The Obama Deception

[vstreet]

Unfortunately, the current OCCUPIER of the WH is as BIG of a HOAX as was the previous resident. Although he is more eloquent in his speech, his BOGUS plans for the economy and the world at large are nothing short of an ATROCITY. There has truly been little to NO change from the previous administration (other than the PR firms the new resident is using to SPIN how "great" he is). The amount of BULL that is spewed nightly on the major media channels is simply unbelievable.

Both political parties are a SHAM of what a real democracy should be/can be. The last three occupiers of the WH are simply a travesty to real democracy & real freedom. And it's a shame the general public is as gulliable and as feeble minded to believe in either political party. They Don't Care About Us!! Or humanity for that matter.

IT IS A D*MN shame this idiot has been compared to MLK or any other social agent of change (and there have been a ton of them).

What happened to the anti-war movement? Are people really that stupid to believe this idiot was really going to come in and end ANY war???


...for those that are interested, just google Noam Chomsky and see what he has to say. Although I don't agree with everything he says, I do believe his assessment is very accurate for the current corporacratic administration.

 

[vstreet]

No he's not on the Bush/Cheney side. He is on the side of common sense. Common sense dictates that he not release those photos for fear it would spurn more violence against American soldiers overseas. I applaud him for that. He is conducting this investigation very very carefully...mark my words. Heads are going to roll on this one.

if you engage in atrocity, you should have NO protection.

And it doesn't matter how it's spun, A LIAR is a LIAR. And a HOAX is a HOAX.

...btw, that is the LAMEST excuse ever.

 

[pamarella]

Cheney was all over the world criticising Obama's national defence policy and defending torture because he knew Obama was deliberating on the torture photos and further investigation into the Bush administration's use of ture and he wanted to influence Obama's decision. And guess what, it worked? Obama came around to Cheney's side.

[/quote]
NO!! CHENEY IS TRYING TO COVER HIS ASS! And some of Obama supporters are now saying that Cheney is so far being effective in trying to cover his ass. The heat is now on Nancy Pelosi, The Queen of the Liberals Democrats.... What did she no about torture?

His critics in the media are the neocons and theocons who supported Bush's use of torture. So of course they'd concede that he made the right decision on this issue. Too bad the people who supported Obama all along were left in the dark.

All of the people who supported Obama weren't concerned about the war. Probably most Americans, don't give a damn about the torture debate. How is that going to pay the bills at the end of the day? Most Americans want to move forward on this issue. In some of the earlier polls, Terrorism what the least of American's worries. It's about the economy. What was done in the past was done. Obama has CHANGED how he will handle detainees going forward. And some of his critical supporters on this issue are beginnig to back down.

Exactly, Obama is not about principle. He's about politics. That's exactly what I've been telling you all along.

:doh::doh::doh:

Who cares is people see it as a partisan attack and turn against Obama? Go against the grain. Isn't that what good leaders do according to you? If he would investigate torture and hold those responsible accountable it would send a clear message to the Middle East and other countries that the USA does not condone torture and it's no longer the official policy of the US to use torture in interrogation procedures. That would be a very positive thing and would not harm the troops but in fact do the opposite because foreigners wouldn't be so hostile towards the troops anymore. Don't you see you are angering your enemies and churning out more terrorists and insurgents with America's current foreign policy?

Obama is the leader of the Democrat Party, the party that is now IN TOTAL CONTROL. We Dems want to keep it that way. The American people care about the issue being partisan, because that is one of the reasons why things don't get done in Washington. The American people are sick and tired of this Tic for Tac way on every damn issue that comes up.

And like I said before, Americans were concerned about our government keeping us safe. To most Americans, we have been safe for the last 8 years. What methods that was used to keep us safe is now being investigated.

And you are naive if you think releasing those horrible photograph will some how make the insurgents and terrorist feel good about the issues of torture and how it's being handled.

Our alligence is to our troops not to INSURGENTS AND TERRORIST

Obama is being responsible on how he is handling the issue. He is not going to solve issues in the way that you would want him too. But the people in the middle east know that Obama is no George Bush.

OBAMA DOESN'T CONDONE TORTURE!! BUT HE SUPPORTS THE RULE OF LAW.

It's just a distraction to add to the illusion that Democrats and Republicans are different, that Obama and Bush are different.

WELL THE TRUTH IS WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO IT, THEY ARE AMERICANS FIRST...:cheeky:

 

[vstreet]

Exactly. "This is the worst recession of our time", "if we don't act now this will ne worse than the great depression". Fear is always used as a tool by the state to push their agenda.

This is true.

Take a look throughout history and you will see this tactic used to "beat" the masses into submission.

I should add that this "recession" was created by them, for "them". And if you think it's going to be solved by them, think again. If anything, the stage is being set for catastrophe later on down the road. All we're seeing right now is nothing but smoke & mirrors. This is NOTHING but history repeating itself. Go back to the early 1900's and you will see how the Federal Reserve came into being. Go read about the bank scares and the credit bubbles of yesteryear. Learn.

Big Banks & Big Govt and Big Business is a recipe for disaster. The haves and the HAVE-Nots. More of the same ole BULL____


CREDIT = SLAVERY
REPUBLICAN = DEMOCRACT and DEMOCRAT=REPUBLICAN. DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE SAME COIN

The dollar is backed by NOTHING. How can you have a "free" market when your currency is manipulated and the markets are manipulated to artificialy stop the housing bubble from fully deflating??

If you want real change, you stop F*** with the prices of everything and let people pay what they can afford for houses vs what they can afford to borrow. Instead of stupid refinances, what about LOWER prices? How come we never hear this????

All you ever hear is how "they" need to save big business. They have plenty of money for STIMULUS, WARS and BAILOUTS but NO money for homelessness, poverty and quality of life.

All "they" ever talk about are JOBS and institutionalized education (the biggest racket ever). Never about retirement or the well-being of the elderly who need the higher savings rates so that they don't HAVE to work. That's because all they care about is the enslavement of the masses. Not the well-being or welfare of the masses.

 

[Bob George]

All of the people who supported Obama weren't concerned about the war. Probably most Americans, don't give a damn about the torture debate. How is that going to pay the bills at the end of the day? Most Americans want to move forward on this issue. In some of the earlier polls, Terrorism what the least of American's worries. It's about the economy. What was done in the past was done. Obama has CHANGED how he will handle detainees going forward. And some of his critical supporters on this issue are beginnig to back down.

Well the root of all the problems in this world is economy. That's what I've been trying to explain this entire thread. If you understand that you understand why Obama and Bush aren't any different. I'll try to give as short and explanation as I can of what I'm on about.

Money makes the world go around. We can all acknowledge that. So obviously, whoever controls the money controls the world. It's quite simple. And who controls the money is not our governments, but private banks.

