Who elected Obama........

#103
#103
ole_boi said:
*88% of the black vote went to Kerry in '04*

*90% of the black vote went to Gore in '00

Try to dig a little deeper than automatically pulling the "race card".
Click to expand...

But what he said was;

I will continue to say this. If 95% of white people voted for McCain the blacks would scream racism and riot in the streets. Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with that. If 95% of the white vote went against the brain washed black vote, their leaders would advocate for rioting.

"There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs. There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don't want the patient to get well."
Booker T. Washington
 
#104
#104
truefan said:
This is old news.

I also notice the article conveniently left out the statistic of white voters with college degrees and above. A large majority of that group voted for Obama.
Click to expand...

How wrong can you be truefan??

From the original post:

By education, his support came from those without a college degree and those with a post-graduate degree.

Other significant constituent groups are those who identify with the disenfranchised; this includes two small but highly ideologically influential groups, the economic and academic elite.

............it is Obama's small economic and academic elite constituencies who pose the greatest danger to that heritage of liberty.

Some have made a lot of "easy money," which explains why Obama received far more support from Wall Street than McCain.

This utter dependence upon the low end of the "service sector" is perhaps the source of the insecurities that drive them to identify with the masses.

Obama's academic elite are just as insecure, but they are driven by ideology.

They are Leftists, Western apologists for socialist political and economic agendas.


(perhaps indoctrinate by the last bastion of socialism in America, academia.)gs

Many will recognize them as "Useful Idiots" for their advocacy of Marxist-Leninist-Maoist collectivism.

Like Obama, they reject constitutional authority and subscribe to the errant notion of a "Living Constitution".

Among Obama's Left elite are such Marxist radicals as Frank Marshall Davis and William Ayers and his religious mentor Jeremiah Wright.

There are some characteristics that are common to many BHO supporters among both the disenfranchised and the elite.

It is no small irony that the day before Obama's inauguration, the nation will pause to honor Martin Luther King. In 1963, King stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and gave his most famous oration, the most well known line from which is, "I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

But Obama and his party have divided the nation into constituency groups judged by all manner of ethnicity and special interests rather than the individual character King envisioned.

.....but he has no history of honoring our Constitution, even pledging that his Supreme Court nominees should comport with Leftist ideology and "break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted."
Click to expand...

So what you say was conveniently left out wasn't left out at all, it was one of the main focuses of the article.
 
#106
#106
gsvol said:
Who elected Obama........
Click to expand...

SheepWatchingGeorgeWBushOnTV3.jpg
 
#107
#107
Do you even read what you quote, or just mindlessly cut and paste it and then add your insipid commentary?

"So, his victory was largely due to support from non-whites, from those under 30, from those with the lowest income and education, and from a small number of voters at the other end of those spectrums, while those of middle age, income and education tended to support John McCain. (not that they had much to support)gs"

The statistics you cite say the exact opposite of your characterization. Your stats say that 52 % of those making more than $200,000 voted for Obama.

And how do you know that those that voted for him have low IQs when it comes to Constitutional principles or understanding of the Republic? Did you talk to all of them? How was that surveyed?

It is just mind boggling how relentlessly negative you are about Obama with the barest effort to hide your bigotry, your ignorance, and your selfishness.
 
#108
#108
lawgator1 said:
Do you even read what you quote, or just mindlessly cut and paste it and then add your insipid commentary?

"So, his victory was largely due to support from non-whites, from those under 30, from those with the lowest income and education, and from a small number of voters at the other end of those spectrums, while those of middle age, income and education tended to support John McCain. (not that they had much to support)gs"

The statistics you cite say the exact opposite of your characterization. Your stats say that 52 % of those making more than $200,000 voted for Obama.
Click to expand...

It's not saying that 52% of Obama's votes came from the over $200k voters just that he won that small group. I don't think 100% of the >$200k vote would change the statistic at all.
 
