The undercurrent matters...

Jarod

Well-known member
Contributor
It depends somewhat on who gets nominated, but I have already detected a subtle (and not so subtle by some) undercurrent of a message from the Republican party for the upcoming campaign to unseat President Obama. The subtext is that he is UNAMERICAN. Most wont come out and say that, because the ballancing act they will be trying to accomplish is to excite the base that belive it to be true, while not alenating the moderates who do not belive it to be true. (What Huckleberry did)

To John McCain's credit at least upon the outset he outlawed this type of rhetoric from his campaign. It was not until Sarah Palin was let loose on the voters that the "he is not one of us" undercurrent stragety was utilized. You will see a subtext of suggestions that President Obama has gone on an Apology Tour of the world to admit that America is bad, (something he did not do), that he does not belive in American Exceptionalism, that he did not grow up with baseball or the Boy Scouts, (He was a boyscout). There will be more sugestions that he is not "one of us" in ways I have not thought of yet. This stragety might work for the Republicans, but at what cost to America?

I will not say that this undercurrent message is racist, because it will not be limited to race, but I do say that it will be playing to those who are racist... It will also be playing to those who are narrow minded who belive the American President must be just like them to be any good, to those who belvie he should be corn fed and from Kansas or something like that. (Preisdnet Obama is as much from Kansas as he is from Africa, in fact more so as he was raised by a family from Kansas.)

Whats so wrong with this message?

1) Its not true about President Obama. Sure aprox. half of his genetic make up comes from Africa, but half comes from Kansas and what matters more than Genetics is that he was raised by an older generation of Kansans. President Obama was a boy scout, his grandmother was a member of the Rotary club, he played baseball in High School. He lost a mother way too young and he had to use student loans to go to collage. Id say his background is MUCH more typical American than George W. Bush or Ronald Reagan for example. Sure four years of Obama's childhood was spent in Indonesia, Maybe that gave him some great perspective on American culture and its virtues. I know when I travel abroad I am very happy to be home.

2) Perhaps the most harmfull reason the Republican message is wrong is that it promotes the idea that for something to be good, it must come from deep within our current culture, that nothing from the outside is good and that change is bad. So what if it were true that President Obama was not from our culture! Is America not a melting pot, one of the reasons for America's success and perdominance is that we are a mix of many cultures. We have taken the best of many types and made it our own. We escaped old traditions that no longer served us and moved forward from the old world.
Some new ideas and fresh perspective just might be what we could use right now. The English were appaled when America stood up and said we no longer need a king, that was VERY un-English, which at the time was the prevaling culture. The undercurrent of the Republican campaign echos the outrage of the English Parlament to the idea of American self rule.

Lets hope cooler heads prevail and the coming campaign is led by leaders who wont take advantage of ignorance and prejudice but will embrace knoledge and acceptance of new ideas that might be helpfull. Dont run on Fear of change, but on hope for a better tomorrow.

Thats what is best for The Unted States!
 
This is commentary, my opinion you silly. You are smart enough to know the difference so I can only conclude that you have no intelegent comment to respond with.

^ thats one of the reasons i thought you didn't write it

and the irony is hilarious
 
^ thats one of the reasons i thought you didn't write it

and the irony is hilarious

The "irony" is lost on me as I have never equated intelegence with spelling ability. TO do so is unintelegent, much like underestimating President Bush fo his inability to speak articulately was an unintelegent thing to do.
 
The "irony" is lost on me as I have never equated intelegence with spelling ability. TO do so is unintelegent, much like underestimating President Bush fo his inability to speak articulately was an unintelegent thing to do.

i don't want to derail your thread, but jarod, spelling does indicate some intelligence. speaking and spelling are two entirely different things. you use the words over and over and if you can't comprehend how to spell them...well then....

and therefore, it is irony...if you're going to bag on someone's intellect, better spell it right
 
i don't want to derail your thread, but jarod, spelling does indicate some intelligence. speaking and spelling are two entirely different things. you use the words over and over and if you can't comprehend how to spell them...well then....

and therefore, it is irony...if you're going to bag on someone's intellect, better spell it right

I disagree with you about intelegence, as did Einstein.
 
good lord...you've typed the word about half a dozen times in a half hour, yet you can't learn how to spell it?

1) You have successfully derailed the thread.

2) No, I have tried and was tested by many experts as a child. THat part of my brain does not work AND I am still intelegent.

3) I spell about as good as Einstein did, but I am not as smart as he was.

4) Get over it.
 
1) You have successfully derailed the thread.

2) No, I have tried and was tested by many experts as a child. THat part of my brain does not work AND I am still intelegent.

3) I spell about as good as Einstein did, but I am not as smart as he was.

4) Get over it.

:rolleyes: and here YOU are still talking about a subject you claim derailed the thread......fine jarod, you can have the last word on the spelling issue

:cry:
 
:rolleyes: and here YOU are still talking about a subject you claim derailed the thread......fine jarod, you can have the last word on the spelling issue

:cry:

SUre I can, because you are embarrased to continue it.

Now, do you have anything of substance to say about the topic of this thread?
 
SUre I can, because you are embarrased to continue it.

