Obama - possible ?

I should've expected the remarks. What I meant is that as a country that's seen at the forefront of democracy (rankings will disagree) its good to see a country introduce a president when they didn't allow either women or blacks to vote not even a century ago.
 
daveza said:
the proliferation of white power neo-nazi groups, the psychos and plain fruitcakes
Click to expand...
"proliferation"!? Evidence, now. That's BS. Pro-white racism is probably lower and less dangerous than its ever been in the US, ever. (Racist white-on-black crime of any sort is highly anomalous.) And in spite of the prevalent childish mass paranoia, actual 'psychos and fruitcakes' are INCREDIBLY rare, to the point of almost being non-existent. Really. For all intents and purposes, dangerous *fruitcakes* pretty much don't even exist. You've got more chance of being hit by lightning.

I don't even want to contemplate the fallout following the assasination of a black president by a white hate group.
Click to expand...
Sure it would be ugly, but come on, the odds of this happening must be close to a billion to one. Americans are pretty chill (with the exception of a tiny minority who bomb abortion clinics). Obama's probably got more chance of being hit by lightning or a tornado.

That said, I'm not an Obama supporter. The US needs less socialism, not more. Plus it irks me that most people voting for him are doing so for the sole reason "because he's black", which (apart from being racist) is the dumbest f-ing reason I've ever heard to vote for someone, bar none.
 
Ok, I concede.

Replace proliferation with plethora.

What odds would you have given to two jumbo jets flying fully loaded into the Twin Towers - granted they were not Americans but we're talking about odds.

The odds of someone winning the lottery are humungously low - but not for one person.

Timothy McVeigh
The roadside sniper
the Unabomber
Charles Manson
Ann Coulter

Fruitcakes all of them.

Westboro Baptists - now here's a bunch of wallies for whom the term psycho, fruitcake, completely wacko just doesn't even start to do them justice.
 
daveza said:
I think he only listens if you use a big G letter - like you used for Obama.
Click to expand...

Lets clear a few cobwebs for you.

If you are evangelical you vote for Huckabee. He's way off in 3rd place miles behind. So not many of them around.

If you're Mormon you vote for Romney. He is well behind in 2nd place. Now when you consider they are a small minority who else is voting for him?

Then there is McCain who is well ahead with more delegates then both of Huckabee and Romney combined. Who's voting for him?

All this BS about the Christian religious fundemalist party is nothing more than the usual liberal MSM rubbish. Just like they're supposed to also be the 'white supremist party. Having two black party members in postitions of power high than anything ever achieved by black Dem members blew that BS out the window. Same now with McCain winning blows this whole Christian fundemalist rubbish onto the cr@p heap of leftie hogwash. :rolleyes:


Fudzy said:
I should've expected the remarks. What I meant is that as a country that's seen at the forefront of democracy (rankings will disagree) its good to see a country introduce a president when they didn't allow either women or blacks to vote not even a century ago.
Click to expand...

That's no reason to vote for somebody. If that president turns out to be rubbish ( like Obama certainly would) then you've shot yourself in the foot. :o


Turtle said:
That said, I'm not an Obama supporter. The US needs less socialism, not more. Plus it irks me that most people voting for him are doing so for the sole reason "because he's black", which (apart from being racist) is the dumbest f-ing reason I've ever heard to vote for someone, bar none.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's scary how many 'enlightened' people are supporting him based only on that. All E Obama offers is the colour of his skin, age and hollywood 'glitz'. But hey that's what they think is required to be a good pres so be it :sick:

daveza said:
Timothy McVeigh
The roadside sniper
the Unabomber
Charles Manson
Ann Coulter

Fruitcakes all of them.

Westboro Baptists - now here's a bunch of wallies for whom the term psycho, fruitcake, completely wacko just doesn't even start to do them justice.
Click to expand...

What's your point exactly :confused:
 
alanf85 said:
What's your point exactly :confused:
Click to expand...

If you read the thread I was chastised for commenting on the existence of a number of loonies in the States some of whom could be a physical threat to Obama should he be elected President.

My reply was to list a couple of high profile dangerous loonies.

Why would Obama certainly turn out to be rubbish ?
 
daveza said:
The right wing conservatives in the Republican camp are up in arms at the likelihood of McCain being the Republican candidate for the next US president, due to his ' liberal ' views.
Click to expand...

Yes while he does have a few 'liberal' views (only really immigration and gun-control), he is the second most conservative member in Congress.

In fact, according to Voteview.com, McCain's voting record in the 109th Congress was the second most conservative among senators.[201] However, his voting record during the 107th Congress, from January 2001 through November 2002, placed him as the sixth most liberal Republican senator, according to the same analysis.[202]

McCain has many traditionally Republican views. He has a strong conservative voting record on pro-life[203] and free trade issues, favors private social security accounts, and opposes an expanded government role in health care. McCain also supports school vouchers, capital punishment, mandatory sentencing, and welfare reform.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain#Assessments_by_political_interest_groups
 
Before we lose sight and discuss the merits or lack of of various candidates, the question was

Do you think the religious right/conservatives/white supremacists would accept a black president.