#109
#109
utvolpj said:
I would bet 52% of people making over $200k is a much smaller amount of votes than those that came from low-income voters. I don't think 100% of the >$200k vote would change the statistic at all.
Click to expand...


Oh, as a raw number of votes, I agree. But that will always be true (the number -- $200,000 -- as a divider will change over time, of course.) The problem is that gsvol takes the fact that there are so many more voters under $200,000 that voted for Obama because there are so many more of them to begin with, and translates that into the poor voted for him.

I guarantee you that if you went back and could figure it out, more of George Bush's votes came form people making less than $150,000 a year than those making more than that, simply because the universe of those people is so much larger.

Does that mean that "the poor are the ones who elected Goerge Bush" or some such other bastardized characterization? Of course not.

But let's not let basic statistics and logic get in the way of the story we want to tell, which is that only the slow-minded poor people voted for Obama, right gs?
 
#110
#110
SavageOrangeJug said:
SheepWatchingGeorgeWBushOnTV3.jpg
Click to expand...

how right you are!!! :lolabove:

lawgator1 said:
Do you even read what you quote, or just mindlessly cut and paste it and then add your insipid commentary?
Click to expand...

1) yes

Your use of the word 'mindless' is just another of your endless attempts to avoid topics of discussion and instead indulge in immature flaming.

2) no

Want insipid?? Go into your bathroom, look in the mirror and repeat ten times; "eye yam we tah did."

You are the epitome of insipedness.

The recent election of Obama is clearly fascist politics at work.

Musolinni thought that he could bring his socialists together, even though they were in the minority, if he could 'bundle' together enough splinter groups.

That's how his brand of socialism came into power in Italy at the end of WWI.

The Italian name of the movement, fascismo, is derived from fascio, “bundle, (political) group.”


lawgator1 said:
"So, his victory was largely due to support from non-whites, from those under 30, from those with the lowest income and education, and from a small number of voters at the other end of those spectrums, while those of middle age, income and education tended to support John McCain. (not that they had much to support)gs"
Click to expand...

The working middle class mainstream Americans voted for McCain. (even though many held their noses while doing so)


lawgator1 said:
The statistics you cite say the exact opposite of your characterization. Your stats say that 52 % of those making more than $200,000 voted for Obama.
Click to expand...

Don't you agree the moneyed wealthy liberals voted for Obama???

Looks like they leaned slightly that way.


lawgator1 said:
And how do you know that those that voted for him have low IQs when it comes to Constitutional principles or understanding of the Republic? Did you talk to all of them? How was that surveyed?
Click to expand...

Interesting question, ask them.


lawgator1 said:
It is just mind boggling how relentlessly negative you are about Obama with the barest effort to hide your bigotry, your ignorance, and your selfishness.
Click to expand...

You reap what you sow.

I do note however though that you make no attempt to hide your own bigotry, ignorance, and selfishness.
 
#115
#115
gsvol said:
But what he said was;



I tend to agree with that. If 95% of the white vote went against the brain washed black vote, their leaders would advocate for rioting.

"There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs. There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don't want the patient to get well."
Booker T. Washington
Click to expand...

who are the leaders of the "brain washed black vote"? most "brain washed" black voters were between the ages of 25-64, meaning the children of segregation/intergration and their children made up the majority of the "brain washed" vote. Out of all of the data you spew all over these boards, the only thing that is consistent is that if it fits your agument then you use it. It's nothing wrong with calling things like you see it, but you seem hell bent on convincing everybody who will listen that it is just as simple as the data you post.

Do not put your faith in what statistics say until you have carefully considered what they do not say. ~William W. Watt
 
#116
#116
SavageOrangeJug said:
Obama-idiots.jpg
Click to expand...

Now that is an interesting statistic! :rock:

lawgator1 said:
How is Obama's election fascism?
Click to expand...

First, let me refer you to this post!

