Barack Obama is a hard target for scrutiny; Joe Biden is first victim

[TraceOneInfinite Flat Earther 96']

Nobody can attack Barack Obama without sounding like a racist bigot.  Joe Biden was actually even trying to compliment him, and said he was the first articulate, clean black candidate running for president, and now Joe Biden's presidential ambitions are ruined because of that comment.

On the one hand, Barack Obama should be an easy target for Republicans to destroy; the guy has a Arabic/Muslim name, close family members who are Muslims, and attended Qu'ran classes in (the most populated Muslim country) Indonesia... all this at a time when America is occupying two Muslim countries (Iraq and Afganistan).   

But yet, he is black, and therefore, any white presidential candidate who tries to attack him from any angle will sound racist and bigoted; and rightly so.

Barack Obama for president!  Ohhh yeah... and Oprah's got his back.  You can't touch this dude.

[7even]

But yet, he is black, and therefore, any white presidential candidate who tries to attack him from any angle will sound racist and bigoted; and rightly so.

lol

[Sanford - V. President of the Dangerous Crew Movement]

im not with all what you said, but he does have my vote.(like it really matters)

[virtuoso]

This man was fully supportive of the Iraq war and now you are supporting him because of his muslim background and the fact he is black. I am perplexed by this stance you are taking, you are taking the same supportive stance that you give to that war criminal and corrupt man clinton. It was under clinton's watch that the united states and the u.n imposed what amounts to a starvation of the iraqi people. Right at this moment you look just as much of a flake as the worst offenders. You don't seem to appreciate that your hatred for Bush is narrow minded and blind to the fact that he is simply the latest puppet to be shown to the american people and the wider world.

[TraceOneInfinite Flat Earther 96']

This man was fully supportive of the Iraq war and now you are supporting him because of his muslim background and the fact he is black. I am perplexed by this stance you are taking, you are taking the same supportive stance that you give to that war criminal and corrupt man clinton. It was under clinton's watch that the united states and the u.n imposed what amounts to a starvation of the iraqi people. Right at this moment you look just as much of a flake as the worst offenders. You don't seem to appreciate that your hatred for Bush is narrow minded and blind to the fact that he is simply the latest puppet to be shown to the american people and the wider world.

I got alot of respect for you, and politically I am in agreement with you at this forum more than anybody.  So let's continue this discussion and see if we can't reach a consensus because I think you misunderstand me.   

First of all, we should put things in perspective.  America is not a Muslim country.  Muslims are only 2 percent of the population here.  Barack Obama is not a Muslim.  Muslims have almost no political power in America (with the exception of Minnesota congressman Kieth Ellison).  So, keeping that in mind, wouldn't it be a significant victory for Muslims, if a president were elected who is from an Islamic background, respectful of Islamic culture, and openly calls for America to pull out of the Iraq war.  Also, I want to research more about your claim on Obama being for the Iraq war, cause he has stated that he was against it from the beggining, that it is wrong, and immoral.

Now, on to Bill Clinton.  Again, let's give some perspective on the issue.  Currently since Bush's presidency, the United States is occupying two Muslim countries, throwing Muslims in prison without due process of law, instituting prejudiced legislation such as the patriot act which violate the rights and privacy of Muslims, slandering Muslims daily in the media, and also fighting proxy wars against Muslims all over the world.  So again, with this in mind, Clinton comes off looking like Mother Teresa.  In fact, the sanctions you mentioned him placing on Iraq; in this context, come off looking like measures taken by an intelligent man to avoid war and still save face against intense pressure from Republican war hawks and an imposing Jewish Lobby.

[virtuoso]

Firstly let me address the obama response, he is simply put just another mouth piece, another way of steering the agenda, to a certain extent americans feel disillusioned right now because they have finally seen through Bush. What the corporate controlled interests are now doing though is offering a false illusion of hope to the people and the hope comes in the form of a black man for president. This is the same man who voted for all of these pieces of legislation which strip all americans of any rights, he is for the burning of the constitution, he is motivated by the ideology of authoritarianism.

As for Clinton, when Clinton was in power, this was the beginning of both the "oil for food program" which is estimated to have killed some 2 million iraqi people and when questioned about this, even his adviser Madelaine Albright said it was a price worth paying, she did not dispute the figures. That right there is an example of cold callous disregard for human life. Clinton is revered for his time in office and yet he sent the american troops into Yugoslavia to decimate that country. Of course certain pretexts were used "trying to stop a genocide" but the truth of the matter is Milosevic said he did not need Europe as Yugoslavia was self sufficient, with a thriving manufacturing base and the country was becoming more prosperous. Under the guise of NATO they went in there and took Yugoslavia apart piece by piece, for geopolitical reasons, to balkanise the country and have on going secterarianism.