The US is run by a private bank. The Federal Reserve, established in 1913. It's as federal as federal express. It's a private bank and it pretty much runs the US through its monetary policy which influences everything else. Obama's Treasury Secretary is Timothy Geithner, former President of the Federal Reserve of New York (The New York fed is said to influence the Federal Reserve in quite a big way).

As we speak, Timothy Geither is in Greece meeting with other big private bankers, private investors and world leaders according to this article and eye witness accounts. They're discussing world issues in private. They're making policy in private. Usually what is discussed at these meetings ends up happening. This is how the world is run. Not in congress, not in parliament, in private meetings between world bankers.

So you can understand that neither Bush or Obama were ever in real control, their orders came from higher up. So of course they are the same because while the President has changed, the group of elites who actually make the decisions haven't. Oh, and last year, Obama was at the same meeting Geither is no attending. So was Geithner I do believe. Perhaps that's where they decided Geither would be Obama's Tresury Secretary when he wins.

And you are naive if you think releasing those horrible photograph will some how make the insurgents and terrorist feel good about the issues of torture and how it's being handled.

Our alligence is to our troops not to INSURGENTS AND TERRORIST

Obama is being responsible on how he is handling the issue. He is not going to solve issues in the way that you would want him too. But the people in the middle east know that Obama is no George Bush.

OK, so let's delve into foreign policy now. Again, I'll try to make it brief.

In the Republican debates last year and in late 2007, Dr. Ron Paul was criticised by his party for saying the US foreign policy was responsible for the kind of anger and hostility towards the US that caused 9/11. He explained in consequent interviews that he's referring to what the CIA call "blowback". Basically, it means unintended consequences of the US' interventionist foreign policy.

It's really just common sense that if the US is occupying certain areas of their region, air-striking villages, intervening in political processes etc. is going to create hostility towards the US. The analogy is often used of China invading Mexico. The US would feel threatened, they wouldn't feel like China was helping them and for sure they'd launch an attack on the Chinese.

So if you are caught torturing detainees captured in the region, imagine the hostility that would create in the region. So again it's just common sense that showing a strong opposition to the use of torture (i.e. holding those who were responsible for torture accountable) would send a very positive message to the middle east.

What's naive is the idea that we're good, they're bad. It's never that simple. They are civilians of a foreign country, most scared, some angry because a big powerful nation is occupying their region killing civilians and conducting torture. They are not all Islamic terrorists, the same way all Americans aren't torturers.

 

[pamarella]

Well the root of all the problems in this world is economy. That's what I've been trying to explain this entire thread. If you understand that you understand why Obama and Bush aren't any different. I'll try to give as short and explanation as I can of what I'm on about.

Money makes the world go around. We can all acknowledge that. So obviously, whoever controls the money controls the world. It's quite simple. And who controls the money is not our governments, but private banks.

The US is run by a private bank. The Federal Reserve, established in 1913. It's as federal as federal express. It's a private bank and it pretty much runs the US through its monetary policy which influences everything else. Obama's Treasury Secretary is Timothy Geithner, former President of the Federal Reserve of New York (The New York fed is said to influence the Federal Reserve in quite a big way).

As we speak, Timothy Geither is in Greece meeting with other big private bankers, private investors and world leaders according to this article and eye witness accounts. They're discussing world issues in private. They're making policy in private. Usually what is discussed at these meetings ends up happening. This is how the world is run. Not in congress, not in parliament, in private meetings between world bankers.

So you can understand that neither Bush or Obama were ever in real control, their orders came from higher up. So of course they are the same because while the President has changed, the group of elites who actually make the decisions haven't. Oh, and last year, Obama was at the same meeting Geither is no attending. So was Geithner I do believe. Perhaps that's where they decided Geither would be Obama's Tresury Secretary when he wins.


OK, so let's delve into foreign policy now. Again, I'll try to make it brief.

In the Republican debates last year and in late 2007, Dr. Ron Paul was criticised by his party for saying the US foreign policy was responsible for the kind of anger and hostility towards the US that caused 9/11. He explained in consequent interviews that he's referring to what the CIA call "blowback". Basically, it means unintended consequences of the US' interventionist foreign policy.

It's really just common sense that if the US is occupying certain areas of their region, air-striking villages, intervening in political processes etc. is going to create hostility towards the US. The analogy is often used of China invading Mexico. The US would feel threatened, they wouldn't feel like China was helping them and for sure they'd launch an attack on the Chinese.

So if you are caught torturing detainees captured in the region, imagine the hostility that would create in the region. So again it's just common sense that showing a strong opposition to the use of torture (i.e. holding those who were responsible for torture accountable) would send a very positive message to the middle east.

What's naive is the idea that we're good, they're bad. It's never that simple. They are civilians of a foreign country, most scared, some angry because a big powerful nation is occupying their region killing civilians and conducting torture. They are not all Islamic terrorists, the same way all Americans aren't torturers.

Well the root of all the problems in this world is economy. That's what I've been trying to explain this entire thread. If you understand that you understand why Obama and Bush aren't any different. I'll try to give as short and explanation as I can of what I'm on about.

Money makes the world go around. We can all acknowledge that. So obviously, whoever controls the money controls the world. It's quite simple. And who controls the money is not our governments, but private banks.

The US is run by a private bank. The Federal Reserve, established in 1913. It's as federal as federal express. It's a private bank and it pretty much runs the US through its monetary policy which influences everything else. Obama's Treasury Secretary is Timothy Geithner, former President of the Federal Reserve of New York (The New York fed is said to influence the Federal Reserve in quite a big way).

Bob George, you are not telling me anything that most Americans already know. We know that banks control the world. We also know that you can count on one hand a number of people who are really in control and it is never the President of the United States. So yes the presidents of the United States do share somethings in common. It's their job to put America's agenda first. But the people in power can also see to it that there is a president in office that supports their agenda. And it's that Presidents job to communicate that agenda to the people.

In the Republican debates last year and in late 2007, Dr. Ron Paul was criticised by his party for saying the US foreign policy was responsible for the kind of anger and hostility towards the US that caused 9/11. He explained in consequent interviews that he's referring to what the CIA call "blowback". Basically, it means unintended consequences of the US' interventionist foreign policy.

Ron Paul isn't saying anything different than what Obama has been saying. Obama opposed the Iraqi war from the very beginning and he is on record for opposing. And for the last time Obama opposes torture of any kind of way.

George Bush and Dick Cheney and the Bush administration is responsible for both the Iraq war and what is happening in Afghanistan. Obama is the one that has to clean up the mess. BUT HE CAN'T DO A SLOPPY JOB in doing so. A great leader listens. A great leader stratagizes. A great leader must plan. AND A GREAT LEADER MUST BE REALISTIC.

