RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Next, we have Babe who just called Mandeal a terrorist. One of the world's greatest leaders of principle and a guy with incredible intestinal fortitude,  is somehow a "terrorist"?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are consistently the moron in all things. Mandela was part and parcel of terrorist bombings. This isn't disputed. Because the cause was just doesn't excuse the tactics dum bass. You are insufferably stupid.


    [/QUOTE]


    What Mandella is remembered for is admirable. what some of the things he was a part of, well , no so much. His party was a communist party and he got his money from the soviets. If that was his only means to and end I will let it go

    But what people will remember for - for freedonm and liberty are good things. I am just going to remember that and move on.

    [/QUOTE]


    His cause was just, but his tactics were despicable. He got a makeover by the media in later years. That's simply the truth.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DanishPastry's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

    Socialism is too often simply used - by Americans - as a term of something you don't like. Though there are more branches of socialism than I care to list - or know of for that matter, in political/economic terms socialism in general is characterized by social ownership of the means of production and co-management of the economy. By that definition neither is Obama a socialist nor is the US turning into a socialist society. To claim otherwise is wrong. As in very wrong.

    What healthcare could be viewed as is change towards more of a welfare state. One may or may not like that, but to call it something it is not derails the argument.

    Back on topic. Mandela is right up there as one of the most important figures in the last 50 years. Not as president, but as the leader of the Anti-Apartheid movement, and as symbol of the fight for freedom.

    Obamas presidency I believe has been a disappointment to many, but he too will stand as a symbol, and as a historical figure in the history of your country. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Americans don't really think anymore, they just put labels on things and then react accordingly.  

    The real issue is about whether we provide healthcare to people who can't afford it and, if we decide to provide that care, how we do it.  Of course, it requires some kind of "welfare" or "socialism" to provide care to those who don't have the money to pay for care.  The only alternative to some kind of socialism or welfare is not to provide that care at all, and just let sick people with no money suffer and die.  We could take that second alternative.  If, however, we decide that we want to be a more humane society, then welfare or socialism or whatever you want to label it is the only option.  

    That's the reality.  If you argue against socialism/welfare/whatever, you are arguing in favour of letting the poor suffer and die if they can't afford care.  It's fine to argue that if that's the kind of person you are, but just be honest about it. What you really are saying is I don't give a damn if the poor die because they can't afford care.  That's their problem.  Too bad. Too sad.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    South Africa labeled him as a terrorist…hmmm…well…we were terrorists to the British in Lexington on April 19, 1775 I suppose.

    [/QUOTE]

    Really? Were the "minute men" blowing up civilian buildings like Mandela?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't we drop atomic bombs on two Japanese cities full of civilians?

    Oh wait, when we killed civilians it was for a higher purpose . . . 

    The ANC only did it to free a bunch of black people . . . 

    And besides all those civilians we killed weren't really civilians, you know, being Asian and all . . .

     

    [/QUOTE]

    1. Japan had been slaughtering civilians in Korea, China, the Phillipines, Burma, etc, for over a decade.

    2. We had to actually drop a second bomb which goes to show you how cuckoo they were.

    3. We were not sending in a million new troops some from Europe who survived that mess to die in Tokyo.

    I hate that argument about that situation. The second one proved the first one had to be dropped.   War is an ugly thing and I'd suggest what Japan did in the 1930s and early 1940s not go unchecked by the world.

    I don't think trying to end a war that had taken millions of lives is for a "higher purpose". I think it's to try to save lives and end the war.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, well wasn't what the ANC did trying to end apartheid?  You see, getting on your high horse about killing civilians is hypocritical because every culture kills civilians when they think it's necessary for some higher purpose.  They US did it too on a mass scale.  Justified? Maybe.  But if our killing civilians to end war is justified why wouldn't the ANC's killing of civilians to end apartheid not be justified too? Maybe it is justified.  

