Sharpton BLASTS Obama: Swingers Discussion 75149

155
Sharpton BLASTS Obama: Swingers Discussion 75149

Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

TOPIC: Sharpton BLASTS Obama

Created by: 38specials	The original post for this thread was deleted.

GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4

1 to 10 of 31

End

User Details are only visible to members.	Him: Straight After Barack Obama was championed as "new face of black politics" I took pause for a few moments and remembered the words of one of my personal heroes. He said: " “The majority of Negro political leaders do not ascend to prominence on the shoulders of mass support. Although genuinely popular leaders are now emerging, most are selected by white leadership, elevated to position, supplied with resources, and inevitably subjected to white control. The mass of Negroes nurtures a healthy suspicion toward these manufactured leaders.” That encapsulates my view of the guy. Beefstick .......explain what country has leadership not determined or influenced by the Majority race of that country? Whites are still the majority, it's seems to make sense statistically that they would be in the position to choose which politicians to elevate. I mean would you complain about a black man being "elevated" by the Japanese in if he was running for Prime Minister of Japan? As for the suspicions, I said it once and I'll say it again and again. In addition to protesting and fighting Racism, like whats going on in Paris, TX. We should also become our own harshest critics. We turn a blind eye to the negative influences within our communities and make excuses for them because the "system" is unfair. Well life is unfair, the Universe is unfair, are we going to start protesting these things too? Why not set standards as they had done during the Civil Rights Era? Back in those days if kids walked down the street in any neighborhood dressed as some dress today, they would probably be arrested or confronted by the community. We don't have that kind of involvement today. We don't have neighbors who look out for children and refuse to allow bad influences to poison our streets. We've become a self absorbed culture, it's all about "Getting Yours". I see the drug dealers, drug addicts, and gang members as being a part of a diseased limb on the body of our African American Community. Instead of aggressively fighting the disease we sit back and let it get worst. If you have a foot that gets gangrene you don't spare the foot just because it's not "at fault", you make a tough decision to either amputate the foot or loose your life. That's the kind of decision that we will have to face in our communities. We will not be in control of our political destiny until we can consolidate economic power, maintain moral community standards, and get involved in changing the toxic culture that so many kids are left exposed to. No other solution exists. That's the hard truth, irregardless of racism in the past, present, and future. If we can't address these issues by setting basic standards within our communities then all the Civil Rights rallies in the world won't change anything. Other minorities within this country does this, Asians and Africans are among some of the most well organized minorities within the United States. Especially Asians, they have communities and networks that have gained them political power and the financial support to protect themselves from racists in power. They thrive in spite of the color of their skin, as do Africans who come to this country and start businesses. We can do the same, and we need to.
Arlington TX			Username hidden (2285 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	After Barack Obama was championed as "new face of black politics" I took pause for a few moments and remembered the words of one of my personal heroes. He said: " “The majority of Negro political leaders do not ascend to prominence on the shoulders of mass support. Although genuinely popular leaders are now emerging, most are selected by white leadership, elevated to position, supplied with resources, and inevitably subjected to white control. The mass of Negroes nurtures a healthy suspicion toward these manufactured leaders.” That encapsulates my view of the guy.
Brooklyn NY			Username hidden (118 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	And why doesn't it DebJack. You think all talking points from the left are false!