The Torture investigation must be done with a fine tooth comb. Because what will happen is that EVERYONE involved with either "PLEAD THE 5TH" if they are asked to testify or they will ask for "IMMUNITY" so they won't do prison time. And as a teacher who taught Constitutional Law, Obama understands this.:yes:

 

[vstreet]

Bob George, you are not telling me anything that most Americans already know. We know that banks control the world. We also know that you can count on one hand a number of people who are really in control and it is never the President of the United States. So yes the presidents of the United States do share somethings in common. It's their job to put America's agenda first. But the people in power can also see to it that there is a president in office that supports their agenda. And it's that Presidents job to communicate that agenda to the people.



Ron Paul isn't saying anything different than what Obama has been saying. Obama opposed the Iraqi war from the very beginning and he is on record for opposing. And for the last time Obama opposes torture of any kind of way.

George Bush and Dick Cheney and the Bush administration is responsible for both the Iraq war and what is happening in Afghanistan. Obama is the one that has to clean up the mess. BUT HE CAN'T DO A SLOPPY JOB in doing so. A great leader listens. A great leader stratagizes. A great leader must plan. AND A GREAT LEADER MUST BE REALISTIC.

The Torture investigation must be done with a fine tooth comb. Because what will happen is that EVERYONE involved with either "PLEAD THE 5TH" if they are asked to testify or they will ask for "IMMUNITY" so they won't do prison time. And as a teacher who taught Constitutional Law, Obama understands this.:yes:

Talk is cheap and so is BULL----.

It amazes me just how easily manipulated the general public has been throughout history. PR firms run this country. Thanks to the television (and now the internet), all you have to do is spin lies using fancy propoganda and "say the right thing" and you have George Orwell's Animal Farm.

Some of my favorite contemporary catch phrases and PR stunts from the incumbant LIAR are as follows:

1. "Clean Coal" -- If I see this mind-numbing infomercial one more time, I'm going to puke. Leave it to the Coal industry to shove this down everyone's throats and leave it to the feeble public to lick it up off the floor.

2. In order to end war, we have to have MORE war, hence the ESCALATION rather than reduction of armed forces around the world. Sounds like a man of peace and of God to me -- NOT.

3. Incumbant Liar "supposedly" opposes his predecessor's tactics, his unprecedented secrecy, his use of torture, his passage of Patriot Act and the stripping of constitutional rights, his previous wars, his bubble economy which robs the poor and gives to the rich, etc, etc, etc.

So, what does the Incumbant Liar do now that he has "told" the masses what he does NOT like?

Well, (1) he decides to NOT go after the previous administrations atrocities. He says he wants to move on and not dwell on the past -- yet he feels we should dwell on the past and raise the stakes in Afghanistan. So, some atrocities are less atrocious than others, I presume? And exactly who is the judge of this? the Devil?

(2) He decides (after putting up a grood front in the press and pretending like he was really debating it) to NOT show the world some of the atrocities committed by the armed forces. He claims this is somehow a threat to national security (like the acts of torture themselves were not a grave danger, but the disclosure and photos of the acts are). The Devil ALWAYS likes to operate in the DARK, doesn't he? Let me give you a rundown of what the REAL threats are: IMMORAL and ILLEGAL wars, military tribunals where constitution is circumvented, guantanamo bay -- it doesn't matter what you say you're going to do, it's still around and it's still active, Patriot Act, Hiring all of your Wallstreet friends and socializing the losses while still privatizing the profits. letting cities turn into police states all in the name of national security -- THOSE are the threats to national security -- NOT the exposure of ATROCITIES committed by those who are supposed to serve and protect. WHATEVER HAPPENS IN THE DARK -WILL COME TO LIGHT - YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT.

(3) He puts up a good front on how he opposes torture. Yet, he fails to go after the previous administration for it. So, what message does this send to future thugs? Better yet, what message does it send to the current THUGS who are still involved in our govt? Talk is VERY cheap.

(4) He decides to continue warrantless wiretapping and guess what? His BOGUS arguments are worse than his predecessor's bogus arguments. http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-worse-than-bush

There also does NOT seem to be any plans to remove the Patriot Act. After all, he voted for a version of it in the past, so why truly oppose it now?

(5) Telling the public how much he was "against" the war only fueled his desire to IMMEDIATELY escalate it. Makes perfect sense to me (NOT). Oh and he also decided that the Secretary of Defense did such a great job under his predecessor that he needed to keep him around, too (along with most everyone else from the the predecessor's armed forces command units). Same "watchful" group of people under whom torture ensued.

Oh and don't even get me started on that SOB Colin Powell. One of the ACCOMPLICES in the crime of DECEIVING the public decides to switch sides? He's proof that Talk is so cheap that even a "caveman can do it".

(6) He vocally criticized his predecessor's handling of the economy. His admin. said his predecessor created the bubble by allowing the FED to keep rates at an all time low for too long and for allowing banks to relax their lending standards and by allowing BUBBLEs to be created in the economy. So, how does the LIAR attempt to solve the problem that was supposedly created by his predecessor? Well, he decides to HIRE almost everyone involved in the creation of that bubble. And what do they do? Well, they immediately begin lowering interest rates to rates lower than that of his predecessor. Oh and this is not done to help the public, it's done to help big business and big banks survive. He also throws his corporate buddies a life raft (issuing BAIL out after BAIL out -- exactly what his predecessor did). After the FAKE "people's" congress pretended to actually "oppose" the passage, they eventually passed it after they "sweetened" it up a little more for their liking.

He also prints money like there's no tomorrow (like we don't have history books to show us what happens when you lower interest rates like a retarded FOOL and print money like a MORON).





So, WHERE's the F***ing CHANGE????????



Check out KRS-One -- I really like how eloquent and respectful he is in his critique here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZs6FSxUyg0&feature=related

Note, that KRS One says he never voted for anyone until the last election, but note how he tells everyone not be DUPED by "black face on the new world order".

I think he's one of the SMARTEST people on the planet. He is what Hip-Hop WAS. I grew up listening to him and I admire his CRITICAL thinking.



Here's more

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yfgsl_qzlFk&feature=related


PS - one of the most offensive things I've seen on the forum is when they plaster this fool's image next to Mike's and try to symbolically compare the two. Or even when the comparison to MLK is made. That is so wrong on SO many levels. First off, Mike and the LIAR are ARE POLAR OPPOSITES. How dare the comparison or the symbolism be made. One wants world peace (Mike) and the other one is gunning for being the greatest Brand Name Wall Street Capitalist that ever lived.

One day, people will realize just how OBSCENELY offensive such comparisons really are. LIAR is NO MLK and/or MJ (or any civil rights advocate) for that matter.

 

[pamarella]

Talk is cheap and so is BULL----.

It amazes me just how easily manipulated the general public has been throughout history. PR firms run this country. Thanks to the television (and now the internet), all you have to do is spin lies using fancy propoganda and "say the right thing" and you have George Orwell's Animal Farm.