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Social Security was one of the more brilliant plans ever.

    [/QUOTE]

    You are so f'n dumb it's painful. SS was the work of imbeciles, because of the "pay as you go" structure. That was asking for a catastrophe and benefited certain persons at the time at the expense of future generations.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Social Security was partly created by Republicans in the 1930s when FDR was president. Are you aware of that? It's an American prorgram meant to support the older population, like yourself. lmao

    Gee, how horrible of an idea.

    So, you're in favor of older people who are too old to work just to starve to death and end their life rummaging for food in trash bins?  

    Are you aware what this country was like pre Great Depression?  Wasn't really in the best spot.  The Great Depression reset everything and changed how America grew, for the better. There was an actual, tangible Middle Class and we were the envy of the world until this recent run of mass corruption in Congress, Congress having far more power than the president.

    Why?  Money. Power and money.  It's always been that way, and always will, but how bad it gets is the real key.  The de-regulation of Glass-Steagall made the abuses of the last 10-15 years a mnuch more attainable thing.

    And, don't think for a second you can call me dumb on subjects I happen to know a lot about, Diapers.

    Try reading a book that isn't the Bible, dumbo.

    [/QUOTE]


    You really are this stupid. Did I say a retirement program for the elderly was a bad idea moron? Ahh, NO!

    I said the pay as you go structure was a bad idea. That's why we have problems funding it today (along with the ridiculous disability payouts). Is that too hard for you to grasp?

     

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    South Africa labeled him as a terrorist…hmmm…well…we were terrorists to the British in Lexington on April 19, 1775 I suppose.

    [/QUOTE]

    Really? Were the "minute men" blowing up civilian buildings like Mandela?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't we drop atomic bombs on two Japanese cities full of civilians?

    Oh wait, when we killed civilians it was for a higher purpose . . . 

    The ANC only did it to free a bunch of black people . . . 

    And besides all those civilians we killed weren't really civilians, you know, being Asian and all . . .

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Have you lost your mind?

    You did hear that they dropped those bombs during a WAR, right? You have heard of Pearl Harbor, haven't you? You are aware 350,000 Americans died in WW2 aren't you? You are aware some estimates of the cost to invade Japan numbered in the hundreds of thousands of lives don't you?

     

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    South Africa labeled him as a terrorist…hmmm…well…we were terrorists to the British in Lexington on April 19, 1775 I suppose.

    [/QUOTE]

    Really? Were the "minute men" blowing up civilian buildings like Mandela?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't we drop atomic bombs on two Japanese cities full of civilians?

    Oh wait, when we killed civilians it was for a higher purpose . . . 

    The ANC only did it to free a bunch of black people . . . 

    And besides all those civilians we killed weren't really civilians, you know, being Asian and all . . .

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Have you lost your mind?

    You did hear that they dropped those bombs during a WAR, right? You have heard of Pearl Harbor, haven't you? You are aware 350,000 Americans died in WW2 aren't you? You are aware some estimates of the cost to invade Japan numbered in the hundreds of thousands of lives don't you?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Look killing civilians is either always wrong or there are exceptions.  I think we all seem to agree that there are exceptions.  Now it comes down to deciding which exceptions are legitimate or not.

    Ending several hundred years of race-based oppression maybe is a legitimate exception.  That's all.

     

     

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    South Africa labeled him as a terrorist…hmmm…well…we were terrorists to the British in Lexington on April 19, 1775 I suppose.

    [/QUOTE]

    Really? Were the "minute men" blowing up civilian buildings like Mandela?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't we drop atomic bombs on two Japanese cities full of civilians?

    Oh wait, when we killed civilians it was for a higher purpose . . . 

    The ANC only did it to free a bunch of black people . . . 

    And besides all those civilians we killed weren't really civilians, you know, being Asian and all . . .

