Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
Inbox
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 88  Next >

2012: It's goes on and on...

Posted: 9/27/2012 3:34 PM

2012: It's goes on and on... 


Please continue...biggrin
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/27/2012 3:39 PM

Re: 2012: It's goes on and on... 


ok, not to belabor the point...but...

i guess to me the difference is that when obama used the "your boy" comment, he was referring to a cuban-american.  so it's not even like a AfrAm using the N-word towards another AfrAm.

to me, obama was just using the expression "your boy" like i've shown in the urban dictionary...or like mink previously mentioned how he referred to rasmussen.  just like to me, skop was just using the expression, without it having to have a racial connotion.

now it can be a mocking or derogatory term, but i don't think it has to be a racial term.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/27/2012 3:47 PM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 


I think when a minority uses it to another minority, the connotation of power and control is taken out of the term, and that is why it is different. When black people were slaves or had less rights, there is little doubt that white people used terms like "boy" to denigrate black men. I think that is why MF started from the place he did.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/27/2012 4:03 PM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 



dcmets wrote: I think when a minority uses it to another minority, the connotation of power and control is taken out of the term, and that is why it is different. When black people were slaves or had less rights, there is little doubt that white people used terms like "boy" to denigrate black men. I think that is why MF started from the place he did.



i understand how the term "boy" can be offensive.

i just don't think the expression "your boy" is necessarily racially offensive, even when used to refer to a black man.  it can be derogatory.  but it doesn't mean it is racially motivated.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/27/2012 4:09 PM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 


Ugh, who cares?

This is a new Obama ad...

www.youtube.com/watch?feature=...d&v=ZnR_BcvkuzY
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/27/2012 4:14 PM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 


I dont think that is an Obama ad, though, right? I only mention that because it's a lot more abrasive and takes more liberties.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/27/2012 4:22 PM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 



dcmets wrote: I dont think that is an Obama ad, though, right? I only mention that because it's a lot more abrasive and takes more liberties.
DNC, not Obama's campaign.

It is brutal, moreso than the ads we see that Obama has "approved."  So thanks for the clarification.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/27/2012 4:26 PM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 



minkusdominkus wrote: Ugh, who cares?

This is a new Obama ad...

www.youtube.com/watch?feature=...p;v=ZnR_BcvkuzY
this theme is going to be played over and over by the Obama campaign and the Dem PACs up until the election.  Romney has become the gift that keeps on giving.
"Maybe it's time to make some moves."  - Sandy Alderson
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/27/2012 4:34 PM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 


Dems have wised up. I think it has to do with the fact that they have more money, but they have been way more agressive. If I am not mistaken, that Romney ad was very recent and they jumped all over it.

Last edited 9/27/2012 4:35 PM by dcmets

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/27/2012 6:46 PM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 



dcmets wrote: Dems have wised up. I think it has to do with the fact that they have more money, but they have been way more agressive. If I am not mistaken, that Romney ad was very recent and they jumped all over it.
It seems lately that the Democrats have been aggressive and the Republicans have been very whiney, crying about everything Obama does despite doing the same or even worse, saying that Obama is going to lie in the debates, etc. What a change.

I wonder if this is the new GOP...they're very sensitive, even Boehner cries all the time.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/28/2012 9:27 AM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 


I find this to be an effective campaign strategy.

www.wtfu2012.com/
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/28/2012 10:25 AM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 



dcmets wrote: I find this to be an effective campaign strategy.

www.wtfu2012.com/
awesome.
"Maybe it's time to make some moves."  - Sandy Alderson
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/28/2012 3:05 PM

Re: 2012: It's goes on and on... 


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t...sH4OB-49GPMwtFQ

credit to Anderson Cooper for doing his job!

I beleive that the State Department is having a cow over the reading of his journal, is bc w/o reading that Stevens had feared for his security, investigators may not have concluded that they needed to see if he made the concerns aware to the State Department. Investigators will surely now follow up with the cables from the embassy to the State Department over security concerns.

To not issue a stronger security detail based on the fact 9/11's significant historical date was looming screams incompetence. But for Stevens to voice the concerns combined with the fact that 9/11 was looming & not receiving it is scandalous.To passify the public with a two week lie that this was a spontaneous mob act to cover up either scenario is blatant corruption.