Some of my favorite contemporary catch phrases and PR stunts from the incumbant LIAR are as follows:

1. "Clean Coal" -- If I see this mind-numbing infomercial one more time, I'm going to puke. Leave it to the Coal industry to shove this down everyone's throats and leave it to the feeble public to lick it up off the floor.

2. In order to end war, we have to have MORE war, hence the ESCALATION rather than reduction of armed forces around the world. Sounds like a man of peace and of God to me -- NOT.

3. Incumbant Liar "supposedly" opposes his predecessor's tactics, his unprecedented secrecy, his use of torture, his passage of Patriot Act and the stripping of constitutional rights, his previous wars, his bubble economy which robs the poor and gives to the rich, etc, etc, etc.

So, what does the Incumbant Liar do now that he has "told" the masses what he does NOT like?

Well, (1) he decides to NOT go after the previous administrations atrocities. He says he wants to move on and not dwell on the past -- yet he feels we should dwell on the past and raise the stakes in Afghanistan. So, some atrocities are less atrocious than others, I presume? And exactly who is the judge of this? the Devil?

(2) He decides (after putting up a grood front in the press and pretending like he was really debating it) to NOT show the world some of the atrocities committed by the armed forces. He claims this is somehow a threat to national security (like the acts of torture themselves were not a grave danger, but the disclosure and photos of the acts are). The Devil ALWAYS likes to operate in the DARK, doesn't he? Let me give you a rundown of what the REAL threats are: IMMORAL and ILLEGAL wars, military tribunals where constitution is circumvented, guantanamo bay -- it doesn't matter what you say you're going to do, it's still around and it's still active, Patriot Act, Hiring all of your Wallstreet friends and socializing the losses while still privatizing the profits. letting cities turn into police states all in the name of national security -- THOSE are the threats to national security -- NOT the exposure of ATROCITIES committed by those who are supposed to serve and protect. WHATEVER HAPPENS IN THE DARK -WILL COME TO LIGHT - YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT.

(3) He puts up a good front on how he opposes torture. Yet, he fails to go after the previous administration for it. So, what message does this send to future thugs? Better yet, what message does it send to the current THUGS who are still involved in our govt? Talk is VERY cheap.

(4) He decides to continue warrantless wiretapping and guess what? His BOGUS arguments are worse than his predecessor's bogus arguments. http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-worse-than-bush

There also does NOT seem to be any plans to remove the Patriot Act. After all, he voted for a version of it in the past, so why truly oppose it now?

(5) Telling the public how much he was "against" the war only fueled his desire to IMMEDIATELY escalate it. Makes perfect sense to me (NOT). Oh and he also decided that the Secretary of Defense did such a great job under his predecessor that he needed to keep him around, too (along with most everyone else from the the predecessor's armed forces command units). Same "watchful" group of people under whom torture ensued.

Oh and don't even get me started on that SOB Colin Powell. One of the ACCOMPLICES in the crime of DECEIVING the public decides to switch sides? He's proof that Talk is so cheap that even a "caveman can do it".

(6) He vocally criticized his predecessor's handling of the economy. His admin. said his predecessor created the bubble by allowing the FED to keep rates at an all time low for too long and for allowing banks to relax their lending standards and by allowing BUBBLEs to be created in the economy. So, how does the LIAR attempt to solve the problem that was supposedly created by his predecessor? Well, he decides to HIRE almost everyone involved in the creation of that bubble. And what do they do? Well, they immediately begin lowering interest rates to rates lower than that of his predecessor. Oh and this is not done to help the public, it's done to help big business and big banks survive. He also throws his corporate buddies a life raft (issuing BAIL out after BAIL out -- exactly what his predecessor did). After the FAKE "people's" congress pretended to actually "oppose" the passage, they eventually passed it after they "sweetened" it up a little more for their liking.

He also prints money like there's no tomorrow (like we don't have history books to show us what happens when you lower interest rates like a retarded FOOL and print money like a MORON).





So, WHERE's the F***ing CHANGE????????



Check out KRS-One -- I really like how eloquent and respectful he is in his critique here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZs6FSxUyg0&feature=related

Note, that KRS One says he never voted for anyone until the last election, but note how he tells everyone not be DUPED by "black face on the new world order".

I think he's one of the SMARTEST people on the planet. He is what Hip-Hop WAS. I grew up listening to him and I admire his CRITICAL thinking.



Here's more

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yfgsl_qzlFk&feature=related


PS - one of the most offensive things I've seen on the forum is when they plaster this fool's image next to Mike's and try to symbolically compare the two. Or even when the comparison to MLK is made. That is so wrong on SO many levels. First off, Mike and the LIAR are ARE POLAR OPPOSITES. How dare the comparison or the symbolism be made. One wants world peace (Mike) and the other one is gunning for being the greatest Brand Name Wall Street Capitalist that ever lived.

One day, people will realize just how OBSCENELY offensive such comparisons really are. LIAR is NO MLK and/or MJ (or any civil rights advocate) for that matter.

ANOTHER RIGHT WINGED OBAMA HATER GOING OFF THE DEEP END....

AND SINCE YOU BROUGHT MICHAEL JACKSON UP, WHY DON'T SOME OF YOU FANS ASK MICHAEL JACKSON WHAT DOES HE THINKS ABOUT BARACK OBAMA??????????

I TELL YOU ONE THING, I WON'T BE SURPRISED BY WHAT HE ANSWERS, BUT MY GUT FEELING TELLS ME THAT YOU WILL BE.:cheeky:

 

[LindaC781]

if you engage in atrocity, you should have NO protection.

And it doesn't matter how it's spun, A LIAR is a LIAR. And a HOAX is a HOAX.

...btw, that is the LAMEST excuse ever.

So, you think that this is a lame excuse huh? There are millions of US tourists in different very vulnerable areas of the world - so you think Obama should push the envelope, thereby threatening their lives as well as the lives of the troops overseas? What is wrong with you? Yes, heads will roll over this, but it will be done privately. Not splashed around the globe so even more United States citizens are put in harms way, due to hatred. Come on, think about it.

 

[pamarella]

@V Street..
Google! the University of Notre Dame and see what they gave Barack Obama today...

UMM!!!!!!!! Yes it's Martin Luther King related..;-)

OH!!! and I will take Barack Obama over KRS with no doubt. His opinion is just that, HIS OPINION... I will also take Will.I.AM over KRS...... I think Michael will too.

What do you think about that VStreet??

 

[Bob George]

Bob George, you are not telling me anything that most Americans already know. We know that banks control the world. We also know that you can count on one hand a number of people who are really in control and it is never the President of the United States. So yes the presidents of the United States do share somethings in common. It's their job to put America's agenda first. But the people in power can also see to it that there is a president in office that supports their agenda. And it's that Presidents job to communicate that agenda to the people.