     

    [/QUOTE]

    1. Japan had been slaughtering civilians in Korea, China, the Phillipines, Burma, etc, for over a decade.

    2. We had to actually drop a second bomb which goes to show you how cuckoo they were.

    3. We were not sending in a million new troops some from Europe who survived that mess to die in Tokyo.

    I hate that argument about that situation. The second one proved the first one had to be dropped.   War is an ugly thing and I'd suggest what Japan did in the 1930s and early 1940s not go unchecked by the world.

    I don't think trying to end a war that had taken millions of lives is for a "higher purpose". I think it's to try to save lives and end the war.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, well wasn't what the ANC did trying to end apartheid?  You see, getting on your high horse about killing civilians is hypocritical because every culture kills civilians when they think it's necessary for some higher purpose.  They US did it too on a mass scale.  Justified? Maybe.  But if our killing civilians to end war is justified why wouldn't the ANC's killing of civilians to end apartheid not be justified too? Maybe it is justified.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I didn't say a civil war in South Africa like that was or was not jusitifed.  In a perfect world, those never happen.

    But, if you look back through history, almost every society has some variation of a civil war and/or a revolution which did include killing civilians.

    I am not promoting it or defending it, but pointing out your comment about the bombs in Japan being questioned.  I just always though it came off as arm chair QB type garbage due to guilt.

    I refuse to not respect those who fought and died for my asss by pretending there was some better solution, with more soldiers dying, as if they are less important than civilians in a mess like that.

    No one is disputing the ugliness of war and that sometimes civilians were involved. We bombed Dresden quite a bit  towards the end and killed civilians. We wouldn;t have had to do that if the cuckoo with the mustache realized he wasn't going to win, or if that assassination attempt on him in July of '44 was successful.

    Walk softly, carry a big stick indeed.  Crap works.

    [/QUOTE]

    Actually, Rusty, I'm not criticizing the decision to drop the bomb.  All I'm doing is pointing out the hypocrisy of those who think that we are somehow more moral than others because we don't kill civilians and others do.  Every culture, including our own, kills civilians if they think they have some higher purpose that justifies the killing.

     

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    South Africa labeled him as a terrorist…hmmm…well…we were terrorists to the British in Lexington on April 19, 1775 I suppose.

    [/QUOTE]

    Really? Were the "minute men" blowing up civilian buildings like Mandela?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't we drop atomic bombs on two Japanese cities full of civilians?

    Oh wait, when we killed civilians it was for a higher purpose . . . 

    The ANC only did it to free a bunch of black people . . . 

    And besides all those civilians we killed weren't really civilians, you know, being Asian and all . . .

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Have you lost your mind?

    You did hear that they dropped those bombs during a WAR, right? You have heard of Pearl Harbor, haven't you? You are aware 350,000 Americans died in WW2 aren't you? You are aware some estimates of the cost to invade Japan numbered in the hundreds of thousands of lives don't you?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Look killing civilians is either always wrong or there are exceptions.  I think we all seem to agree that there are exceptions.  Now it comes down to deciding which exceptions are legitimate or not.

    Ending several hundred years of race-based oppression maybe is a legitimate exception.  That's all.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree with that. It's basically a revolution.  Some stay on one side, some on the other, and one side wins.

    A revolution doesn't always consist of uniformed military personnel.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We're basically on the same side in this debate Rusty.  

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    The Tea Party is clearly one step away from the Nazi Party.   Each was an extremist movement.

    [/QUOTE]

    Seriously, get f'n help. You are a psychotic looney bird.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The Tea Party isn't on the left and it's not the left of the Republican Part right now, dumbo.

    Do you even know what the political spectrum is, stupid?  Seriously.  Please draw a basic spectrum on this board, so the board can tell if you know what you're talking about.

    This should be hilarious.

    A defensive Tea Party racist homophobe is telling me I need help. Absolutely priceless.

