Obama admits he's a Muslim

The issue isnt whether he is a muslim, although it was pretty dumb to say he was.

The issue is whether this incident was an example of him revealing who he really is or is just another example of him being a complete moron and having no clue what he says.

Either way he comes off very unflattering.

BTW with this stupid statement can we please get off this BS claim that Obama is vastly intelligent than most people? He isnt.
thats exactly how i saw it as well
 
Lets see, how to start.... You are, I hope, aware people have 2 sets of Grandparents? One set on the Fathers side ( Fraternal) and one set on the mothers side ( Maternal)?

Perhaps you just forgot this? I can not see how you could not have been taught this or figured it out on your own.
:badgrin: I didn't know you were from West Virginia.
 
Pride?

I'm actually embarrassed that his "supporters" who seem to feel that his faith is something that needs to be spun are my fellow Americans.

He could be a Wiccan for all I care - his religion is of no importance to me.

I think you'll find that most of his "supporters", support him with no different intensity than any other candidate. As for the ones who are more fervant, I'd guess they're no more so than the people who, almost 30 years later, still think Reagan was G-d.

As for his religion being "of no importance" to you, might be true, but you seem to not mind using it to smear him and get people not to vote for him.

You should know better... right wing extremist societies make bad places for Jews to live.
 
I think you'll find that most of his "supporters", support him with no different intensity than any other candidate. As for the ones who are more fervant, I'd guess they're no more so than the people who, almost 30 years later, still think Reagan was G-d.

As for his religion being "of no importance" to you, might be true, but you seem to not mind using it to smear him and get people not to vote for him.

You should know better... right wing extremist societies make bad places for Jews to live.


So too, left wing extremist societies.

Come to think of it, those are unhealthy for people generally, regardless of their race, color, creed, or religion.
 
The issue isnt whether he is a muslim, although it was pretty dumb to say he was.

The issue is whether this incident was an example of him revealing who he really is or is just another example of him being a complete moron and having no clue what he says.

Either way he comes off very unflattering.

BTW with this stupid statement can we please get off this BS claim that Obama is vastly intelligent than most people? He isnt.

again, I say this is no more revealing about who Obama "REALLY" is than John McCain's slip that he's a liberal, which he immediately backtracked and corrected.

Avatar, what comes off as unflattering is that the Cons have been doing this shit for 19 LONG MONTHS and it just never seems to get old for them.

I'd say Obama is more intelligent than 80% of the population.... Havard Law magna cum laude - with high honor; with high academic distinction; "

and even if you want to make the argument that he's not vastly more intelligent than MOST people, he's certainly more intelligent than John McCain...Mr. 894th out of 899 students

Come November we'll see what really matters to the American public and I don't think it'll be bullcrap stories like this.
 
John McCain finished at the bottom of his class, are you sure he even knows what Muslim means?



A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote against the fundamental principle of America, the right of the individual to lead their life privately without the government interfering.
 
BUSHTEAM did an incredible job on the THICK, UNTRAVELLED, XENOPHOBIC, hillbilly US public.

There are about 24 islamic extremists on the planet.... whilst there are 100 million christian NUTS in the US.

.....

:lol: We're bible-gun clingers! :lol:

Please repeat this post on as many political board as possible. In fact, why don't you have some bumper stickers made with these lines?
 
A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote against the fundamental principle of America, the right of the individual to lead their life privately without the government interfering.

True... But you're not suggesting that a vote for Obama/Biden will have a different result are you? If so I've got some bad news...
 
I figured and typos don't normally warrant attention, IMO, but I did think you could stand a taste of your own medicine.
;)
and thanks for the rep. :)
It wasn't a typo it was an error in vocabulary. Although I strive for perfection I am not there and never will be, and am man enough to admit when I made a mistake instead of claiming my fingers did it.
 
True... But you're not suggesting that a vote for Obama/Biden will have a different result are you? If so I've got some bad news...