Following on from that the Kosovo war was just another staged phony set of circumstances, Al Queda were used to attack the serbian troops and when in retataliation they hit back they were claimed to be genocidal killers wiping out muslims. Wild hype was thrown around in the media there was a max exodus of muslims and that they were being ethnically cleansed from Kosovo. Which was confirmed to be nothing but concocted bullshit when the UNHCR reported that the mass exodus of people from Kosovo began after the NATO bombardment. So on Clinton's watch he is complicit with notorious drug barons, endorsed the genocidal "oil for food program" and a war mongerer who has helped to turn Yugoslavia into a radioactive nuclear wasteland forever. As for Obama well so far he can be credited with supporting legislation which can declare any american as an enemy combatant, to be lawfully kidnapped, tortured and held indefinitely in concentration camps without any legal recourse.

In fact what I have said there are no great revelations it's just people like to entrench themselves within a certain camp and view it almost like a game of soccer, or football you have to support one side or the other. Only the difference in political ciricles, is if you get past the rhetoric what they are saying in most cases, amounts to exactly the same thing. Clinton is all the things I mentioned and much more but the difference between him and Bush was he really had the smarts, the swagger and the cunning to pull the wool over peoples eyes. Whereas Bush's puppet strings are so obvious to basically anyone who sees or hears him. This is my main frustration, with the way in which people have allowed political groups to be branded, they automatically assume that because the agenda is represented under the NATO or U.N banner that it must be good and couldn't possibly have any wicked intentions in mind.

[Jip]

i think this proves how much bryan only talks about stuff or says its good because someone or something is muslim, this guy is obviously your basic politician

he thinks the stuff they all do

but because hes muslim, bryan gave him full support without the facts

[Teddy Roosevelt]

but because hes muslim, bryan gave him full support without the facts

Obama is not a Muslim. He is a member of the United Church of Christ.

[Samoan Enforcer]

bryan i thought you were over America and thats why u left. why the fuck are you still meddling in OUR affairs?

[east bay funk]

all i know about Obama is he smoked a lot of ganj and tried some yowder

[dexter]

Firstly let me address the obama response, he is simply put just another mouth piece, another way of steering the agenda, to a certain extent americans feel disillusioned right now because they have finally seen through Bush. What the corporate controlled interests are now doing though is offering a false illusion of hope to the people and the hope comes in the form of a black man for president. This is the same man who voted for all of these pieces of legislation which strip all americans of any rights, he is for the burning of the constitution, he is motivated by the ideology of authoritarianism.

As for Clinton, when Clinton was in power, this was the beginning of both the "oil for food program" which is estimated to have killed some 2 million iraqi people and when questioned about this, even his adviser Madelaine Albright said it was a price worth paying, she did not dispute the figures. That right there is an example of cold callous disregard for human life. Clinton is revered for his time in office and yet he sent the american troops into Yugoslavia to decimate that country. Of course certain pretexts were used "trying to stop a genocide" but the truth of the matter is Milosevic said he did not need Europe as Yugoslavia was self sufficient, with a thriving manufacturing base and the country was becoming more prosperous. Under the guise of NATO they went in there and took Yugoslavia apart piece by piece, for geopolitical reasons, to balkanise the country and have on going secterarianism.

Following on from that the Kosovo war was just another staged phony set of circumstances, Al Queda were used to attack the serbian troops and when in retataliation they hit back they were claimed to be genocidal killers wiping out muslims. Wild hype was thrown around in the media there was a max exodus of muslims and that they were being ethnically cleansed from Kosovo. Which was confirmed to be nothing but concocted bullshit when the UNHCR reported that the mass exodus of people from Kosovo began after the NATO bombardment. So on Clinton's watch he is complicit with notorious drug barons, endorsed the genocidal "oil for food program" and a war mongerer who has helped to turn Yugoslavia into a radioactive nuclear wasteland forever. As for Obama well so far he can be credited with supporting legislation which can declare any american as an enemy combatant, to be lawfully kidnapped, tortured and held indefinitely in concentration camps without any legal recourse.

In fact what I have said there are no great revelations it's just people like to entrench themselves within a certain camp and view it almost like a game of soccer, or football you have to support one side or the other. Only the difference in political ciricles, is if you get past the rhetoric what they are saying in most cases, amounts to exactly the same thing. Clinton is all the things I mentioned and much more but the difference between him and Bush was he really had the smarts, the swagger and the cunning to pull the wool over peoples eyes. Whereas Bush's puppet strings are so obvious to basically anyone who sees or hears him. This is my main frustration, with the way in which people have allowed political groups to be branded, they automatically assume that because the agenda is represented under the NATO or U.N banner that it must be good and couldn't possibly have any wicked intentions in mind.

real