    [/QUOTE]


    I'm quite certain that I know more about the political spectrum than you will ever know. The political compass is a far more accurate depiction of one's views anyway. Simpleton.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    "The pay as you go structure" has been wildly successful for like 75 years.

    [/QUOTE]

    More stupidity. Of course that flawed system is going to work, for a while. Duh. That's the problem jackazz. You want a system that doesn't one day collapse from it's own weight. Simply creating personalized accounts from the start would have prevented the pitfalls a changing population causes in a pay as you go system. You are hopelessly stupid.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Well as they say the devil is in the details. 

    the IRS has the power to disrupt your life and livelihood that is the issue. When choices are taken away and the only choice you have that is administered by force is government run healthcare then I see that as an issue in a free market society.if all means of production, goods and wealth are concentrated and controlled by the government, that is not a good thing. Free markets use capital in the best way possible. Certainly more effectively than federal government. This in essence is what the tea party is about - taking power back from the federal government and giving it to the states all built upon our constitution and bill of rights. they have been painted by both parties and the media as racist, but that is not the truth. Those in power will do anything to protect it and the tea party before being corrupted was a challenge to this power base.

    Another reason I am distrustful of the IRS is because they are on record of discriminating against opposition groups because these groups don't hold the same beliefs of those in power. That is a dangerous precedent. Of all,of. Sudden you hold a different view, can be targeted by the IRS, they have the power to make your life a living hell.

    Given you are not American it may be hard for you to appreciate our beginnings, those beginnings  built on a constitution and bill of rights that protect people, not government. As of this writing, those rights are being slowly stripped away. For example, the president passed NDAA Which gives government the authority to unlawfully arrest and detain a person without cause nor due process. This goes against our 4th amendment. The president also didn't turn back (as he promised when campaigning) the spying on Americans and collection of their conversations, etc. by the NSA. Also goes against the 4th amendment. 

    These things like obamacare, NDAA, NSA spying on US citizens by themselves may not be viewed as bad with the right spin.but combined, they go against what this country was all about. Individual freedom, liberty, etc. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Were you all up in arms over the Patriot Act with Dubya? Spare me this "spying" paranoid rhetoric.  What a bunch of drama and rhetoric.

    You're as naive as a 5 year old if you think this country hasn't been doing what it wants, when it wants,  for YEARS, when it comes to that stuff.  You think J Edgar Hoover was sitting on his hands all those years, do ya?

    Obama doesn't care if you surf the web for porn and he ain't taking your guns.  Whoa.

    Hitler once tried using scare tactics like you psycho Tea Party types try to use today. I'd suggest reading a book. That might help. But, you're probably too old to be broken from the brainwashing.

    Yes, let's have literally no gov't, no roads, no hospitals, no schools, nothing.  Super.

    And, I am not even a Democrat. lol

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Russ, yes I was. Doesn't matter who is in office if the trample our civil liberties. 

    you should leave history to those that know. This country hasn't been doing what it wants, not if what it wants is up to the people and not the Fed, CFR  and TC. These groups run things. The pres is just a figurehead.

    tea party which I am not a part of doesn't use scare tactics genius. They at their essence are about protecting our rights and a return to the constitution.  Both of which are in jeapordy now.

    and, I didn't say I didn't want government, I said I would prefer the power balance shift from federal to the states. We don't need a big federal government. we need a strong state and local government with the federal government having very limited power. 

    Yes, I can tell you are not a democrat Because you are an idiot.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    South Africa labeled him as a terrorist…hmmm…well…we were terrorists to the British in Lexington on April 19, 1775 I suppose.

    [/QUOTE]

    Really? Were the "minute men" blowing up civilian buildings like Mandela?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't we drop atomic bombs on two Japanese cities full of civilians?

    Oh wait, when we killed civilians it was for a higher purpose . . . 

    The ANC only did it to free a bunch of black people . . . 

    And besides all those civilians we killed weren't really civilians, you know, being Asian and all . . .