I said the method used by the democrats to win this and other elections was the same method used by the first fascist to gain office.

How does it differ??


FT_eykiw.jpg




hitlerveg.jpg


ole_boi said:
who are the leaders of the "brain washed black vote"? most "brain washed" black voters were between the ages of 25-64, meaning the children of segregation/intergration and their children made up the majority of the "brain washed" vote. Out of all of the data you spew all over these boards, the only thing that is consistent is that if it fits your agument then you use it. It's nothing wrong with calling things like you see it, but you seem hell bent on convincing everybody who will listen that it is just as simple as the data you post.

Do not put your faith in what statistics say until you have carefully considered what they do not say. ~William W. Watt
Click to expand...

Jesse Jackson? The NAACP?

Why do you think the Afro American is so on the side of the Democrats when it is the Republican party that has actually done more for them???

Have you ever talked to an Afro American Republican??

If so, you would get a good does of just exactly what I'm saying.
 
#117
#117
i just think its amusing all the problems coming up with Obamas cabinet when during his many "sermons on the mount" he talked about how he was going to clean up washington, get rid of the dirty politicians etc etc, and yet several of his top officials are getting pinned for tax evasion, and one had to get an ethics waver? hahahahaha good job cleaning up
 
#118
#118
funny how obama really supported Daschel until yest., but then lawgator said "he changed his mind, that's what smart ppl do". funny that he didn't change his mind til the public opinion on that situation started to go against him
 
#119
#119
Vol Mania 21 said:
funny how obama really supported Daschel until yest., but then lawgator said "he changed his mind, that's what smart ppl do". funny that he didn't change his mind til the public opinion on that situation started to go against him
Click to expand...


kinda like when he decided reverend wright was wrong?
 
#120
#120
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
i just think its amusing all the problems coming up with Obamas cabinet when during his many "sermons on the mount" he talked about how he was going to clean up washington, get rid of the dirty politicians etc etc, and yet several of his top officials are getting pinned for tax evasion, and one had to get an ethics waver? hahahahaha good job cleaning up
Click to expand...



Duplicity in high gear!!!!

Not surprising to anyone who has studied Obama's history, no change there.

Birds of a feather?

6a00d8341c4fe353ef010537084f31970b-pi
 
#121
#121
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
kinda like when he decided reverend wright was wrong?
Click to expand...

the underside of Obama's bus has to be getting crowded.

Daschle
Wright
Pflager
Whitey Grandma
Bill Richardson
Blago
Rezko
Wesley Clark
Samantha Power (she's sort of half under)
 
#122
#122
MG1968 said:
the underside of Obama's bus has to be getting crowded.

Daschle
Wright
Pflager
Whitey Grandma
Bill Richardson
Blago
Rezko
Wesley Clark
Samantha Power (she's sort of half under)
Click to expand...

Wouldn't you love to see Panetta on that list???

090203_panetta_vogel.jpg


Panetta, whose nomination to be CIA director will go before the Senate Intelligence Committee Thursday afternoon, last year earned $250,000 on the speaking circuit and another $790,000 in fees from consulting fees and board directorships, according to a disclosure statement he filed with Office of Government Ethics.

In all, Panetta, who developed a reputation as a bipartisan policy and budget expert in government, reported earning more than $1.2 million last year from various private sector activities and investments.

Economic meltdown victims Merrill Lynch paid him $56,000 for a pair of talks – one of which came after Bank of America had moved to buy the struggling financial services firm. Wachovia also paid for Panetta talks, as did the defense firm Carlyle Group.

The Pacific Maritime Association paid him $60,000 as “governmental adviser,” which an Obama aide said was for advice on port security issues, not for lobbying.

Panetta, who reported assets worth between $1.5 million and $3.7 million, served on a hodgepodge of high-powered corporate boards last year, including international energy giant BP Corporation (which paid him $125,000 last year) and public relations behemoth Fleishman Hilliard ($120,000).

