How Did Barack Obama Become "The Magic Negro"?

So the LA Times are the source of "Barack, The Magic Negro". Interesting. Are the resident moonbat lefties going to trash and insult the LA Times? Nope. The LA Times is a liberal rag; therefore, the anger and hate will be directed towards those who oppose them, the right. This is how it works.
 
So the LA Times are the source of "Barack, The Magic Negro". Interesting. Are the resident moonbat lefties going to trash and insult the LA Times? Nope. The LA Times is a liberal rag; therefore, the anger and hate will be directed towards those who oppose them, the right. This is how it works.

You guys don't really get it. We all have to sign pretty binding contracts over here; once we go left, we're not to criticize anyone or thing that could remotely be considered part of the left, whether it's a media outlet, politician, or even a fellow message board poster. They don't really tell us what the ramifications are if we do, but there is enough of a veiled threat there that we take it very seriously.

Sometimes, I look at the posters here who are on the right, and the way they start SO many threads criticizing talk radio, politicians on their side, Fox news & their fellow conservative posters, and can only sigh with envy...
 
You guys don't really get it. We all have to sign pretty binding contracts over here; once we go left, we're not to criticize anyone or thing that could remotely be considered part of the left, whether it's a media outlet, politician, or even a fellow message board poster. They don't really tell us what the ramifications are if we do, but there is enough of a veiled threat there that we take it very seriously.

Sometimes, I look at the posters here who are on the right, and the way they start SO many threads criticizing talk radio, politicians on their side, Fox news & their fellow conservative posters, and can only sigh with envy...

You don't need to criticize the media outlet. What is your opinion of the OP/ED?
 
So the LA Times are the source of "Barack, The Magic Negro". Interesting. Are the resident moonbat lefties going to trash and insult the LA Times? Nope. The LA Times is a liberal rag; therefore, the anger and hate will be directed towards those who oppose them, the right. This is how it works.

Correction: "So the LA Times "is"...not "are". It's a singular newspaper with a plural in its' name. Did you go to school?
And the LA Times wasn't the source, but a specific journalist. Did you even read the article? I hate it when folks don't know what they are talking or raving about.
 
Conservatism: The Politics of Ignorance and Self-Interest.

http://www.bidstrup.com/politics.htm

Truth
That's not true. There's plenty of ignorance and self interest on the other side of the aisle too. Conservatism, by it's nature is the politics of retaining the status quo. The problem that I see is that many so called "conservatives" are factually political reactionaries or authoritarian extremist or, as in Alias's case, garden variety bigots, none of which are really conservatives.
 
That's not true. There's plenty of ignorance and self interest on the other side of the aisle to. Conservatism, by it's nature is the politics of the retaining the status quo. The problem that I see is that many so called "conservatives" are factually political reactionaries or authoritarian extremist or, as in Alias's case, garden variety bigots, none of which are really conservatives.
I disagree. I happen to believe it is true. I also believe that the racists and the bigots here, in this forum are not "true conservatives", but aberrations.
 
You guys don't really get it. We all have to sign pretty binding contracts over here; once we go left, we're not to criticize anyone or thing that could remotely be considered part of the left, whether it's a media outlet, politician, or even a fellow message board poster. They don't really tell us what the ramifications are if we do, but there is enough of a veiled threat there that we take it very seriously.

Sometimes, I look at the posters here who are on the right, and the way they start SO many threads criticizing talk radio, politicians on their side, Fox news & their fellow conservative posters, and can only sigh with envy...
I think your sarcasm will be lost on many here! LOL
 
Maybe you can start a forum where certain race 'discussers' (ahem, Alias and Poet) can express their racial 'love' for each other 24/7 in their own special place.

Another inept poster who can't seem to find the words to discuss the OP. Interesting experiment we have going on here. I see Damocles is another confused little twit. Some things are just to high over their pointed little heads.
 
Correction: "So the LA Times "is"...not "are". It's a singular newspaper with a plural in its' name. Did you go to school?
And the LA Times wasn't the source, but a specific journalist. Did you even read the article? I hate it when folks don't know what they are talking or raving about.

Whatever. Why don't you give us your thoughts on the article. That's what we are all here for. Go for it.
 
You guys don't really get it. We all have to sign pretty binding contracts over here; once we go left, we're not to criticize anyone or thing that could remotely be considered part of the left, whether it's a media outlet, politician, or even a fellow message board poster. They don't really tell us what the ramifications are if we do, but there is enough of a veiled threat there that we take it very seriously.

Sometimes, I look at the posters here who are on the right, and the way they start SO many threads criticizing talk radio, politicians on their side, Fox news & their fellow conservative posters, and can only sigh with envy...

You should take the exit into Libertarian offered in that contract. It is a little known inclusion in the fine print.
 
You should take the exit into Libertarian offered in that contract. It is a little known inclusion in the fine print.

If libertarians became the majority, they wouldn't last long. Their own lack of order would allow the bullies in the left to run them like they do here on this forum.
 
Conservatism: The Politics of Ignorance and Self-Interest.

http://www.bidstrup.com/politics.htm

Truth

Also from your source
http://www.bidstrup.com/index.htm

Why I Support A Primary Challenge To Barack Obama - And Won't Vote For Him Again
Three years ago, when Barack Obama was merely a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the presidency, I began to encounter some troubling signs that he was not what he appeared to be. Several columnists whom I trust were warning, even then, that this man was a conservative in progressives' clothing and that was evident from his voting record as a senator if anyone would bother to check, and from some of the speeches he gave before the Chicago Council On Global Affairs, speeches in which his militaristic adventurism was on full display. Many of his campaign team policy advisers were neoconservatives, most hired out of the Bush administration. It didn't look good, but when I mentioned this to my progressive friends, I was uniformly shouted down - so fervent was the desire for real change from the horror of the Bush years. So I shut up, and like them, voted for the man, however reluctantly. Then I moved to a home in a place where Internet service was not available, and my ability to research was largely cut off for several months. I was unable to do much research.
When my access to the Internet was finally restored, just days before he was inagurated as president, I was finally able to sit down and do some serious research on this man. And what I discovered was nothing short of appalling. He had been a CIA asset fresh out of college (which is why his Columbia transcript has never been released, and professors there have been forbidden from talking about him - and why the details of his post-college employment at a CIA front company have been kept very sketchy), and he had been trained in propaganda and disinformation, which is what he practiced on that job. The Washington Post reported the very day my Internet was turned on, that he had reassured conservatives just the day before that he had every intention of "reforming" Social Security and Medicare, but had to wait until the economy was in better shape before he could do so.

So it came as no surprise to me at all when I began to see that he was indeed a Manchurian Candidate, designed to appear to be a refreshing progressive, but a man with a hidden agenda, largely implemented out of sight, that it is hard to describe as anything other than hard-core neoconservative, in some ways, even more so than his predecessor. Over time, a lot of my progressive friends have slowly come around to recognizing that what I tried to warn them of was true. But alas, it is too late. We were stuck with yet another neoconservative, this one with a winning smile, a slick, smooth manner and a whole lot of political capital to spend on nefarious projects.

So the big question now facing the progressive community is what to do about it next year. Do we vote for Obama and watch ourselves be betrayed for another four years? Do we vote for a third-party candidate and throw our votes away? And watch some Republican wingnut take the helm of the Ship of State? Our dilemma was very arrogantly summed up by Obama's sleazy chief of staff at the time, Rahm Emmanuel, who, when asked about Obama's betrayal of the progressives that put him in office, said, "So what? Where they gonna go?"



SO DO YOU STILL FIND YOUR LINK TRUE??????
 
Last edited:
Back
Top