     

    [/QUOTE]

    1. Japan had been slaughtering civilians in Korea, China, the Phillipines, Burma, etc, for over a decade.

    2. We had to actually drop a second bomb which goes to show you how cuckoo they were.

    3. We were not sending in a million new troops some from Europe who survived that mess to die in Tokyo.

    I hate that argument about that situation. The second one proved the first one had to be dropped.   War is an ugly thing and I'd suggest what Japan did in the 1930s and early 1940s not go unchecked by the world.

    I don't think trying to end a war that had taken millions of lives is for a "higher purpose". I think it's to try to save lives and end the war.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, well wasn't what the ANC did trying to end apartheid?  You see, getting on your high horse about killing civilians is hypocritical because every culture kills civilians when they think it's necessary for some higher purpose.  They US did it too on a mass scale.  Justified? Maybe.  But if our killing civilians to end war is justified why wouldn't the ANC's killing of civilians to end apartheid not be justified too? Maybe it is justified.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I didn't say a civil war in South Africa like that was or was not jusitifed.  In a perfect world, those never happen.

    But, if you look back through history, almost every society has some variation of a civil war and/or a revolution which did include killing civilians.

    I am not promoting it or defending it, but pointing out your comment about the bombs in Japan being questioned.  I just always though it came off as arm chair QB type garbage due to guilt.

    I refuse to not respect those who fought and died for my asss by pretending there was some better solution, with more soldiers dying, as if they are less important than civilians in a mess like that.

    No one is disputing the ugliness of war and that sometimes civilians were involved. We bombed Dresden quite a bit  towards the end and killed civilians. We wouldn;t have had to do that if the cuckoo with the mustache realized he wasn't going to win, or if that assassination attempt on him in July of '44 was successful.

    Walk softly, carry a big stick indeed.  Crap works.

    [/QUOTE]

    Actually, Rusty, I'm not criticizing the decision to drop the bomb.  All I'm doing is pointing out the hypocrisy of those who think that we are somehow more moral than others because we don't kill civilians and others do.  Every culture, including our own, kills civilians if they think they have some higher purpose that justifies the killing.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I get  it. I was just jumping in there to show why it was justified.  

    We had them beat in the air, on the ocean and they were surrounded.  It's sad, but the people or families affected by those bombs can blame their leaders.  

    Christ, think about it....Each World War was in some ways avoidable if certain things were done by certain leaders of certain countries.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, my feeling about the atomic bomb was that there was no easy or clear right answer in that situation.  I can't criticize the decision that was made.  In fact, if I had been in the position to make the decision, I probably would have decided to drop the bomb too. That said, I don't think you can ever fully feel comfortable when violence is used, regardless of the righteousness of the cause or the merits of the end achieved. 

    As far as what the ANC did, the tactics aren't pretty.  But if I were in their situation would I have done the same things?  Quite likely.  Just as I wouldn't want more American boys to die needlessly in a drawn out war, I wouldn't want to see my children grow up in what was effectively slavery.  If I felt violence against civilians was the only way out of either situation would I choose a violent path?  Very likely.  We like to say the ends don't justify the means.  But maybe, sometimes, they really do. The world . . . and morality . . . isn't as clear cut as we'd sometimes like. 

     

     

     

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What Mandella will be remembered for as an icon is one thing
    and what he may have been as a man is another. He gets kudos for the great he did. His wife was not so good at all. In the end. the world was far better off for him.

    As to ohole - there is nothing good to say for him. There is no policy domestically or internationally that is working. Even Jonathan Turley -a lib dem who supported Obama-is saying what a danger he is to the Constitution. Not only today but for future presicents The only reason he was elected was cause he was black and the only reason he was reelected was cause he was black. Someone finally beat out Carter for being the worst president of all time. So in the end , the world is worse off for him and the total damage he will do is still unknown. The only Natz like person is Ohole.