He also sat on the boards of two insurance companies: Blue Shield of California, which paid him $93,000 and Zenith National Insurance, which paid $170,000 and in which he owns as much as $350,000 in stock. And he pulled down $11,500 for being a director of Corinthian Colleges, a chain of colleges accused of misleading students.

Sylvia Panetta’s salary comes from a company called Leon Panetta & Associates, according to the financial disclosure report. Her husband reported receiving consulting fees of $150,000 from the chancellor’s office at California State University, which houses the institute at the school’s Monterey Bay campus.
Click to expand...

----------------------------------------------

"In April 1985 [Leon] Panetta joined with 13 of his leftist congressional colleagues — including Ron Dellums, Don Edwards, George Miller, Christopher Dodd, and Les Aspin — in sponsoring a 20th anniversary fund-raising gala for the pro-Marxist Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), which had been described by Brian Crozier, director of the London Institute for the Study of Conflict, as the "perfect intellectual front for Soviet activities which would be resisted if they were to originate openly from the KGB." The IPS was originally funded with millions of dollars from the Faberge perfume magnate and Communist Party member Samuel Rubin and his wife."

"Readers who recall the movement to impeach Bill Clinton remember that one of the charges raised by Clinton's critics was the conflict of interest created when individuals connected with the Chinese Overseas Shipping Company (COSCO) — such as John Huang, Charles Trie, and James and Mochtar Riady — helped funnel contributions to the Clinton reelection campaign. Afterwards, the Clinton administration lobbied for granting COSCO a 10-year lease on the former Long Beach Naval Shipyard in California.

During a March 1997 edition of CNBC's Equal Time program, California Republican State Senator Dick Mountjoy noted that COSCO-linked arms dealer Wang Jun had been granted personal access to President Clinton, and that Wang's business associates had smuggled illegal assault weapons into California for delivery to street gangs by making use of a ship owned and operated by COSCO.

Mountjoy then stated:

The next thing you know, (then-Chief of Staff) Leon Panetta is down here negotiating that port for the Chinese.

There is much more to the COSCO-Long Beach connection than we have room for here, but a good summary of the threat the arrangement made to U.S. security may be found in an item inserted into the Congressional Record by Rep. Gerald B.H. Solomon on May 20, 1997.

Even the most unbiased of observers may legitimately ask: Why on Earth is an individual who helped negotiate the turnover of the Long Beach Naval Shipyard to the communist Chinese, thereby creating the threat to U.S. national security described in the Washington Times article by Rowan Scarborough and inserted into the Congressional Record by Rep. Solomon, being considered for a top position at one of our nation's most critical intelligence agencies?"
-------------------------------------------

The 2009 IV Peoples’ Summit in Trinidad and Tobago

On April 17-19, 2009, the IV Peoples Summit will be taking place in Port of Spain, Trinidad (while heads of state are simultaneously meeting at the V Summit of the Americas).The message of a "change agenda" for the hemisphere will be brought to the island nation by social movements coming from all points in between Alaska and Tierra del Fuego. A key focus for discussions during the People’s Summit will be the economic meltdown hitting the capitalist system, and the opening that this provides for the implementation of a peoples’ agenda promoting sustainable development, social justice, equity, and peaceful coexistence.[ie, communism/socialism -etl]

In conjunction with the Hemispheric Social Alliance, social movements present in Trinidad and Tobago will be providing a "change agenda" that, in large measure, will likely be echoed by representatives from many of the newly elected governments in Latin America and the Caribbean. The V Summit of the Americas will be an ideal setting for Obama to signal a new respectful and consultative role for the US in the Americas as well. Will Obama avail himself of the opportunity to take this courageous step forward? Ojalá!

(source, IPS)
------------------------------------------

All these kids who said Obama wasn't a marxist need to speak up and tell us how wrong we were again.

"Liberalism is communism sold by the drink."
P. J. O'Rourk
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top