrote:
Are there no rules for conduct and behavior?
Of course there are[^] and Chris tried to enforce them but the little shit kept re-registering under a different name and branched out to writing his pissy little comments in the lounge. Chris either gave up or possibly made a deal to let him shit all over SB as long as he stayed out of the Lounge.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Can you not think for yourself? I have giving you a ton of evidence and you just won't think. You can't draw your own conclusions, they are predefined.
-
GuyThiebaut wrote:
Seems like some parts of the USA have still not heard of the word hubris (let alone understood what it means).
Let me see if I can use it in a sentence. The meaning of the "hubris" (preceding it with "the word" was a wee bit redundant, don't you think?) was demonstrated to the world by the British Empire which committed it daily for a couple of hundred years and left as its legacy most of the problems in the middle east that plague us today. How's that?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
and left as its legacy most of the problems in the middle east that plague us today.
Hoy! Be fair! Not just the Middle East: problems in Africa, the Indian sub-continent, swathes of the Far East, Wales, ... The sun never sets on our legacy, mate.
Bob Emmett
-
Oakman wrote:
and left as its legacy most of the problems in the middle east that plague us today.
Hoy! Be fair! Not just the Middle East: problems in Africa, the Indian sub-continent, swathes of the Far East, Wales, ... The sun never sets on our legacy, mate.
Bob Emmett
-
EliottA wrote:
Are there no rules for conduct and behavior?
Of course there are[^] and Chris tried to enforce them but the little shit kept re-registering under a different name and branched out to writing his pissy little comments in the lounge. Chris either gave up or possibly made a deal to let him shit all over SB as long as he stayed out of the Lounge.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
This guy is such a pisser, seeing backwards racist comments everyday tend to get annoying quite often.
EliottA wrote:
This guy is such a pisser, seeing backwards racist comments everyday tend to get annoying quite often.
He's a troll. He says whatever seems to get him the most response. The good news is that one of the regs, Diego Moita, has created a grease monkey script for CP, if you use FF, that blocks the posts of any one you find annoying. Diegio's Script[^] About GreaseMonkey[^] (Just in case it is new to you)
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
EliottA wrote:
This guy is such a pisser, seeing backwards racist comments everyday tend to get annoying quite often.
He's a troll. He says whatever seems to get him the most response. The good news is that one of the regs, Diego Moita, has created a grease monkey script for CP, if you use FF, that blocks the posts of any one you find annoying. Diegio's Script[^] About GreaseMonkey[^] (Just in case it is new to you)
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Bob Emmett wrote:
The sun never sets on our legacy, mate.
My humble apologies! . . .Does this mean you are taking responsibility for Australia, too? :omg:
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Oakman wrote:
Does this mean you are taking responsibility for Australia, too?
I suppose that onus, too, must fall upon us. :sigh: (BTW: That was a London 'mate', mate. Not an Oz 'mate'.)
Bob Emmett
-
Bob Emmett wrote:
I suppose that onus, too, must fall upon us.
Not only that, but the USA is your fault, too.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
This is because you have decided that Tony Dungey is a flaming liberal? That Wesley Powell is a Muslim appeaser? And that even though it is the Blacks who are being blamed for voting in the anti-gay marriage law in California - the same Blacks who went 9:1 for Obama - they really are not good Christians? When did Armstrong Williams and JC Watts become left-wing? Naturally most dyed-in-the-wool conservatives, regardless of skin color, are lukewarm towards Obama at best. To single out Black Conservatives and demand that they put skin color before political commitment is a slight bit of racism, isn't it? Can't Blacks be allowed to stay true to their beliefs, or is that reserved for Whites?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
modified on Thursday, December 18, 2008 8:52 AM
Oakman wrote:
This is because you have decided that Tony Dungey is a flaming liberal? That Wesley Powell is a Muslim appeaser? And that even though it is the Blacks who are being blamed for voting in the anti-gay marriage law in California - the same Blacks who went 9:1 for Obama - they really are not good Christians? When did Armstrong Williams and JC Watts become left-wing? Naturally most dyed-in-the-wool conservatives, regardless of skin color, are lukewarm towards Obama at best. To single out Black Conservatives and demand that they put skin color before political commitment is a slight bit of racism, isn't it? Can't Blacks be allowed to stay true to their beliefs, or is that reserved for Whites?