    As for you tea party demonizers. The tea party is only for a rational fiscal policy- Against a   $17 trillion dollar debt and still growing. It is not a movement for or against any social issue. Any pol on either side wgo says different is factually incorrect

    [/QUOTE]

    You may know football, but you don't understand politics and history.

    When a new party is created and kicks to the right of the religious right/extremist and cuckoo modern day Republican Party, that's pretty scary stuff.  That's into Nazi Land.  

    If Hitler had succeeded and had a son or sons, the Tea Party would be in line with the Hitlers and Germany/Europe and Europe would be miserable.

    I don't want exclusionists and bible thumpers determining policy in a free country. It's that simple.

    I also don't want people who lack education and common sense dictating policy.  You can always tell who is full of crap when they repeat rhetoric over and over because they want to sound intelligent.

    That's the redneck at Walmart. That's the bible thumper.  That's the angry old white man.   These people are easily manipulated, can't think for themselves and/or brainwashed. They all like the Tear Party and/or race out and vote for Michelle Bachmann or Sara Palin because they never read a book before.

    Not good.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Not know history, well you prove you don't know what you are talking about. 

    Again proving you are an idiot across many topics. For the fifth time mr dunce, the tea party is nothing like the nazi party. If you want to find a more comparable group, look at both the dems and repubs. Anyone, any group intent on taking away our civil liberties, trashing our constitution, and concentrating power in the executive branch is more hitler like. seawolf had it right. 

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to newenglanderinexile's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ImagydBostonOnTwitterYouTube's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to melswitt's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Two morons posting back to back. The first moron comes in with a blatantly racist statement because if Obama wasn't black, he'd never make the inference.

    Next, we have Babe who just called Mandeal a terrorist. One of the world's greatest leaders of principle and a guy with incredible intestinal fortitude,  is somehow a "terrorist"?

    You said you attended college, right, Babe?  May I ask where you went to college? Was David Duke your professor by chance?

    RIP Nelson Mandela. He helped change the world for the better.

    [/QUOTE]

    Have to completely agree with you on all points...

    Mandela was no terrorist...he was a victim of a supremely terrorist-reactionary state...there is no genuine and knowledgable source who says otherwise unless they are a member of the KKK or American Nazi Bund...not even that bastion of right wing hate known as Fox Noise Network thinks he was a terrorist. Mind numbing blindness to what happens in the real world...

    Mandela was a leader in bringing divergent and devided peoples together. In South Africa he used sports to bind generations old wounds. His is and will always be a legacy of peace and love, of brotherhood and forgiveness.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Comrade Melly, we often have commmon ground but ur wrong on this and owe me an apology. i will hold my breath til you acquiesce. there's a difference b/being racist and racialist? UNFORTUNATELY, THERE AINT MANY WHITE GUYS WHO HAD TO FIGHT FOR THEIR FREeDOM IN THE LASt 500 years esp from other races.. got that? its a coincidence of fate or race if u will.. is there a white mandela? is there a white guy in our lifetimes who had to fight another race or pigment to get out of their lands or to give them their basic human dignity or rights?

    [/QUOTE]

    Lots of white people fought lots of other white people for independence, liberty, freedom and from a different form of slavery called taxation. Want to guess who those white people who won were? Let me give you a hint...you wouldn't be posting here with your crazy stuff if they lost. 

    [/QUOTE]

    You're saying that freedom of speech would not exist had we remained part of the United Kingdom?  The last I heard, the UK was a pretty free place.  In fact, in some ways, speech is freer there than here.

    [/QUOTE]

    I didnt say that. we broke free from the Uk, or should I say the queen because she was milking the colonies for money and stuffing her bed with it, while the British soldiers were confiscating colonists firearms, who knows what would it be like today. We could have went the way of many if not all failed British colonies. History tells us anyplace the queen sticks her head in doesn't smell like roses when she's done. She extracts wealth and leaves the country they take over much worse than when they found it.

     

Share