Depends what principles matter to you, wouldn't you say? If you're about individual freedom in the form of personal privacy, like reproductive choice and maintaining the separation of church and state, then McCain isn't for you. If you're about the freedom to discriminate against gays; to teach your religion in school and to play moral arbiter for anyone who isn't a christian fundamentalist, then Obama shouldn't get your vote.

It's pretty simple, really.
 
It wasn't a typo it was an error in vocabulary.

And a nit picky one at that!!

I would argue that it is a sort of typo in that it appeared to be an erroneous word substitution, a slip of the tongue, an Obamination, if you will.

Was it really an error in vocabulary a la Sargetard? I'm guessing you knew the correct definition all along.

I appreciate your honesty and your efforts towards perfection. Us libs here will be glad to help you achieve that goal. Now repeat after me, " "under god" is a phrase which should not have been tacked onto to The Pledge of Allegiance".

:eusa_clap:
 
Depends what principles matter to you, wouldn't you say? If you're about individual freedom in the form of personal privacy, like reproductive choice and maintaining the separation of church and state, then McCain isn't for you. If you're about the freedom to discriminate against gays; to teach your religion in school and to play moral arbiter for anyone who isn't a christian fundamentalist, then Obama shouldn't get your vote.

It's pretty simple, really.

That about sums it up.
 
And a nit picky one at that!!

I would argue that it is a sort of typo in that it appeared to be an erroneous word substitution, a slip of the tongue, an Obamination, if you will.

Was it really an error in vocabulary a la Sargetard? I'm guessing you knew the correct definition all along.

I appreciate your honesty and your efforts towards perfection. Us libs here will be glad to help you achieve that goal. Now repeat after me, " "under god [sic]" is a phrase which should not have been tacked onto to The Pledge of Allegiance".

:eusa_clap:
I know the definitions of both words and used the wrong one. That's not a "typo" per my understanding of that term.

"nder God" was inserted to be more correct, bringing the Pledge in line with the Declaration of Independence, that clearly recognizes our reliance on Providence, and to the Constitution, that recognizes His Blessings.
 
Depends what principles matter to you, wouldn't you say? If you're about individual freedom in the form of personal privacy, like reproductive choice and maintaining the separation of church and state, then McCain isn't for you. If you're about the freedom to discriminate against gays; to teach your religion in school and to play moral arbiter for anyone who isn't a christian fundamentalist, then Obama shouldn't get your vote.

It's pretty simple, really.
Maybe if you string enough lies together and repeat them enough some mindless robots will start to believe you. :eusa_liar:
 
I know the definitions of both words and used the wrong one. That's not a "typo" per my understanding of that term.

"nder God" was inserted to be more correct, bringing the Pledge in line with the Declaration of Independence, that clearly recognizes our reliance on Providence, and to the Constitution, that recognizes His Blessings.


No, it was voted in by Congress on a bill supported by Eisenhower who wanted to throw a bone to the rabid right wingers of the McCarthy Era who were so deluded they really thought they could smoke out secret communists who would be unable, like a vampire cannot kiss a crucifix, to pronounce the words 'under God".

In this way, Eisenhower threw the First Amendment under the bus, as well as atheists, certain religious groups and anyone who believes no patriot should be required to put God before country. The Pledge was perfectly acceptable, a beautiful, inspiring and eloquent oath .... till the McCarthyites got their claws on it and corrupted it
 
No, it was voted in by Congress on a bill supported by Eisenhower who wanted to throw a bone to the rabid right wingers of the McCarthy Era who were so deluded they really thought they could smoke out secret communists who would be unable, like a vampire cannot kiss a crucifix, to pronounce the words 'under God".

In this way, Eisenhower threw the First Amendment under the bus, as well as atheists, certain religious groups and anyone who believes no patriot should be required to put God before country. The Pledge was perfectly acceptable, a beautiful, inspiring and eloquent oath .... till the McCarthyites got their claws on it and corrupted it
Nice story you should write a novel, but here lets stick with the facts of history.
 

Forum List

Back
Top