St Petersburg FL			Username hidden (989 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	Did he ever try? Did he ever tell the American people of this growing threat? If he had then I would be more willing to give him a pass. But it seems that he was more interested in his "Legacy" than worrying about some dirty Islomofacists who probably couldn't carry out a successful attack anyway......until September 11th, 2001 that is. Did everything he could? I would respect him more if he actually had admitted that he could have done more. But it seems that he has an "excuse" for everything, nothings his fault . He jumps on Chris Wallace's ass for asking him a simple question, and you guys cheer like he was taking on Shawn Hannity. Had that been Bush jumping into Anderson Cooper's shit you guys would be calling him childish and rude all day. You guys like to say that about Bush, and ya maybe he wears "rose colored glasses" when dealing with some issues. But most presidents do. What I like about Bush is that he doesn't seem to care about "Legacy", it might not even bother him if history regards him as one of the worst presidents either. I think he's giving his country 100%, and being human at times that may not be enough, but what more can you ask. The difference between Clinton and Bush for me is that I can believe Bush's sincerity before I could Clinton's. I mean could you imagine if Bush had said "well that depends on what the definition of "Is" is"? Come on I would love for one Liberal on here to admit that they have a double standard when comparing Bush to Clinton. Hell I'll admit it. I have a double standard with regards to some issues, only because I believe in one mans character over another. Now take that, cut it up, and quote it all day long if ya like.
Arlington TX			Username hidden (2285 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	DebJack All of which are talking points of the right and really have nothing to do with what I said. Clinton is bashed by the right for basically not going to war to prevent 9/11 when there was no possible way Clinton could have garnered support from his Congress for anything more than what he did.....lob missles. He couldn't have received Congressional approval to scratch his ass during that time in history little lone get Congressional approval for invading Alphganistan.
St Petersburg FL			Username hidden (989 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	DebJack "Also,Clinton fired a couple of cruise missiles timed to fog the issue of Monica and her testimony. You watch too much CNN ABC CBS NBC MSNBC. " Don't know which one you watch too much of.....Fox maybe. Let's be realistic, there is no way that Clinton could have done more prior to 9/11 with a republican controlled congress. The political winds during the time "prior" to 9/11 were not with Clinton. He could not have gotten support from the Congress for an invasion of Aphganistan or Iraq for that matter....so pretty much lobbing some missisles was all he could do without "warring" authority. I could imagine the uproar from Congress if he had......the blow job would have taken back seat if that had occured.
St Petersburg FL			Username hidden (989 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	With 9/11, I don't care who was President at the time. It would have gone down. It was something akin to winning the lottery for terrorists. It was so improbable to have gone well for them as it did, that no one really believed it could ever happen. Hell even Bin Ladin was surprised. Bush took this attack personally and became committed perhaps even obsessed with defending this country. Now I say that that every decision that he has made has had that motivation behind it. It doesn't mean that his policies are perfect or that they would even be successful. But I believe that he has the right motivation. We still have people who don't believe 19 Arab hijackers caused 9/11. Some believe that Bush was behind that as well. When you have those people mixed in with his critics it greatly diminishes the honesty of government descent. I would like the decenter to be more honest, even if I still disagree with them. What we have is a "Bush lied, soldiers died" mantra that isn't supported by the facts. YY you've shown your "compassion" for people sulfuring in Iraq through another post of yours. You believe that Saddam Hussian was a good thing for Iraq. That he was no threat to the U.S. I wonder if we pre-emptively attacked Afganistan before 9/11, would you have said the same things about Osama and the Taliban? Instead of easy rhetoric how about some hard answers and solutions? The Dems have not delivered those yet, and they might not need to either, now that really scares me. Because they may be in power in 08'. Hurricane Katrina. Now this is not a popular position to take, but I put more responsibility on the Local Government who refused to use the resources they had available to get those people out of there. They had places that they could have gone, a few phone calls is all it would have taken. The local government did not respond with the urgency that was necessary to save people's lives. You can blame the federal government for many things during that time. However the first line of defense failed to do it's job. I put the majority of the blame on the Local Government and then the state government for being to in decisive about giving the federal government total control. I believe that states should surrender control to the federal government when a disaster of this magnitude takes place. There should be as little red tape as possible. Of course YY would probably put most of the blame on Bush, but I'm from Louisiana and know how lazy and corrupt the system is there. Keep in mind I was not a "Bush Supporter" before 9/11, I could not have cared less about his presidency. I supported Mccain. But after 9/11 I understood the gravity of the presidency. What it meant to be the leader of the free