I actually have no clue what you are talking about. My point was that if it were simply a matter of the black community supporting black candidates, they would be supporting conservatives as much as they do liberal blacks. They don't. Clearly, the issue isnt', as Christian implied, a racial issue. It is a political issue. Blacks supported Obama in such large numbers primarily because of their perspective of his political agenda, and not because he is black.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Not to worry. Our society is actively working to make the US a beacon of new age moral rectitude by the aggressive elimination of all those who dare raise any question concerning the spiritual purifying certainty that we are all the same. In fact, our children are taught to chant that every day in school "We are all the same. We are all the same..."
The people that champion that philosophy will eventually succumb to the evidence that it is stupid and doesn't work; that's the scientific way of doing it. Remember science? That thing you constantly malign and pervert despite your dubious assertions that you trust in it?
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
The people that champion that philosophy will eventually succumb to the evidence that it is stupid and doesn't work; that's the scientific way of doing it. Remember science? That thing you constantly malign and pervert despite your dubious assertions that you trust in it?
So, your saying that science disproves racism? That we are all exactly the same? Thats the scientific conclusion?
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
I'm not sure what your point is. You're decrying the death of racism ? I mean, that seems at odds with your character, but I just can't work out your point here...
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
I simply refuse to accept that racism is a moral issue. There is no moral code of ehtics to which I am in any way obligated to subsribe which mandates that I acknowledge that all ethnic groups are the same. Is trying to extreminate people becuase you think you are better than them immoral? You betcha. Is making slaves out of people because they are not of the same race you are immoral? Yep. But is it immoral for me as an individual to simply not wish to associate with people based upon whatever damned criteria I like, racial or otherwise? Nope. Not a bit. And I refuse to subject myself to any such code of ethics.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
I simply refuse to accept that racism is a moral issue. There is no moral code of ehtics to which I am in any way obligated to subsribe which mandates that I acknowledge that all ethnic groups are the same. Is trying to extreminate people becuase you think you are better than them immoral? You betcha. Is making slaves out of people because they are not of the same race you are immoral? Yep. But is it immoral for me as an individual to simply not wish to associate with people based upon whatever damned criteria I like, racial or otherwise? Nope. Not a bit. And I refuse to subject myself to any such code of ethics.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
I simply refuse to accept that racism is a moral issue.
Of course not. By claiming that racism is simply recognizing that different ethnic groups do not share cookie-cutter similarity, you set up a marvelous strawman for you to feel virtuous while attacking.
Stan Shannon wrote:
But is it immoral for me as an individual to simply not wish to associate with people based upon whatever damned criteria I like, racial or otherwise?
Ahh, yes, and then you use your perversion of Jefforson to justify legislating "separate but equal" schools, and separate public restrooms, and no blacks served in this restaurant, and "all them darkies can sit in the balcony." Pretty soon no upppity nigra will dare look at a white woman, in your little paradise, will they, Stan?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Oakman wrote:
This is because you have decided that Tony Dungey is a flaming liberal? That Wesley Powell is a Muslim appeaser? And that even though it is the Blacks who are being blamed for voting in the anti-gay marriage law in California - the same Blacks who went 9:1 for Obama - they really are not good Christians? When did Armstrong Williams and JC Watts become left-wing? Naturally most dyed-in-the-wool conservatives, regardless of skin color, are lukewarm towards Obama at best. To single out Black Conservatives and demand that they put skin color before political commitment is a slight bit of racism, isn't it? Can't Blacks be allowed to stay true to their beliefs, or is that reserved for Whites?
I actually have no clue what you are talking about. My point was that if it were simply a matter of the black community supporting black candidates, they would be supporting conservatives as much as they do liberal blacks. They don't. Clearly, the issue isnt', as Christian implied, a racial issue. It is a political issue. Blacks supported Obama in such large numbers primarily because of their perspective of his political agenda, and not because he is black.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Blacks supported Obama in such large numbers primarily because of their perspective of his political agenda.
Because the Republican party, starting in the sixties made a conscious play for the most racist elements of Dixie. The Republican candidate voted against honoring MLK and saying "oh gee, if I had known I was going to run for President against a black man, I never would've done that," didn't get him off the hook. On the other hand, any black political agenda was more embraced by Clinton than Obama, and there could have been no question of how closely she supported the political aspirations of the black community. If it was not a racial issue, she would have received much more support by the blacks than she did and would have been the nominee, I suspect.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface