See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: Jim Webb, Iron Intellectual
Source:
The Trail
URL Source: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the- ... im_webb_iron_intellectual.html
Published: Jun 6, 2008
Author: Alec MacGillis
Post Date: 2008-06-06 19:33:05 by a vast rightwing conspirator
Keywords: None
Views: 2586
Comments: 219
By Alec MacGillis Both men, of course, have been mentioned as possible running mates for Obama -- and, in the eyes of the veep-obsessed press, that made the event into an audition of sorts. There's no doubt that Webb is tough. He's stood up to President Bush at a White House reception and has a concealed-carry gun license. But he also sees himself as a serious, free-thinking intellectual. He has a bevy of fairly well-regarded books under his belt and prides himself on writing his own stump material. If yesterday's joint appearance was any indication, far from canceling out Obama's Ivy League pedigree, an Obama-Webb ticket could be one of the most literary pairings ever to take the field. Whereas Kaine served up a fairly conventional Democratic rallying cry, Webb embarked on a meditation on American history and self-conception over the past forty years. He noted that it was the 40th anniversary not only of Bobby Kennedy's assassination but also of his own swearing into the Marine Corps. He took the audience back to that "tumultuous year" -- the assassinations, the Tet offensive, the riots in which "the African American sections in many American cities had erupted with frequent violence" and the Democratic convention in Chicago. Webb said he was giving the history tour "because we all know that the United States of 2008 is also a troubled and divided place in a quiet but equally disturbing way." "The tumult of those earlier years," he went on, "convinced me and others that we needed to learn our love our country more deeply for all its ugly flaws, because it required us to sit back and reconsider the beliefs and values that had once been handed to us as our national legacy. We went through an intellectual challenge in justifying America's uniqueness on fresh grounds and this caused us to believe all the more strongly that ... that this was the moral beacon of the world, that for all or problems we had the will to solve them, the patience to undergo the painful debates that might identify solutions ... and the constitutional system that will provide remedies and thus hold us together as a people." "He is man of great intellect," said Webb. He then drove home the praise by punctuating the final sentence of his introduction with a loud fist pound on the podium.
Barack Obama
Jim Webb, Iron Intellectual
Lost in the hubbub over Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton's secret rendezvous at Sen. Dianne Feinstein's house last night were some of the intriguing ramifications of Obama's previous appointment, a rally at the Nissan Pavilion in the Northern Virginia exurbs that was also attended by Sen. Jim Webb and Gov. Tim Kaine.
This was particularly true for Webb, who, unlike Kaine, was making his first appearance in the role of an Obama booster, having stayed neutral throughout the primaries. One thing quickly became clear, as the red-haired senator introduced the presumptive nominee: those pushing for Webb because they think he will bring muscular, regular-guy credentials -- Marine hero in Vietnam, former Navy secretary, Scots-Irish roots -- may need to think again.
After a bit more in this vein, Webb got around to introducing Obama -- whom he praised, before all else, not for his toughness or determination, the qualities one might expect the ex-Marine to highlight, but for his brains.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-20) not displayed.
.
.
.
#21. To: Fred Mertz (#20)
(Edited)
Uh oh... That is certainly an ill omen. I noticed that mockingbird Chris Matthews began out of the blue to squawk out the name of Mark Warner, longtime globalist agent, for Veep, rather than Jim Webb. Though Webb had an audition of sorts with Obama yesterday, Matthews ignored him as a possibility and touted Warner instead. Obama will come under intense pressure on his Veep pick. I hope he stands up to them all and picks Webb.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
OH'Bummer is owned by the same people who own Hitlery and McNuts. He has made obeisance to the Marxist-Zionist State and kissed Olmerts "Pinky Ring". His proposed foreign policy is nothing but vague and vacuous blather about change with meaning or meaningless changes or something like that. He's another owned whore. Any contention otherwise is simply self delusion.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Obama Capitulates – to the Israel lobby by Justin Raimondo Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's visit to the U.S. is part of a concerted effort, by the Israeli government and its American lobbyists, to convince U.S. lawmakers – and, most of all, President George W. Bush – that the time to attack Iran is now. The Israeli newspaper Yediot Achronot reports that Olmert will tell Bush "time is running out" on diplomacy and that he'd better launch an attack. In his speech to the AIPAC conference, Olmert's message was harsh and unrelenting: Iran, he said, "must be stopped by all possible means" from acquiring a nuclear capability. Yes, sanctions must be tightened, but these are only "initial steps": what's needed, he averred, are "more drastic and robust measures" – and that can only mean one thing. Israel would rather not act alone, but Olmert signaled that he was willing to do so if pushed: ""Israel will not tolerate the possibility of a nuclear Iran, and neither should any other country in the free world," he declared, in what was clearly a threat of unilateral action. Citing Israel's record in regard to Iraq in the eighties and Syria last year, Tim Butcher warned in the Telegraph: "The speech shortens the odds significantly on military action against Iran's nuclear program." The U.S. would almost certainly be drawn into the conflict if Israel carried out its threat, and Olmert knows that. So does Bush, who, in any case, may not need much persuading. After all, in his speech to the Israeli parliament last month, the President declared: "Permitting the world's leading sponsor of terror to possess the world's deadliest weapons would be an unforgivable betrayal for future generations. For the sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon." For the sake of peace, we must make war: a familiar refrain that echoes down through the years, mocking the living and the dead. The clock is ticking, and time is running out for the War Party: they must get in their licks before the most pro-Israel president, ever, leaves office. As Butcher writes: "Among Israeli supporters of military action against Iran there is concern something must be done before Mr. Bush's end of office next January as Mr. Bush is perceived as closer to Israel than any potential successor." Pre-Order this Book Don't look to Barack Obama for deliverance from this looming conflict. In his speech to AIPAC, he clearly signed on to the Lobby's latest project, departing from his prepared text to declare: "I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Everything in my power. Everything." "Everything" includes murdering tens of thousands of Iranians, mostly civilians – driving the price of oil up above $300 a barrel and destroying the US economy – and involving us in a war that will make the Iraq conflict look like a Sunday school picnic. And for what? The irony, of course, is that Iran is nowhere near obtaining nuclear weapons, as the President's own intelligence agencies recently informed him: but no matter. That's a small obstacle to those who disdain "the reality-based community," and see themselves as Making History while the rest of us watch, helpless and aghast. As Ha'aretz recently reported "Olmert will try to convince Bush to set aside the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear program in favor of data presented by Israel, and determine the administration's policy on Iran accordingly." The coming war with Iran has nothing to do with "weapons of mass destruction" – no more than the invasion of Iraq ever did. It's all about preserving Israeli hegemony in the Middle East by wiping any and all recalcitrant Arab-Muslim states off the map. First Iraq, then Iran – and Syria will have its turn soon enough, along with poor prostrate Lebanon, once the jewel of the eastern Mediterranean and now an economic and political basket case. It is almost certain we will be at war with Iran before a new President is inaugurated: now that Obama has capitulated to the Lobby, nothing but Divine Providence can stop it. God help us all. I have to say I was wrong – dead wrong – about Obama. In my eagerness to find a bright spot in a rapidly darkening world, I grasped on to his alluring rhetoric and his at-times trenchant critique of the Bush foreign policy, like a sinking man holding on to a life-jacket. But looking for hope in all the wrong places doesn't create opportunities for peace – it only prolongs our illusions. We must face the prospect of a much more terrible conflict than we have ever known, and look it squarely in the face, without flinching or looking for false messiahs. I know many of you are disappointed, and some of you are now exclaiming "I told you so!" All that we can do now is hope, and pray, that our country – and the Iranian people – will somehow survive the coming catastrophe.
but, according to Arator, we who are not self deluded are "stump stupid."
No, only those whose reflexive Obama-hatred is rooted in racism.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
No, the stupids vote for Obama the "10,000 killed in one storm in Kansas" wonder. The one who sees "fallen heroes in the audience" on Memorial day. The one who will say Iran is not a serious threat one day, then two days later call Iran a serious threat. Anyone that would vote for such a man is stupid. Voting for McCain to keep such a stupid man away from the nuke button wouldn't be stupid at all.
God is always good!
Very funny Arator. If you think Obama is in any way smart, then I have a bridge to sell you real cheap.
God is always good!
I hope he does too, so he will lose.
God is always good!
No, only those whose reflexive Obama-hatred is rooted in racism. Oh, and let me guess, anyone who criticizes Israel for their ongoing genocide in Palestine are just criticizing mass murder and oppression "cuz they hate Jews". Have I, or christine, AT ANY TIME commented that our opposition to OH'BilderburgBummer based upon his race? The answer of course is no. It is irrelevant, although the reports leaking out suggest that OH'Bummer's wifey hates white people with a passion. Is that racism? The points raised have been, and are, valid ones questioning who controls the Brzhinsky (founding chairman of the Trilateral Commission) OH'Bummer campaign? All of the evidence suggests that OH'Bummer is no different than Hitlery or McNuts - he is owned by the power elite and will dance to the tune that is dictated - just as the current Mad Chimp in the Whore House has. Further I DEMAND that you back up your slur or do the gentlemanly thing and apologize.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
that's a crock. how many times have we posted it's not about his color, it's about his radical leftist, socialist politics and the fact that he, like hillary and mccain is OWNED. how many times have we posted and you've not comprehended that if this were a Shelby Steele, Larry Elder, Reverend Jesse Petersen, Walter Williams (aside from the fact that he has subbed for limbaugh), Ward Connerly, or any other conservative or libertarian black that isn't establishment that they would have our support? further, if obama had Ron Paul's politics or if Ron Paul were black, either one would have our support.
From your writings, one sees indications you are either a person of color or a self hating white person that sees racism in every aspect of their life. Regardless of your color or lack there of, this..."stars have aligned so that very universe mocks and laughs at their puerile and retrograde pigmentation-based pretensions"....is sure sign of a person that has been off the deep end for quite some time. Rather than one in need of professional help, my view is that you are person with a narrow mind, steeped in self righteousness, with no self esteem and a total lack of character. A person that needs to live on their knees for the sins of this world of racists. In total, a social outcast that wants to be loved by those that despise you.
I know I posted with a rather broad brush, but it was directed at only a select few posters here, not all anti-Obama folk. I appreciate your skepticism and reluctance to support any major party candidate. But it has also been apparent than many here actually hoped Hillary would beat Obama (or still hope that he will lose to McCain in the general). I can't think of any rational reason why anyone would favor Hillary or McCain to Obama. That leaves only irrational ones (like racism).
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
many here? i can't think of one who expressed that they hoped hillary would beat obama. i think one or two may have posted that, in their opinion, she could beat mcCain more handily than could obama. that certainly doesn't translate into hillary love as avrwc asserts. for the few that you have mentioned (i can only think of 3) who've expressed that they would vote for mccain over obama, their reasons expressed were that they felt that foreign policy under a democrat wouldn't change, but that domestic policy would actually be worse.
Samo samo here. Of the three stooges, I like him best. Cynicom won't admit his terrible predictions. I'm not sure if Obama will win but McSame will put us in a sink hole, deeper than we're in now, if that is possible.
Nice, you insult someone vastly smarter then you, then use one of the oldest metaphors of gullibility in existence to help prove this is so. Not very original or smart, are you?
I see racism only rarely -- in some posts here on 4um (or other fora) and in my small town kin (some of whom actually think Obama is a crypto-Muslim agent of al Qaida). Otherwise, not. My only aquaintance with self-identified "white" or "European-American" pigmentation-based identity groups/websites has been via posts here on 4um (and, previously, on Liberty Forum). As you probably gathered, I have nothing but contempt for those who vest their identity in mere skin color. Skin color is probably the most superficial basis for "community" possible. If that's all some folks have to hang their identity upon, it probably means that they suffer for lack anything more meaningful. Hence, rather than being a mark of membership in some great civilization or high culture (as "white" supremacists like to pretend), it (ironically) signals the bleeding edge of an ongoing civilizational collapse towards barbarism.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
I started to agree with your post and then you took off on your sanctimonious path to the tall grass. I don't have any respect for either white OR black supremicists. Both groups are extremists in their respective groups and neither show any insight or connection to their respective racial groups. What mainstream whites or blacks identify with them? None, zero, nada. However to diss the contributions of whites in Western nations is too PC blind on your part. Without a doubt the greatest inventions, the greatest progess in the arts and sciences have been accomplished through the intelligence and creativity of whites. Puhleaze...get real. Progress = whites.
If you say so, whitey.
I like Jim Webb alot. And I empathize with his anguished decision to run as a Dem - he said he was a Republican until the neocons commandeered the GOP and the party left him ( similar to the experience of Zell Miller with the Dems). Though the GOP left Webb, he has not left the party totally methinks. Frankly I don't see him as a Dem Party VP. I think he would add a needed dimension to the Dems, but I don't see him towing the Dem line. I think Obama senses that resistence. Webb may have voted for the Shephard hate speech law because it represented ssomething personal to him - his current wife is Asian - Vietnamese I believe. For the most part, Webb is a moderate conservative. I don't see him being a happy camper as a VP to socialist Obama. He might try to make himself fit, but in the long run there'd be policy clashes with Obama and Webb.
That's because you are not rational. Obama is a racist, a habitual liar, and a elitist. He would destroy health care in this nation, attack Pakistan, which has done nothing to us, and destroy race relations in this nation with his anti-White bigotry, which he has made known through his book, his choice of wife, and the church he has been going to for 20 years. On top of all that Obama is a mental midget which he shows on a daily basis. The guy makes Bush look smart and that is no small accomplishment. There is no rational reason to choose him over either McCain or Hillary. None whatsoever.
God is always good!
It's fact, Fred. Please cite me examples of social progress and innovation being associated with non-Caucasians. Answer: you can't. What the future holds no one knows.
Sounds like McCain and Clinton II to me.
Civilization is not the product of any single race or skin-pigmentation. When our "white" ancestors were backwoods barbarians chasing game in northern European forests, the foundation of the civilization that those primitives would later come to inherit was being laid by darker-skinned folk in Africa and the Near East. When our "white" ancestors were still hacking each other to pieces and wallowing in ignorance during the Dark Ages, Arab civilization was preserving the wisdom of the ancients in the East and advancing the science of mathematics for later transmission to us, which made the Italian Rennaisance possible. Where would our civilization be without the advances made by the Chinese, which we received via Marco Polo when he returned from his great trek to the Far East? It is only in the last five-hundred years that Western and Northern European peoples have become dominant, thanks in no small part to prior advances made by other peoples in other parts of the globe. In the greater scope of human history, Northern and Western European "whites" have been rather unexceptional and even barbaric for the most part. The last five-hundred years is the exception, not the rule, and our dominance in this epoch is in no small part derivative from prior advances made or preserved in former epochs dominated by non-"white" peoples. History both exalts and humbles, in turn. No civilization or people remains dominant forever. The truly exceptional civilizations will understand this, and remain humble even when exalted and (temporarily) dominant. If we become too full of ourselves, our turn to be humbled and dominated by others is likely to come sooner than we think.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
You are full of shit Arator. You pull ideas out of your ass to try to make a point. But the only point you are making is that you are stupid. The Romans were White, they dominated when Jesus was here. That was over 2000 years ago.
God is always good!
You seem to be fascinated with certain words such as "pigmentation". Most of us accept "color" as sufficient, unless of course you feel some need to impress people. If that is so, then feel free to impress for whatever self satisfaction you receive. We do not mind, however, in doing so you are painting a physical and character portrait of yourself. What we see so far is not a portrait of honesty nor of acceptable social character.