So you concede that Obama is doing the bidding of the world's elite, yet you still defend him to the end of the earth? I admit, Obama not really the one to blame. He's just the puppet. But because he's the figure-head for the global elites he is an easy target for criticism and I've obviously fallen into the trap of shooting the messenger. But I'm trying to convey to you and everyone who reads this thread that Obama isn't working for you, he's working for the world bankers and they aren't interested in "change" unless it means progressing towards globalisation. Obama could tell the powers that be to take a hike. Not all the power in the world has been handed over to global organisations like the UN and the IMF. The power to change things and overthrow this mammoth control-grid system that has been set up worldwide over the last century and into this one, resides in the US. Unfortunately no other nation can really do much. But the US has a bill of rights and a constitution that was written by people who wanted to ensure that what's happening now wouldn't. So that's why I'm so critical of Barack Obama. He's the leader of the US and he's helping the global elites tear up those documents his country was founded on. No other country really has a history like the US does where great men fought against tyranny and oppression to secure their rights and liberty forever. So as the leader of that country, Obama's in a unique position. It's just too bad that he's on the wrong side of this fight.

 

[pamarella]

So you concede that Obama is doing the bidding of the world's elite, yet you still defend him to the end of the earth? I admit, Obama not really the one to blame. He's just the puppet. But because he's the figure-head for the global elites he is an easy target for criticism and I've obviously fallen into the trap of shooting the messenger. But I'm trying to convey to you and everyone who reads this thread that Obama isn't working for you, he's working for the world bankers and they aren't interested in "change" unless it means progressing towards globalisation. Obama could tell the powers that be to take a hike. Not all the power in the world has been handed over to global organisations like the UN and the IMF. The power to change things and overthrow this mammoth control-grid system that has been set up worldwide over the last century and into this one, resides in the US. Unfortunately no other nation can really do much. But the US has a bill of rights and a constitution that was written by people who wanted to ensure that what's happening now wouldn't. So that's why I'm so critical of Barack Obama. He's the leader of the US and he's helping the global elites tear up those documents his country was founded on. No other country really has a history like the US does where great men fought against tyranny and oppression to secure their rights and liberty forever. So as the leader of that country, Obama's in a unique position. It's just too bad that he's on the wrong side of this fight.

1. Heck no I don't concede, that is a bunch if bull sh!t and you know it. America's roll is the world is not like it used to be during the era of WWI and WWII. American isn't the super power she once was. China is just as strong if not stronger, that's why I thank God that John McCain lost the election. Barack Obama understands that the world has change. The Republicans try to wrap themselves in the cloak of patriotism, but they are the ones that's selling the USA down the river.


2. What??? A BILL OF RIGHTS AND A CONSTITUTION THAT WAS WRITTEN BY A GROUP OF WHITE MEN???? YOU THINK THE FOUNDING FATHER WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A AFRICAN AMERICAN MAN BEING IN OFFICE?

3. Bob George, what you are saying is what the racist in this country are saying. And you are going from calling Obama a puppet to Obama tearing up the most sacred document of the United States..

4. What Obama is doing is solidifying what The Constitution stands for. Over it's 232 year history, The Constitution had to be amended so that it's words would live up to it's meaning. That is why we have a President who is African American.
Yes!!! Slavery was taken out of the original draft of the Constitution. All men being created equal didn't apply to Black people.

5.No my friend, YOU are on the wrong side of the fight. And your side is going to loose the battle and the war...

 

[vstreet]

ANOTHER RIGHT WINGED OBAMA HATER GOING OFF THE DEEP END....

AND SINCE YOU BROUGHT MICHAEL JACKSON UP, WHY DON'T SOME OF YOU FANS ASK MICHAEL JACKSON WHAT DOES HE THINKS ABOUT BARACK OBAMA??????????

I TELL YOU ONE THING, I WON'T BE SURPRISED BY WHAT HE ANSWERS, BUT MY GUT FEELING TELLS ME THAT YOU WILL BE.:cheeky:

"right winged Obama Hater"??? Is that the best twisted BULLISH you could come up with after I schooled you to the truth? WTH did you get "right winged" from when I said BOTH political parties are two sides of the same coin?

I just laid out the truth and all you could do is get it twisted and start calling names? Your FALSE messiah is a FALSE prophet and a DECEIVER based on the assertions above.

-- Oh I forgot, on Animal Farm, if you don't support the "PIGS" then you must support the Humans, right?

No, No, no, I'm not one of the sheep. I don't live on Animal Farm with you.

I don't like the NEW WORLD Order and I don't support its crazy agenda. NEOCON and DEMOCRATS are one and the same in my eyes. And by the looks of it, their ISH is identical in many, many respects.

Lay off the kool-aid.

 

[vstreet]

@V Street..
Google! the University of Notre Dame and see what they gave Barack Obama today...

UMM!!!!!!!! Yes it's Martin Luther King related..;-)

OH!!! and I will take Barack Obama over KRS with no doubt. His opinion is just that, HIS OPINION... I will also take Will.I.AM over KRS...... I think Michael will too.

What do you think about that VStreet??

Wow, what a well thought out, educated and eloquent rebuttal to what i said earlier. PASS THE KOOL-AID.



:doh:

 

[vstreet]

So, you think that this is a lame excuse huh? There are millions of US tourists in different very vulnerable areas of the world - so you think Obama should push the envelope, thereby threatening their lives as well as the lives of the troops overseas? What is wrong with you? Yes, heads will roll over this, but it will be done privately. Not splashed around the globe so even more United States citizens are put in harms way, due to hatred. Come on, think about it.

How does the saying go, "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere"? Right?

That argument you make above has been used by Dictators throughout history. It's a typical fascist statement put out by an authoritarian govt. it's nothing new. The man doesn't have an original idea in his head. It's all recycled garbage from previous political figures around the world. If you're a typical institutionally educated consumer (most people are trained to be "good consumers" from the time they are born), you'll see nothing wrong with his statements or his contradictions or deceptions. On the otherhand, if you don't subscribe to the corprotocracy agenda, then you will have a problem with it.

"Good consumers" will gladly "give up" freedom for "true freedom". You will support "additional war" to end war. You will accept socialism for the poor and capitalism for the elite rich. You will probably believe there is such a thing as "clean coal". And you will also have no problem with the govt. hiding things or lying to you in the name of "national security".

Look, I didn't make the man say the things he said. I contend he is a snake (just like the SNAKE before him). He claims he's "new" and he's the "change" that everyone has been waiting for. I say, it's a sham.

And so far, I'm right.

 

[Bob George]

1. Heck no I don't concede, that is a bunch if bull sh!t and you know it. America's roll is the world is not like it used to be during the era of WWI and WWII. American isn't the super power she once was. China is just as strong if not stronger, that's why I thank God that John McCain lost the election. Barack Obama understands that the world has change. The Republicans try to wrap themselves in the cloak of patriotism, but they are the ones that's selling the USA down the river.