world. The truth is that I would probably be an Al Gore supporter if he had been president and decided to become a hawk in order to protect this country. When your enemies are hardcore killers you can't afford to second guess yourself with every decision. You can't afford to worry about "creating more enemies", either you are all in to destroy your enemy or not. The terrorists who want to kill us don't argue about whether or not it's right or wrong to do the things that they do. They are focused and prepared to die in order to destroy this country. If you don't believe what they say, when they say that they want to destroy America, and think that they can be reasoned with. Then there is nothing I can say to you. Except maybe that I pray to God, someone who feels as you do don't become president of this country.
Arlington TX			Username hidden (2285 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	"We can just claim "bad luck" and then pass fault of on people we've hired, and THEN when it's time for THEM to face responsibility, we can simply give them awards and praise the "great job" they've done. That's a WIN-WIN if I've ever seen one. Thanks again Joe, for the insight. I'm so excited right now that I might just quit my job and by some dice, a rabbit's foot, and a bunch of 4-leaf clovers." YingYang YY anytime you have the worst terrorist attack in the nation's history within the first few months of your first term. Not to mention the worst Natural disaster in the nation's history. I would call that "Bad Luck", now I did not say that he was not responsible for responding to these situations. I do believe that he that he has taken flak for things beyond his control.
Arlington TX			Username hidden (2285 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	Yeah and Hilary wearing a stap on !!!!.
Fayetteville GA			Username hidden (2075 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	The more I think back I have a hard time remembering why the "Clinton Years" were so good. Oh that's right we were not at war with terrorists. Although if we had been, then maybe 9/11 would not have happened. How about the stock markets? We did have a huge tech bubble, of course it popped when he was leaving office.......Well at least he fixed Social Security, The Educational System, and Medicare.....oh wait no that's not true....Well the troops loved him, He spent more money on helping Military families and vetreans than any other president!.......what? that wasn't Clinton? Well he was "Popular" all over the world and so what if his "Balanced Budget" did not take into account the "War on Terror", the Department of Homeland Security", 9/11, or Hurricanes Katrina and Rita? We had a "Balanced Budget people! Looking back back I wonder what ole Slick Willie would have done to fix our problems. Maybe he would have done a better job of making us think they did not exist.......... That being said, Bush won't win a Gold Star when it comes to handling the same issues either. But he had the guts to confront the terrorists and to set our focus on fighting Terrorism. I don't believe the man was being "dishonest" when he made the decision to invade Iraq. I just think that as a commander and chief he picked the wrong people to work under him, and his Loyalty has come back to bite him more than once during his presidency. He also doesn't really do diplomacy very well, he's not a "cultured" guy. In other words he he's too plain spoken and straight up when dealing with foreign governments. He's not nuanced enough to trick them into doing what we need them to do for us. If anything I would call Bush unlucky. That being said, I look forward to 08' and a "fresh start". I have a terrible feeling that the Right will fall on their swords and nominate a "true conservative" like Mitt or Newt. I guess if you have to lose an election lose supporting your "Principles". I would have voted for Mccain in 2000 and I would vote for him in 08' out of the current field he is the best choice for president IMO. Of course Powell could always become a Fall surprise, that would really shake things up, and don't forget about Condi. But otherwise I just get the terrible feeling that many Republicans have given up on winning the White House in 08'. Unfortunately I think a "fresh start" will mean a Democrat as president. At this point I don't see Libermann getting in the race, nor does he have a snow ball's chance of winning the nomination. And Hillary? No chance in hell she can get elected, I think the republicans are hoping for her to win the nomination, she's really there best shot. Edwards? Well he may have San Francisco and parts of Manhattan..... So I guess we will have to settle for "Everyone Loves Obama". I just hope he has the skill to back up his feel good attitude. Otherwise we could see the Left's version of an inexperienced politician who's "Guided" by far left forces, making huge policy blunders............ Rant done. Now I have to get ready to get drunk and hopefully laid on my Birthday! 29......the last year of being a "Young Adult".
Arlington TX			Username hidden (2285 post)

GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4

1 to 10 of 31

End

TOPIC: Sharpton BLASTS Obama