The Roman civilization was a copycat of the Greeks' with a bit of Etruscan spice. The Greeks themselves viewed the Egyptians as their source and their inspiration. Mesopotamia, Persia, India, China preceded the Romans by hundreds or thousands of years. Sadly, but deservedly, the so-called Western civilization is dying. Like the Romans', it's not the barbarians at the borders defeating us but the rot from within that's hollowing us out. I am re-reading Mein Kamph these days. Hitler's critique of the Jewish race is as valid today as it ever was and it applies to what we are calling today the Western world. Our greed, selfishness, irresponsibility, abandonment of any moral standards is making us all third-rate Jew copycats, worshipers of the golden cow and destined to collapse and return to ashes and dust. It's not very clear what is likely to emerge out of this collapse. Sadly, we finally corrupted the Chinese, the Japanese and the Indians. The Muslims are still resisting us but we changed them too as many of them find meaning in their life in opposing us. Buddhism may re-emerge to be the world's more promising faith and inspiration as the Hindus and the Chinese are taking over the world, hopefully spread humanity to other planets and re-civilize Europe and the Americas. If that's the case, it's not so bad. I can think of other, less elegant alternatives. Anyone dares envision the human-dominated universe in 1000 years? In 10,000 years? In 100,000 years? in a million years? In a billion years? One possibility would be for the machines taking over and doing lots of things meant to help us while the bio-foundation degrades and decays and, eventually, disappears which, surprisingly, would make the machines' continuation meaningless and highly unlikely. Who knows, some hidden and totally incomprehensible God might tweak a parameter or 2 and everything might change direction, following some kind of a reboot process.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Only a PILE would chose the word "rule over
them" in reference to a potential President Obama. Such is your need for
subjugation. You have no character, Arator. You, more than most, know that my
politics would never bring me to support a Hillary, McCain or Obama, yet with
FReeper flair you avoid discussing Webb's Hate Speech vote I researched, and
continue the deflection. For a man who believes in every crack pot conspiracy
in Patriotville, you are missing the most overt threat to our freedom since
its founding. But then again you are consumed with white guilt and see Obama
as a god simply b/c of his color. Strip that away and he'd be on the lunatic
left and a non threat. Obama is blessed to be running, today, after decades of
multiculturalism and political correctness have conditioned a once proud
people. Although I'm forced to come along with you on this ride, I won't be
compliant. I'll never stop pointing out the socialism he's about to "deliver"
to us all. God help us, white and black.
Ricky Retardo can't seem to get it through his thick skull plate that one of them black folks is much smarter the he is. Obama graduated with a J.D. magna cum laude from Harvard in 1991 Ricky. He also served as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review and was elected to the Senate in a landslide with 70 percent of the vote after effective and successful service to his community his entire life after receiving his impeccable academic credentials. You are a fuckwit who repeats garbage in the face of facts, hoping that if you throw them long enough your lies will stick to something. What aa absolute idiot you are, one so stupid you are more amusing to watch then irritating, as it is you you hurt here, not Barack Obama. It is your own words and posts that erode your credibility, bubba. Sure sucks to be you.
A rational person would not vote for any one of the three and most certainly wouldn't spend hours on end talking about how wonderful one or the other of the traitors is.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Barack Obama is a man, a human being, wake up. Hello, stop obsessing about race, It is painfully obvious race bothers you a hell of allot. The rest of us don't give a damn as long as a candidate has the right stuff to lead and Obama has it. It doesn't matter what color or ethnic background he is. The campaign is going to be about his fitness to lead, not about your own personal racial myopia. I was arguing with someone recently who took that "Whites invented everything good" line. I asked him for examples and he mentioned things like the Chinese invention of gun power. I opened my lappie and used the wi-fi where we were to show him just how much the Chinese have invented or developed. Every people on this planet has contributed to humanity, and it was fun to watch him realize his White Supremacy hair shirt has holes in it. Simply put, Barack Obama is a talented leader and brings much needed change to the White House when he is elected this November. It is an election that is going to be about that, not whether he has Negro blood in his linage. Get over your obsessions. Your myopia and mean spirited short sightedness on race only hurts you, not Obama.