But you did say the world is run by private bankers who have an agenda and it's the President's job to communicate that agenda with the people. That's exactly what you said. So at least your acknowledging Obama's role in the world.

And the US is still the world's superpower. It may not be as super powerful as China but China isn't the beacon of hope that the US is. Even though that beacon of light is rapidly dimming. Europe is gone to the EU. There's no hope there. The Asian union is coming along fast. So soon that part of the world will be gone. Africa has already gone to the UN. The whole world is being centralised into global organisations. But the US still has its constitution and its bill of rights. There is still hope in that part of the world. It doesn't matter that it may not have the strongest economy anymore or maybe not even the strongest military. Freedom still stands a chance in the US and that's more powerful than money or weapons. But, if the US goes done it's all over for the rest of the world and at the moment, it looks like the US is going down hard and fast. In reality, there's little hope left in the world. But I like to be optimistic, idealist and romantic about it all because it's very hard to face the reality that we're all stuffed.

2. What??? A BILL OF RIGHTS AND A CONSTITUTION THAT WAS WRITTEN BY A GROUP OF WHITE MEN???? YOU THINK THE FOUNDING FATHER WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A AFRICAN AMERICAN MAN BEING IN OFFICE?

What are you on about? Where did I even mention race in my post? I'm just going to ignore this point because it's absolutely bizarre. I don't know when or how race even entered into this discussion.

3. Bob George, what you are saying is what the racist in this country are saying. And you are going from calling Obama a puppet to Obama tearing up the most sacred document of the United States..

So anyone who criticises Lord Obama is a racists. He is tearing up the US bill of rights, figuratively of course. Bush got rid of the fourth, fifth and eighth amendments and now Obama is getting rid of the first and second. Guess what? Bush is white and I hate him too.

4. What Obama is doing is solidifying what The Constitution stands for. Over it's 232 year history, The Constitution had to be amended so that it's words would live up to it's meaning. That is why we have a President who is African American.
Yes!!! Slavery was taken out of the original draft of the Constitution. All men being created equal didn't apply to Black people.

Oh, now I;m starting to get why you brought up race, Because the writers of the constitution didn't originally include protection for slaves. That's fair enough. But the constitution was amended to abolish slavery and the right of congress to amend the constitution was written in there by the founders.

You have to understand, many of us outside of the US don't have anything like a bill of rights and a constitution that protects our liberties. That's why in Australia our freedom of speech, our freedom to bear arms have been heavily restricted. So to a lot of people who don't have a bill of rights, the US bill of rights represents a lot. It reminds us that no matter how tyrannical and oppressive our leaders and lawmakers become, there were once a bunch of great men who had the courage and the lust for freedom to fight for their rights. It gives us hope that if pushed far enough, we may too have that same courage and lust for freedom to stand up to our oppressors.

5.No my friend, YOU are on the wrong side of the fight. And your side is going to loose the battle and the war...

I'm on the side of freedom, liberty and sovereignty. What side are you on? Forget left and right, liberal and conservative. When will people understand that we are all in this together and we all disposable in the eyes of our real leaders. We wont beat them until we put our petty differences aside. I know you like Obama. I know the significance of an African-American in the office of President of the US gives a lot of people hope. But unfortunately he is not on our side. He doesn't care about the people of his country or the world. He's been bought and paid for. He's an illusion, a figure-head. I understand how easy it is to go by accepting what you see in front of you for what it seems to be. But I'd rather know the truth, no matter how horrible it is, than go on living a lie. Don't tell me you don't look at what's going on around the world and get the feeling that something's not right, things aren't what they seem to be. This isn't how it's supposed to be.

 

[pamarella]

"right winged Obama Hater"??? Is that the best twisted BULLISH you could come up with after I schooled you to the truth? WTH did you get "right winged" from when I said BOTH political parties are two sides of the same coin?

I just laid out the truth and all you could do is get it twisted and start calling names? Your FALSE messiah is a FALSE prophet and a DECEIVER based on the assertions above.

-- Oh I forgot, on Animal Farm, if you don't support the "PIGS" then you must support the Humans, right?

No, No, no, I'm not one of the sheep. I don't live on Animal Farm with you.

I don't like the NEW WORLD Order and I don't support its crazy agenda. NEOCON and DEMOCRATS are one and the same in my eyes. And by the looks of it, their ISH is identical in many, many respects.

Lay off the kool-aid.

So if you don't like the new "WORLD ORDER", THEN WHAT ARE YOU DOING ABOUT IT INSTEAD OF CRITICIZING THE PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES?........

THE FACT IS THAT YOU DO LIVE ON THE FARM JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. YOU TRY TO BE THE SHEEP, BUT YOU ARE SIPPING THE Kool-AID and you are enjoying every bit of it.

Also, what part of the world do you live in V.Street??? And if you are an American, then was party do you belong to???

 

[pamarella]

Wow, what a well thought out, educated and eloquent rebuttal to what i said earlier. PASS THE KOOL-AID.



:doh:

If you are talking about the KRS video, I don't agree with what he is saying. You do because he you think he supports your point of view. I told you who I supported. Pull up a You.Tube with WIll.I.am. He supports Obama.:cheeky:

 

[LindaC781]

How does the saying go, "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere"? Right?

That argument you make above has been used by Dictators throughout history. It's a typical fascist statement put out by an authoritarian govt. it's nothing new. The man doesn't have an original idea in his head. It's all recycled garbage from previous political figures around the world. If you're a typical institutionally educated consumer (most people are trained to be "good consumers" from the time they are born), you'll see nothing wrong with his statements or his contradictions or deceptions. On the otherhand, if you don't subscribe to the corprotocracy agenda, then you will have a problem with it.

"Good consumers" will gladly "give up" freedom for "true freedom". You will support "additional war" to end war. You will accept socialism for the poor and capitalism for the elite rich. You will probably believe there is such a thing as "clean coal". And you will also have no problem with the govt. hiding things or lying to you in the name of "national security".

Look, I didn't make the man say the things he said. I contend he is a snake (just like the SNAKE before him). He claims he's "new" and he's the "change" that everyone has been waiting for. I say, it's a sham.

And so far, I'm right.

You didn't answer my question. Would you put Americans in harms way just to get a point across?

Didn't think so.

You aren't from this country, so why the heck are you so concerned over our politics? Maybe you and Bob George could answer that one while you're at it.

You sound like a carbon copy sound-bite for Rush Limbaugh, whether you come from another country or what. And you want to know something? You aren't making a strong point here. You aren't convincing me of anything.