Now, do you have anything of substance to say about the topic of this thread?

LOL...so i stop derailing your thread, give you the last word and now you insult me.

what a pussy. why did you whine about thread derailment only to continue it?

if you like, i can go on and show you that you're wrong. but excuse me for trying not to derail your thread mental midget
 
LOL...so i stop derailing your thread, give you the last word and now you insult me.

what a pussy. why did you whine about thread derailment only to continue it?

if you like, i can go on and show you that you're wrong. but excuse me for trying not to derail your thread mental midget

Now that you had that last word on that issue. ....


Do you have anything to say about the substance of this thread... What are your thoughts?

Is the GOP going with an undercurrent?

If so, is it a harmfull thing to do?

Do you belive its legit to do so regardless of if you belive they are doing it or not?

Do you belvie Presidnet Obama is unamerican?
 
Now that you had that last word on that issue. ....


Do you have anything to say about the substance of this thread... What are your thoughts?

Is the GOP going with an undercurrent?

If so, is it a harmfull thing to do?

Do you belive its legit to do so regardless of if you belive they are doing it or not?

Do you belvie Presidnet Obama is unamerican?

Obama is actually the latest in a long line of presidents and candidates who have been the subject of "unamerican" conspiracies:

"Chester A. Arthur (1829–1886), 21st president of the United States, was rumored to have been born in Canada.[36][37] This was never demonstrated by his Democratic opponents, although Arthur Hinman, an attorney who had investigated Arthur's family history, raised the objection during his vice-presidential campaign and after the end of his Presidency. Arthur was born in Vermont to a U.S. citizen mother and a father from Ireland, who was eventually naturalized as a U.S. citizen. Despite the fact that his parents took up residence in the United States somewhere between 1822 and 1824,[38] Chester Arthur additionally began to claim between 1870 and 1880[39] that he had been born in 1830, rather than in 1829, which only caused minor confusion and was even used in several publications.[40] Arthur was sworn in as president when President Garfield died after being shot. Since his Irish father William was naturalized 14 years after Chester Arthur's birth,[41] his citizenship status at birth is unclear, because he was born before the 1868 ratification of the 14th Amendment, which provided that any person born on United States territory and being subject to the jurisdiction thereof was considered a born U.S. citizen, and because he was a British subject at birth by patrilineal jus sanguinis.[42] Arthur's natural born citizenship status is therefore equally unclear.

The eligibility of Charles Evans Hughes (1862–1948) was questioned in an article written by Breckinridge Long, and published in the Chicago Legal News during the U.S. presidential election of 1916, in which Hughes was narrowly defeated by Woodrow Wilson. Long claimed that Hughes was ineligible because his father had not yet naturalized at the time of his birth and was still a British citizen. Observing that Hughes, although born in the United States, was also a British subject and therefore "enjoy[ed] a dual nationality and owe[d] a double allegiance", Long argued that a native born citizen was not natural born without a unity of U.S. citizenship and allegiance and stated: "Now if, by any possible construction, a person at the instant of birth, and for any period of time thereafter, owes, or may owe, allegiance to any sovereign but the United States, he is not a 'natural born' citizen of the United States."[43]

George Romney (1907–1995), who ran for the Republican party nomination in 1968, was born in Mexico to U.S. parents. Romney’s grandfather had emigrated to Mexico in 1886 with his three wives and children after Utah outlawed polygamy. Romney's monogamous parents retained their U.S. citizenship and returned to the United States with him in 1912. Romney never received Mexican citizenship, because the country's nationality laws had been restricted to jus-sanguinis statutes due to prevailing politics aimed against American settlers.[44] George Romney therefore had no allegiance to a foreign country.

Barry Goldwater (1909–1998) was born in Phoenix, in what was then the incorporated Arizona Territory of the United States. During his presidential campaign in 1964, there was a minor controversy over Goldwater's having been born in Arizona when it was not yet a state.[36]
Lowell Weicker (born 1931), the former Connecticut Senator, Representative, and Governor, entered the race for the Republican party nomination of 1980 but dropped out before voting in the primaries began. He was born in Paris, France to parents who were U.S. citizens. His father was an executive for E. R. Squibb & Sons and his mother was the Indian-born daughter of a British general.[45]

Róger Calero (born 1969) was born in Nicaragua and ran as the Socialist Worker's Party presidential candidate in 2004 and 2008. In 2008, Calero appeared on the ballot in Delaware, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Vermont.[46]

