Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
[edit] Recognition and awards
The audio book edition earned Obama the 2006 Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album.[7]
Columnist Joe Klein stated in an article about Obama for Time that the book "may be the best-written memoir ever produced by an American politician."[8]
Ali it would seem that someone who accuses everyone else on the other side of being a liar might well be diagnosing his own condition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreams_from_My_Father
I will see if I can find this book and actually read it.
How many here have?
Perception isn't reality.
Compare right wing talk radio with left wing air america, if you want to see a comparison. You won't hear anyone on talk radio spewing obscenities. It's a given on air america.
Which is why nobody listens to it. It's trash.
Compare Hillary trotting out imaginary "victims" of the imaginary "health crisis" and see if you can find anything like that going on on the right side of the campaign.
Compare Obama's ties to a hate-mongering racist and see if there's anything like that going on the right side of the campaign.
The difference between the right and the left is that the right is, essentially, honest. The left is dishonest, and when they're caught being dishonest, they insist that everybody does it, so it's okay.
It's not okay, and everybody doesn't do it.
Ann Coulter is amazing. That she can distill a several hundred page memoir into its very essence with just three quotes is astounding. I admire her a great deal. I am also quite sure that she is supplying this information with the proper context. She is a respected journalist after all.
Anyone hear read "The autobiography of Malcolm X?" If you haven't, then you don't know what you're talking about.
Yes, he did start out hating white people. But he went on a trip to Mecca and met Muslims of all races and ethnicities, and realized that he had been wrong.
Perhaps that was the point of Obama's quote about the book. I don't know, because I haven't read his book.
I sincerely doubt that someone who has a white grandmother hates white people.
Maybe he went through a period where he did wish that his whiteness could be removed. Shit, I'm white as they come and I've wished I could not be associated with the slavery and hatred and lynchings and rape that have occurred at the hands of white people in this country.
Not to mention, the whiteness in Malcolm X's blood and the vast majority of African Americans is the result of plantation owners raping their slaves. Yeah that's something to be really happy about.
Calling you a stupid bitch doesn't make me racist. It's not because of your race that you are stupid.
You can't honestly prove that the left are the only ones that lie, can you? I'm more conservative myself...but even I know that a politician is politician through and through. The right is worried about their party just as much as the left is worried about their party. They all (for the most part) are dishonest to a degree. You can't look at the world in black and white. You have to look at it without bias.
Really?
"Nappy headed Hoes"
Savage:
On his July 5, 2007 radio broadcast, commenting on students' fasting in protest of the lack of immigration reform, Savage said, "I would say, let them fast until they starve to death; then that solves the problem.
lliberalism is not only a mental disorder; it is fascist at its core.
Its because Liberals don't like listening to hateful trash. Conservatives do. Hence Liberal trash talk radio failed and Conservative trash talk radio is doing just dandy. Congrats on that fine success!
Imaginary? Not quite.
Hagee, anyone?
Actually the difference between the right and the left is deep fundamental philosophical differences. Anyone who couches political differences in terms of honesty and dishonesty is a fucking idiot.
Well golly gee then. Since it was Ann Coulter we all know for a fact that these quotes weren't in his book at all and HAD to have been taken out of context -so no need to read his book for yourself now, is there? Certainly sounds like YOU have no intention of reading it and deciding for yourself -the fact a critic of what he had to say was Ann Coulter is enough for you, right? Since it was Ann Coulter, we know that is proof positive that this guy doesn't have a racist bone in his body -which certainly explains why he kept with the same racist, anti-American bigoted "pastor" for more than 20 years -who just happened to be the very first person he thanked upon his election as Senator.
Reliance on Ann Coulter as a source would generally make me second-guess your intelligence, but lucky for you, I already thought you were stupid.
Easy way to dismiss the validity of Coulter's criticisms without knowing AT ALL if they are valid or not, isn't it? How can you argue or even SUGGEST that Coulter took his comments out of context -WITHOUT READING THE BOOK, THEN READING HER ARTICLE AND DECIDING BASED ON THE FULL FACTS whether her criticisms carry any validity or not and whether she took his comments out of context or not? I'm willing to bet you've never even read one of her books to decide for yourself whether taking comments out of context is even something she does. I have not only read Obama's book, I have read a couple of Coulter's books-which were intensely referenced as lawyers tend to do and better reads than her TV appearances would suggest. (I read books from authors on the left, right and everywhere in between -I'm not afraid to read a book from someone with whom I politically disagree.) And taking statements out of context is not typical of Coulter -at least in the couple of books of hers I did read. But I rarely read any of her articles.