 

[snowhite]

foreigners care about american politics because the american government is very much in love with the notion of war and conflict and that worries people

 

[pamarella]

1. But you did say the world is run by private bankers who have an agenda and it's the President's job to communicate that agenda with the people. That's exactly what you said. So at least your acknowledging Obama's role in the world.

2. And the US is still the world's superpower. It may not be as super powerful as China but China isn't the beacon of hope that the US is. Even though that beacon of light is rapidly dimming. Europe is gone to the EU. There's no hope there. The Asian union is coming along fast. So soon that part of the world will be gone. Africa has already gone to the UN. 3.The whole world is being centralised into global organisations. But the US still has its constitution and its bill of rights. There is still hope in that part of the world. It doesn't matter that it may not have the strongest economy anymore or maybe not even the strongest military. Freedom still stands a chance in the US and that's more powerful than money or weapons. But, if the US goes done it's all over for the rest of the world and at the moment, it looks like the US is going down hard and fast. In reality, there's little hope left in the world. But I like to be optimistic, idealist and romantic about it all because it's very hard to face the reality that we're all stuffed.


4.What are you on about? Where did I even mention race in my post? I'm just going to ignore this point because it's absolutely bizarre. I don't know when or how race even entered into this discussion.


So anyone who criticises Lord Obama is a racists. He is tearing up the US bill of rights, figuratively of course. Bush got rid of the fourth, fifth and eighth amendments and now Obama is getting rid of the first and second. Guess what? Bush is white and I hate him too.


Oh, now I;m starting to get why you brought up race, Because the writers of the constitution didn't originally include protection for slaves. That's fair enough. But the constitution was amended to abolish slavery and the right of congress to amend the constitution was written in there by the founders.

5. You have to understand, many of us outside of the US don't have anything like a bill of rights and a constitution that protects our liberties. That's why in Australia our freedom of speech, our freedom to bear arms have been heavily restricted. So to a lot of people who don't have a bill of rights, the US bill of rights represents a lot. It reminds us that no matter how tyrannical and oppressive our leaders and lawmakers become, there were once a bunch of great men who had the courage and the lust for freedom to fight for their rights. It gives us hope that if pushed far enough, we may too have that same courage and lust for freedom to stand up to our oppressors.



6. I'm on the side of freedom, liberty and sovereignty. What side are you on? Forget left and right, liberal and conservative. When will people understand that we are all in this together and we all disposable in the eyes of our real leaders. We wont beat them until we put our petty differences aside. I know you like Obama. I know the significance of an African-American in the office of President of the US gives a lot of people hope. But unfortunately he is not on our side. He doesn't care about the people of his country or the world. He's been bought and paid for. He's an illusion, a figure-head. I understand how easy it is to go by accepting what you see in front of you for what it seems to be. But I'd rather know the truth, no matter how horrible it is, than go on living a lie. Don't tell me you don't look at what's going on around the world and get the feeling that something's not right, things aren't what they seem to be. This isn't how it's supposed to be.

1. Of course I am acknowledging Obama's role, but not based on your description. As the President of the United States, It has always been that way. Why are you calling out Obama and Bush? Right now, Barack Obama and the supporters of his agenda are in charge.

2. Again, Obama understands China's new role in the world, that's why he has a very agressive agenda here in the United States. The one thing that you have to say about the Chinese is that their citizens are educated, yet Obama is always getting criticized about how he wants to address education here in the U.S. THAT IS THE KEY TO KEEPING THE BEACON OF HOPE SHINING. If you have un-educated American Cititzens, then China will take that beacon of hope away. But that beacon of hope still exist thanks to Barack Obama. Along with "CHANGE" he also talked about "HOPE" when he was campaining if you do re-call.

3. Obama understands that the world is changing and has changed. The world is smaller in so many ways. This is not the 20th century. Again, that's why I'm glad John McCain isn't president. Obama represents the new generation of leaders. So far, most of the leaders of the world still have that mentality of the past. And it's time for the young people is some of those country to start standing up. Your reality is DEAD WRONG, there isn't little hope. There is tons of 'HOPE" with Obama.

4. No you didn't bring up race in your post and I didn't imply that you were a racist. I just didn't understand what you meant when you said something about Obama changing the documents that the writers of the Constitution had put in place.
One of the claims and FEAR TACTICS that was used against Obama and is still being used is that he was going to somehow change the Constitution. Some of those claims came from Neo-Nazi and racist organization here in America.

5. How is Obama going to take away the Freedom Speech or someone's rights to Bear Arms? He is not going to do that. When it comes to some of the Gun control issues, there should be some changes. And there are some assault reapons that should not be on the market for people to buy or own, like some of these military style type of gus. The fear mongers wants to say that Obama want to take away ALL the fire arms away.
As the former Senator of Illinois who lived in Chicago, Obama understands what guns have done to some of those crime riden communities.
Ask Americans who live in crime infested communities in some of the major cities and they would agree something needs to be done about the guns.
Ask Americans who live in communities where the crime rate is less to 0,
then they don't think anything needs to be done. If you are a honest gun owner who uses your gun for things like hunting, then you won't have anything to worry about.
PERSONALLY, I THINK IF YOU ARE A HONEST GUN OWNER AND YOUR GUN IS USED IN A CRIME, I THINK YOU SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CRIME JUST AS MUCH AS THE CRIMINAL THEMSELVES. AFTER ALL, IT SHOULD BE YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO INSURE THAT YOUR GUN DOESN'T END UP IN THE HANDS OF A CRIMINAL. I DON'T CARE IF IT WAS STOLEN. ALL GUNS SHOULD HAVE THE GUNS OWNERS SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER ENGRAVED ON THEM.

In America, we are amazed how the crime rates in other parts of the world are very very low compared to America, thanks to the restrictions and laws that are put in place when it comes to owning a gun.

6. You are on the same side as I am. AND!!!!! Barack Obama's. And when I look at the world, I now see HOPE thanks to Barack Obama. And there will be other leaders in the world that will share that same hope too.

 

[pamarella]

foreigners care about american politics because the american government is very much in love with the notion of war and conflict and that worries people

So what country do you prefer to be in power, RUSSIA or the United States???

 

[vstreet]

So if you don't like the new "WORLD ORDER", THEN WHAT ARE YOU DOING ABOUT IT INSTEAD OF CRITICIZING THE PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES?........

Just that: criticizing the new world order. I know in Robot school this is considered BLASPHEMY.

THE FACT IS THAT YOU DO LIVE ON THE FARM JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. YOU TRY TO BE THE SHEEP, BUT YOU ARE SIPPING THE Kool-AID and you are enjoying every bit of it.

What, are we back in grade school? I'm rubber and you're glue....:*****:

Also, what part of the world do you live in V.Street??? And if you are an American, then was party do you belong to???