If not is it reasonable to suggest they 'would do something about it '.
 
The question presumes the Reps didn't make it and Obama did.

But to hijack my own thread with this breaking news...

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1304526,00.html

Millionaire Mitt Romney has dropped out of the race to win the Republican nomination for the White House.

Mitt RomneyThe decision makes Arizona Senator John McCain the all-but-certain nominee of his party for November's presidential election.
Click to expand...
 
daveza said:
Timothy McVeigh
The roadside sniper
the Unabomber
Charles Manson
Ann Coulter

Fruitcakes all of them.
Click to expand...
Who has Ann Coulter murdered? Anyway, so we have three or four out of hundreds of millions of Americans who have existed. That almost proves my point. If it were such a problem you'd be able to point to something in the news almost daily. Seriously, lightning/bees etc. kill far more people than "fruitcakes", why do fruitcakes get all our paranoid attention, we should rather get hyper over Obama possibly being stung to death by bees or eaten by a shark, the odds are probably higher. OK, perhaps presidents are in general more likely to get murdered, but still even that seems quite unusual, especially considering how many people presidents come into contact with regularly.

Westboro Baptists - now here's a bunch of wallies for whom the term psycho, fruitcake, completely wacko just doesn't even start to do them justice.
Click to expand...
There are MANY fruitcakes, but there are extremely, but extremely few *dangerous* fruitcakes, especially amongst US citizens. It's so rare it's basically a non-entity. The very reason 'Tim Mcveigh' is probably the first to spring to most peoples minds *is* that what he did was so rare and exceptional.

daveza said:
Before we lose sight and discuss the merits or lack of of various candidates, the question was

Do you think the religious right/conservatives/white supremacists would accept a black president.
Click to expand...

Depends what you mean by "accept", but I think so, yes. Sure you'll see some complaining on the fringes but then most will just get over it and get on with their lives. The US won't collapse after a single four year term by Obama, and most people will probably be glad to be out of the Bush era.
 
Last edited:
Fudzy said:
I should've expected the remarks. What I meant is that as a country that's seen at the forefront of democracy (rankings will disagree) its good to see a country introduce a president when they didn't allow either women or blacks to vote not even a century ago.
Click to expand...

Democracy is about equal rights, not equal outcomes. And it's about voting for people based on merit. Voting for someone "because they're black" (or female) will not be a good thing, it's a racist or sexist ideological argument that goes against the grain of democracy in a dangerous way, as it further promotes the very idea of voting on idiotic qualities like tits or skin colour instead of, gee, I don't know, constitutional issues like gun control or economic issues like welfare. (The very fact that we're having this discussion at all suggests that our attention has already been diverted away from the real issues and to focusing on race (by whom?), so we've already gone backwards and been pulled down into the mud, the game is lost - it's as if every discussion of merit is a non-starter.) If you don't vote for someone because you believe they'd make the BEST PRESIDENT, then you're asking for a worse president, that's stupid. And as someone else pointed out, counterproductive to your very goal: A bad black president would be the absolute worst thing ever for your goal of equality. Fortunately for Obama, Bush has set the 'expectation' bar quite low.

Actually I can't believe you said with a straight face 'it would be good to shove black tokens into prominent positions'. That's insulting and degrading to blacks, it suggests they'll never get there on merit alone, and that's the message it'll send to little black kids --- "we need to be artificially pushed into high positions".

America is actually a fairly solid democracy, even if imperfect. Every citizen has equal rights and opportunities.
 
Last edited:
At least one other person shares my concerns...

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1304779,00.html

'They Would Murder A Black President'
Updated:14:36, Saturday February 09, 2008

US Presidential hopeful Barack Obama would be assassinated if he won the race for the White House, it is claimed.
Doris Lessing, winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature, said a first black American president would not be tolerated by some.

Barack Obama Obama and Hillary Clinton are the front-runners for the Democratic party's nomination for November's election.



Mrs Lessing, 88, a Brit who won the award last year, said Obama "would certainly not last long, a black man in the position of president. They would murder him".


Doris Lessing, speaking to Swedish daily newspaper Dagens Nyheter believes it would be better if Mrs Clinton, the former First Lady, won.

Victory would make her the first female US president.

"The best thing would be if they (Clinton and Obama) were to run together. Hillary is a very sharp lady. It might be calmer if she were to win, and not Obama," she said.
Click to expand...
 
Two presidents at the same time? That would add a new spin on things.
 
If he was assasinated he'll certainly prove that there are still way too many backward ***holes in America.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X