What does the man's formal education have to do with the socialism he espouses? FDR came to us after completing a Harvard and a Columbia Law School indoctrination. Wilson, a professor at Princeton, tried to stick the League of Nations down our gullet. Don't think for a minute the elitists among us have our best interest in mind.
My obsession? I've done nothing but speak to the hope and change bumper sticker mentality you've embraced. Lets talk issues. What has he accomplished legislatively that places America First?
People looking for a political Savior will always find one. They are easily swayed by oratory and a re a member of the "sheep" family of contented grazers.
Well, of course you are. You both seem to just love the whitey-hating Marxist for some reason. I would imagine the only ones who will ever know why will be God and your psychiatrists. I imagine those sessions, where he delves into what makes you tick and why you have changed from someone who supported a real patriot in Ron Paul, or claimed to anyway, and now supports someone who is his complete opposite in Obama, is confusing to say the least.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. They are easily swayed by oratory and a re a member of the "sheep" family of contented grazers. Sad, ain't it?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. You are a responsible poster with whom discourse and debate moves along a logical line and who allows it to evolve. Ricky Retardo is a fuckwit who repeats the same crap over and over trying desperately to make it true by trying to wear down those debunking his verbal patter. I cite the stark, black and white, and incontrovertible evidence like extremely high accomplishment academically because it is begged by Ricky's fuckwit style. If I bore you with repetitions the obvious, my apologies. But as long as he posts lies, I will debunk them.
Race doesn't bother me and I could, and would, vote for a black person but not just any black person. And that is what the white guilters are doing in this case. And I think you will be eating huge helpings of crow if that whitey hating Marxist actually gets elected. Of course the way the system is rigged it is a "choice" between him and that lunatic, McCain, but a sensible person would say a plague on both their houses and do a protest vote or not participate in what he knows to be a fraud.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. I am not moved by your proclamations all three are equally incompetent and bad. I have lived in a community full of nihilists like you and am weary of doom and gloom stagnation politics. Your attitude and fuss budget attitude is what is sad here, nothing else.
Lincoln...lawyer..Civil War Wilson....College professor..WW1 Roosevelt...Hahvud...WW2 Truman...Dummy inherited FDR Korea... Johnson..School teacher...Vietnam Bush...Yale... Iraq Clinton...Oxfud...Kosovo Bush...Yale...Iraq II Obama...Hahvud.....Lets speculate, unless Bush beats him to Iran Obummer will dance to the tune from Tel Aviv... Note....Note a single small town bitter white trash hill billy yet has started a war.
Comments (62 - 219) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestUSA “Johnson, James A.” “Vice Chairman, Perseus, LLC” (Obama’s man tasked with selecting his running mate)
#22. To: (#19)
#23. To: Arator, a vast rightwing conspirator, Jethro Tull (#19)
#24. To: Arator (#19)
#25. To: Original_Intent (#23)
Any contention otherwise is simply self delusion
#26. To: christine (#25)
but, according to Arator, we who are not self deluded are "stump stupid."
#27. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#1)
The stupids are likely to vote for McCain or to stay home and watch Cialis infomercials.
#28. To: Arator (#19)
And, now, a black man shall rule over them, one possessing exceptional intellect and political skills, and the prospect positively terrifies them.
#29. To: Arator (#21)
I hope he stands up to them all and picks Webb.
#30. To: Arator, christine. (#26)
but, according to Arator, we who are not self deluded are "stump stupid."
#31. To: Arator (#19)
(Edited)
And, now, a black man shall rule over them, one possessing exceptional intellect and political skills, and the prospect positively terrifies them. In this way, the stars have aligned so that very universe mocks and laughs at their puerile and retrograde pigmentation-based pretensions.
#32. To: Arator (#26)
now, a black man shall rule over them, one possessing exceptional intellect and political skills, and the prospect positively terrifies them. In this way, the 'stars have aligned so that very universe mocks and laughs at their puerile and retrograde pigmentation-based pretensions".