In the current IDIOCRACY, DROIDS are TOLD that if you are "American" you must be affiliated with a political party. Well, as I said above, I don't subscribe to the institutional train of thought. I think different (what a concept). So, guess what? I don't belong to a "party". If anything, I belong solely to God. Why the hell would I choose the lesser of two evils? I'm not a sheep.

Isn't McDonald's slogan something like "Billions Served"? Well, then I contend the covert new world order Slogan is: Billions TOLD (what to do, how to behave, what to like, how to respond, how to think) and BILLIONS of Souls Sold (the almighty dollar is the "god" of this world).

 

[vstreet]

You didn't answer my question. Would you put Americans in harms way just to get a point across?

Didn't think so.

No, I clearly answered your question. Except it didn't compute because it's outside the parameters of your comprehension.

Just because I advocate shining the light on injustice does not mean I advocate harm to anyone. However, I will NEVER accept a lame excuse to NOT shed light on evil. I'm not "programmed" to accept that nonsense.

You aren't from this country, so why the heck are you so concerned over our politics? Maybe you and Bob George could answer that one while you're at it.

Who said I wasn't from this country? What, because I didn't attend droid school and drink the punch you think I'm from another planet?

You sound like a carbon copy sound-bite for Rush Limbaugh, whether you come from another country or what. And you want to know something? You aren't making a strong point here. You aren't convincing me of anything.

Oh yeah, i guess if I'm not tall, I must be short, right? Or if I'm not hot, I'm cold. If I'm not "Obama", I'm "Rush Limbaugh"? What a joke. And an insult, I might add.

That's what happens when you're programmed to think in black & white. The hot pinks and the different shades of blue are all flushed out. it's a simpleton way of thinking.

 

[vstreet]

If you are talking about the KRS video, I don't agree with what he is saying. You do because he you think he supports your point of view. I told you who I supported. Pull up a You.Tube with WIll.I.am. He supports Obama.:cheeky:

Who cares about "Will I Am"? He's not a leader of any movement or architect of anything or a critical thinker. You might as well tell me to go look up Britney Spears' worthless endorsements.


You should also brush up on your facts. MJ doesn't endorse candidates (or vote for that matter). Accepting invitations to the WH or performing for a President (even at a fundraiser) in the PAST is NOT an endorsement or a vote. So you're statement a few posts back about whom MJ supports is defective.

 

[Sifa_Dias]

Vstreet, why are you such a bitter person? It seems like you saw a few internet docu's on world politics and are now all enraged, plus you're putting people down and insulting them. If you really want people to listen, like you say, I suggest starting with an attitude change. Just a suggestion.

 

[144000]

lol..i wish people would leave Michael out of this. he's smart enough to make it that nobody knows what he thinks. this hotbed atmosphere is proof of that.

 

[pamarella]

Who cares about "Will I Am"? He's not a leader of any movement or architect of anything or a critical thinker. You might as well tell me to go look up Britney Spears' worthless endorsements.


You should also brush up on your facts. MJ doesn't endorse candidates (or vote for that matter). Accepting invitations to the WH or performing for a President (even at a fundraiser) in the PAST is NOT an endorsement or a vote. So you're statement a few posts back about whom MJ supports is defective.

ABOUT WILL.I.AM?.............. NEITHER IS KRS.

YOU WERE THE ONE WHO BROUGHT UP MICHAEL JACKSON AND I RESPONDED.

I never said that Michael endorsed any candidate. I said why don't some fans asked him what does he thing about Obama? And I believe I know the answer, just like YOU SEEM TO THINK YOU KNOW.

And you need to brush up on some facts about Michael Jackson. He did perform at one of the campaign functions for Bill Clinton ( a Democrat) back in 1992. To most Americans who saw that performance, they saw it as an endorsement. Most entertainers will not support such an event in the mist of a campaign if they didn't support the candidate. Also, entertainers don't waste their time doing fundraising for a candidate they don't support. Talking about throwing money down the drain????????

And visiting the White House on most occassions doesn't mean that you support the person who is the President.

BUT I WILL MAKE THIS BOLD STATEMENT... AS LONG AS THERE IS A GOD IN HEAVEN, I KNOW MICHAEL JACKSON ISN'T A REPUBLICAN.

 

[vstreet]

Vstreet, why are you such a bitter person? It seems like you saw a few internet docu's on world politics and are now all enraged, plus you're putting people down and insulting them. If you really want people to listen, like you say, I suggest starting with an attitude change. Just a suggestion.

If you study a cult (any cult), one of the ways it defends its thinking (aka way of life) is by NOT allowing critical debate of anything inside of the cult. Also, many of its leaders (or followers) are quick to resort to irrational name calling and/or marginalization of anyone outside of the cult. That's how the cult defends itself because any critical debate of the cult would expose the cult for what it is: A cult.


I laid out a very solid argument for why I believe someone to be a LIAR. No one so far has provided an intelligent rebuttal thus, far. In fact, no one has even attempted to refute what I presented in my argument. Gee, I wonder why?

If someone cannot carry on an intelligent debate without name calling and irrational mischaracterization of where I'm from or who I support then I am going to defend myself.

And mischaracterizing me as "bitter" or "enraged" is also an insult. It would be AKIN to me calling you "delusional" or "crazy".

 

[vstreet]

And you need to brush up on some facts about Michael Jackson. He did perform at one of the campaign functions for Bill Clinton ( a Democrat) back in 1992. To most Americans who saw that performance, they saw it as an endorsement. Most entertainers will not support such an event in the mist of a campaign if they didn't support the candidate. Also, entertainers don't waste their time doing fundraising for a candidate they don't support. Talking about throwing money down the drain????????

So what?
Am I supposed to believe that MJ supports the politics of the govt. of Saudi Arabia (or endorsed members of the Royal family) because he had a business venture with a Saudi Prince in the 90's?

Should I conclude he somehow supported the Bush Sr. administration because he was invited to the WH by George Bush SR and gladly accepted the invite? Or conclude he supports Reaganomics because he was called out to the WH by Ronald Reagan and given an award?

Maybe I should conclude he believed in the Bush Doctrine(s) because afterall, letters were found during the raids on Neverland, written to GWB.

Should I conclude he would support Israel over Palestine (because he was seen holding an Israeli flag in 2004 during a trip to Washington, photographed with Arial Sharon and he was friends of Rabbi Boteach)?

Or should I conclude he's affiliated with the NOI because he's friends with Min. Farrakhan and EMPLOYED some of its members?


No, I shouldn't conclude any of that because that would make me an IDIOT!

The facts (at least those that have been made known to us-- who knows what goes on behind closed doors?) are that MJ does NOT vote and does not endorse candidates. Aside from that, he is an entertainer with NO boundaries and by the looks of it, an entertainer with NO political affiliations.

PS - That "compaign function" in 1992 is called the Inauguration. You should also check out his performance for the Sultan of Brunei (just don't mistaken that for Michael's endorsement of a Theocracy).