I am satisfied in my mind -based entirely on my OWN research, in which his book was only a part -that Obama is a racist, which he wants to hide, has a racist wife that his campaign is now trying to hide, and was led by a racist "pastor" for more than 20 years with whom he is deeply and intricately tied -and reached that conclusion long before Coulter's article. Which I have not read -so until I read her article, I don't know if she took anything out of context or not. But those three quotes given were just a sampling of the ones that struck me in that book too. Not the ONLY three. The difference is -I didn't write an article about it. My research was one to decide whether he held some of my most important political views or not -discovering he was a racist was an incidental and unpleasant realization. His political views already removed him as a viable candidate for my vote -his racist views would have clinched that for me had his politics not already done that. But I leave it to everyone else to decide whether that is their conclusion about Obama -but I would like to think they have actually researched this guy's politics and his personal views instead of pretending the guy is the person they WANT him to be.
Until you have actually determined for yourself that Coulter took his comments out of context in his book, surely you know your "opinion" that she did or even "probably did" has no validity, no weight and need not be considered by anyone else as a valid opinion. Unless you have actually read Obama's book and seen for yourself whether her comments carried any validity or not -then what the heck are you talking about? Nothing but "kill the messenger" as far as I can see. Gee, did that work out real well as a mode of thinking in the past for someone that I didn't hear about or what? Did we all revert back to a world where we get to pretend that whether what a person says has any validity or not -is based on our personal like or dislike of that person? Just imagine where mankind would be today if that were actually true. Still believing in a flat earth and that the sun revolves around the earth no doubt.
Coultergeist doesn't traffic in truth, kiddo... she's a liar, and exists only to create fissions in our society while enriching herself.
So I'd suggsest that before YOU bother giving credence to anything she's written (since she's been proven a liar so many times before) that YOU go read Obama's book.
Coulter says:
Nearly every page -- save the ones dedicated to cataloguing the mundane details of his life -- is bristling with anger at some imputed racist incident. The last time I heard this much race-baiting invective I was ... in my usual front-row pew, as I am every Sunday morning, at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.
I have READ the book. That is a blatant lie. Until you have also read the book, you're forced to rely on those of us who have.
Except based on YOUR posting here I know you couldn't be trusted to tell the truth about some one like her if you were offered a million bucks.
I have read the book. she is lying. you have not read the book. for you to continue to support a woman who said, among other things, that she wished that Timothy McVeigh had attacked the new york times instead of the federal building in OK City shows what a vile and despicable hack you are......
lie down with dogs, get up with fleas
Yup, she was dead serious when she said it of course. Does this mean I get to take every liberal comment and cast it in stone without using common sense? Ohh wait, I forgot, THAT is different. Liberals get to ignore the law and the rules.
so...her statement about every page of Obama's book being filled with race baiting invective wasn't a lie cuz she was jes kiddin'???
I see....so whenever I call you on anything you have ever said, your response will be, "hey, I wasn't dead serious.... I was jes kiddin'" and that will make it OK?
The left and right often identify the same things as "problems" -the key difference between them is how best to solve them.
The left invariably says that bigger and more regulatory government is ALWAYS the answer. It is a cookie-cutter response for them. The right is more likely to say the answer lies elsewhere. The other difference is one that has been pointed out long before I came along.
A liberal believes he holds the views he does because he is a moral and decent person, therefore his views are the only truly moral and decent ones.
That must mean anyone who disagrees with them cannot possibly be a decent and moral person. Which means they must be disagreeing because they are evil and cannot have any other motive for disagreeing. And therefore, whatever they DO believe -must also be evil and bad. It is actually a childish mentality -I am good, therefore whatever I believe is also good. If you were a moral and good person too, you would have the same political positions I do. Since you don't, then you must be bad and evil and therefore whatever you believe in is also bad and evil.
Which sure helps explain their nonstop bs that conservatives are racist bigots, hateful and despicable people who want everyone's children, including their own, poisoned with bad air and water, etc. etc. ad nauseum.
I've heard more than a few liberals say that all conservatives and Republicans should be thrown in prison -which is certainly in line with communist thinking too.
One can only be a political dissident because you are evil and we need to protect everyone from such a criminal. We must protect people who shouldn't be exposed to such evil! When you tell yourself that you are a good person, that you believe in x,y and z and that must mean x,y and z are GOOD -then its pretty easy to turn around and insist that anyone who doesn't believe that must be the exact opposite. If he disagrees, he must be a BAD and EVIL person. And since he is a bad and evil person, then I don't even have to listen to his argument because whatever he believes is also bad and evil. Quick and easy way to dismiss without any consideration the validity of any arguments from those who disagree then, isn't it?