#33. To: christine (#31)
(Edited)
further, if obama had Ron Paul's politics or if Ron Paul were black, either one would have our support.
#34. To: Arator (#33)
But it was also apparent than many here actually hoped Hillary would beat Obama (or still hope that he will lose to McCain in the the general).
#35. To: Arator (#33)
I can't think of any rational reason why anyone would favor Hillary or McCain to Obama.
#36. To: RickyJ (#28)
"Very funny Arator. If you think Obama is in any way smart, then I have a bridge to sell you real cheap."
"Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly." Robert F. Kennedy
#37. To: Cynicom (#32)
(Edited)
From your writings, one sees indications you are either a person of color or a self hating white person that sees racism in every aspect of their life.
#38. To: Arator (#37)
My only aquaintance with self-identified "white" or "European-American" pigmentation-based identity groups/websites has been via posts here on 4um. As you probably gathered, I have nothing but contempt for those who vest their identity in mere skin color. Skin color is probably the most superficial basis for "community" possible. If that's all some folks have to hang their identity upon, it probably means that they suffer for lack anything more meaningful. Hence, rather than a being a mark of membership in some great civilization or high culture (as "white" supremacists like to pretend), it (ironically) signals a civilizational collapse towards barbarism.
#39. To: scrapper2 (#38)
Puhleaze...get real. Progress = whites.
#40. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
#41. To: Arator (#33)
(Edited)
I can't think of any rational reason why anyone would favor Hillary or McCain to Obama.
#42. To: Fred Mertz (#39)
(Edited)
If you say so, whitey.
#43. To: RickyJ (#41)
Obama is a racist, a habitual liar, and a elitist.
#44. To: scrapper2 (#38)
(Edited)
However to diss the contributions of whites in Western nations is too PC blind on your part. Without a doubt the greatest inventions, the greatest progess in the arts and sciences have been accomplished through the intelligence and creativity of whites. Puhleaze...get real. Progress = whites.
#45. To: Arator (#44)
It is only in the last five-hundred years that Western and Northern European peoples have become dominant, thanks in no small part to prior advances made by other peoples in other parts of the globe.
#46. To: Arator (#37)
(as "white" supremacists like to pretend), it (ironically) signals the bleeding edge of an ongoing civilizational collapse towards barbarism.
#47. To: RickyJ (#45)
(Edited)
The Romans were White, they dominated when Jesus was here. That was over 2000 years ago.
#48. To: Arator (#19)
And, now, a black man shall rule over them, one possessing
exceptional intellect and political skills, and the prospect positively
terrifies them. In this way, the stars have aligned so that the very universe
mocks and laughs at their puerile and retrograde pigmentation-based
pretensions.
#49. To: RickyJ (#41)
"Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly." Robert F. Kennedy
#50. To: Ferret Mike (#49)
#51. To: RickyJ (#41)
There is no rational reason to choose him over either McCain or Hillary. None whatsoever.
Lord Acton
#52. To: Jethro Tull (#48)
"Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly." Robert F. Kennedy
#53. To: Ferret Mike (#49)
#54. To: Ferret Mike (#52)
Get over your obsessions.
#55. To: James Deffenbach (#51)
A rational person would not vote for any one of the three
#56. To: Arator, a vast rightwing conspirator, Jethro Tull (#19)
I'm with you, avrwc.
Lord Acton
#57. To: Cynicom (#55)
People looking for a political Savior will always find one.
Lord Acton
#58. To: Jethro Tull (#53)
"What does the man's formal education have to do with the socialism he espouses?"
"Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly." Robert F. Kennedy
#59. To: Ferret Mike (#52)
It is painfully obvious race bothers you a hell of allot. The rest of us don't give a damn as long as a candidate has the right stuff to lead and Obama has it.
Lord Acton
#60. To: James Deffenbach (#57)
"Sad, ain't it?"
"Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly." Robert F. Kennedy
#61. To: Jethro Tull (#53)
What does the man's formal education have to do with the socialism he espouses?
.
.
.