John McCain (born 1936), who ran for the Republican party nomination in 2000 and was the Republican nominee in 2008, was born at Coco Solo Naval Air Station[34][47][48][49][50][51][52] in the Panama Canal Zone. McCain never released his birth certificate to the press or independent fact checking organizations, but did show it to Washington Post reporter Michael Dobbs: "A senior official of the McCain campaign showed a reporter Dobbs a copy of the senator's birth certificate issued by Canal Zone health authorities, recording his birth in the Coco Solo "family hospital."[49] A lawsuit filed by Fred Hollander in 2008 alleged that McCain was actually born in a civilian hospital in Colon City, Panama.[53][54] Dobbs wrote that in his autobiography, "Faith of My Fathers," McCain wrote that he was born "in the Canal Zone" at the U.S. Naval Air Station in Coco Solo, which was under the command of his grandfather, John S. McCain Sr. "The senator's father, John S. McCain Jr., was an executive officer on a submarine, also based in Coco Solo. His mother, Roberta McCain, now 96, has vivid memories of lying in bed listening to raucous celebrations of her son's birth from the nearby officers' club. The birth was announced days later in the English-language Panamanian American newspaper."[55][56][57][58] The former unincorporated territory of the Panama Canal Zone and its related military facilities were not regarded as United States territory at the time,[59] but 8 U.S.C. § 1403, which became law in 1937, retroactively conferred citizenship on individuals born within the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and on individuals born in the Republic of Panama on or after that date who had at least one U.S. citizen parent employed by the U.S. government or the Panama Railway Company; 8 U.S.C. § 1403 was cited in Judge Alsup's 2008 ruling, described below. A paper by former Solicitor General Ted Olson and Harvard Law Professor Laurence H. Tribe published in March 2008 opined that McCain was eligible for the Presidency.[60] In April 2008 the U.S. Senate approved a non-binding resolution recognizing McCain's status as a natural born citizen.[61] In September 2008 U.S. District Judge William Alsup stated obiter in his ruling that it is "highly probable" that McCain is a natural born citizen from birth by virtue of 8 U.S.C. § 1401, although he acknowledged the alternative possibility that McCain became a natural born citizen retroactively, by way of 8 U.S.C. § 1403.[62] These views have been criticized by Gabriel J. Chin, Professor of Law at the University of Arizona, who argues that McCain was at birth a citizen of Panama and was only retroactively declared a born citizen under 8 U.S.C. § 1403, because at the time of his birth and with regard to the Canal Zone the Supreme Court's Insular Cases overruled the Naturalization Act of 1795, which would otherwise have declared McCain a U.S. citizen immediately at birth.[63] The US Foreign Affairs Manual states that children born in the Panama Canal Zone at certain times became U.S. nationals without citizenship.[64] It also states in general that "it has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural born citizen […]".[65] In Rogers v. Bellei the Supreme Court only ruled that "children born abroad of Americans are not citizens within the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment", and didn't elaborate on the natural born status.[66][67]"


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natura...l_candidates_whose_eligibility_was_questioned

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natura...l_candidates_whose_eligibility_was_questioned
 
Last edited:
Now that you had that last word on that issue. ....


Do you have anything to say about the substance of this thread... What are your thoughts?

Is the GOP going with an undercurrent?

If so, is it a harmfull thing to do?

Do you belive its legit to do so regardless of if you belive they are doing it or not?

Do you belvie Presidnet Obama is unamerican?

uh jarod, YOU had the last word on that issue

i think you analysis is colored heavily with your usual left bias. i don't think obama's campaign is unamerican. you don't have the first clue what the undercurrent is in america....you and others libs thought the pub party dead....oops...2010 anyone
 
1) You have successfully derailed the thread.

2) No, I have tried and was tested by many experts as a child. THat part of my brain does not work AND I am still intelegent.

3) I spell about as good as Einstein did, but I am not as smart as he was.

4) Get over it.

No Jarod, you are a fucking moron. Not just because of the spelling.

That said, the irony Yurt was referring to is that in the OP the spelling was good, concise sentences were used, in short... it was NOTHING like what you normally post. Which is why he asked for a link.
 
uh jarod, YOU had the last word on that issue

i think you analysis is colored heavily with your usual left bias. i don't think obama's campaign is unamerican. you don't have the first clue what the undercurrent is in america....you and others libs thought the pub party dead....oops...2010 anyone

I never thought the GOP dead, never. I agree many other liberals did.

SO, Im not clear based on what you typed...


Do you belvie there is an undercurrent in the campaign to unseat President Obama?
 
I never thought the GOP dead, never. I agree many other liberals did.

SO, Im not clear based on what you typed...


Do you belvie there is an undercurrent in the campaign to unseat President Obama?

The only undercurrent is the one coming from morons on the left who once again want to start pretending that everything their opponents are doing are due to racism etc....
 
The only undercurrent is the one coming from morons on the left who once again want to start pretending that everything their opponents are doing are due to racism etc....

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a post from me on this board where I'm yelling "racism" regarding anything Obama-related, but do you really think it's just coincidence that in a country where the Senate is all white, and where we have had white male Presidents for over 2 centuries, that one of the strategies used against the 1st black Prez is painting him as "unamerican"?
 
I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a post from me on this board where I'm yelling "racism" regarding anything Obama-related, but do you really think it's just coincidence that in a country where the Senate is all white, and where we have had white male Presidents for over 2 centuries, that one of the strategies used against the 1st black Prez is painting him as "unamerican"?

1) I stated that the MORONS on the left were the ones doing so.... funny that you should take that to mean YOU. (unless 'Jarod' is a troll of yours... which actually would make sense)

2) Again, I think the whole 'they are painting him as UnAmerican' is just bullshit from the left. They think if they say stupid shit like that over and over again that their lemming followers will buy into it and start parroting it themselves.
 
Back
Top