Well done Anderson Cooper. I am delightfully shocked.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/28/2012 3:22 PM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 


It's a pretty d'ck move for CNN to pick up a personal journal from a murdered ambassador at a crime scene and publish it's contents and go around town reporting tips from it. That said, it's ridiculous for the State Dept to whine about CNN, too.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/28/2012 3:35 PM

RE: 2012: It's goes on and on... 



dcmets wrote: It's a pretty d'ck move for CNN to pick up a personal journal from a murdered ambassador at a crime scene and publish it's contents and go around town reporting tips from it. That said, it's ridiculous for the State Dept to whine about CNN, too.

In a perfect world, the family would have told CNN to air it, bc the world needs to know, and in doing so from there, all parties would be at peace with the decision.

Cooper, even in the realm of being a d'ck, did the right thing. There is no way the State Dept has credibility on this.

1.) if they were so concerned about fact finding how the hell did CNN walk into the crime scene
2.) where were the officers protecting it?
3.) if they finished their investigation, why didn't they recover it?

this is a full blown scandal to conceal incompetence. the fact that they let any Tom, Dick, or Harry into the crime scene just solidifies it.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/28/2012 4:03 PM

Re: 2012: It's goes on and on... 


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t...TQBgPy27ix3h5vg

"the movie trailer" maker is in custody w/o bail for using different names which violate his probation.

*never missed a phone interview with probation officer
*never missed a face to face
*willingly went to police station after SWAT team scares his family to death

yet, he is a flight risk.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/28/2012 5:11 PM

Re: 2012: It's goes on and on... 



skopko wrote: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t...TQBgPy27ix3h5vg

"the movie trailer" maker is in custody w/o bail for using different names which violate his probation.

*never missed a phone interview with probation officer
*never missed a face to face
*willingly went to police station after SWAT team scares his family to death

yet, he is a flight risk.
Under the terms of his probation he was not allowed to use the internet or use aliases. He violated both of those. With past convictions for fraud, he engaged in more fraud by lying to virtually everyone regarding this film: what it was about, how it was financed, everything. He opened accounts and signed checks with aliases. That's bank fraud. Why isn't that dangerous? He attempted to get a passport with an alias in 2011. How isn't he a flight risk?

Last edited 9/28/2012 5:13 PM by shhaggy

Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/28/2012 5:23 PM

Re: 2012: It's goes on and on... 



shhaggy wrote:
skopko wrote: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t...TQBgPy27ix3h5vg

"the movie trailer" maker is in custody w/o bail for using different names which violate his probation.

*never missed a phone interview with probation officer
*never missed a face to face
*willingly went to police station after SWAT team scares his family to death

yet, he is a flight risk.
Under the terms of his probation he was not allowed to use the internet or use aliases. He violated both of those. With past convictions for fraud, he engaged in more fraud by lying to virtually everyone regarding this film: what it was about, how it was financed, everything. He opened accounts and signed checks with aliases. That's bank fraud. Why isn't that dangerous? He attempted to get a passport with an alias in 2011. How isn't he a flight risk?

you truly believe that? this dude might as well be named Lee Harvey Oswald, but in this case, he really is the "patsy".

He fits into the President's narrative to the extremists of not blaspheming their prophet & Obama still tries to, as of yesterday, imply that the stupid trailer was the reason for the uproar.

so they stormed his house in the early am one day with a SWAT team just bc he violated parole?

koolaid, anyone?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/28/2012 5:39 PM

Re: 2012: It's goes on and on... 


the idea of putting limits on hateful speech isn't so outrageous.  Germany has done pretty well having such limits, though I don't know how it's regulated and what the judging authority is.  And that is not to say that I think the US owes any apologies for the dude who put the video out.  I'm just saying that in general, the issue of unlimited free speech should maybe be examined.

Moreover, I do think many muslims who are outraged by the alleged mocking of their prophet are by and large hypocrites for their own hateful expressions against jews, but also lose a lot of credibility for their violent behavior in response to what is merely a video and even though the violence is not perpetrated by all or even a majority of muslims it clearly meets with the approval of a majority of muslims and that is a pretty big problem imo.
"Maybe it's time to make some moves."  - Sandy Alderson
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/28/2012 5:56 PM

Re: 2012: It's goes on and on... 



DuffyDyer wrote: the idea of putting limits on hateful speech isn't so outrageous.  Germany has done pretty well having such limits, though I don't know how it's regulated and what the judging authority is.  And that is not to say that I think the US owes any apologies for the dude who put the video out.  I'm just saying that in general, the issue of unlimited free speech should maybe be examined.

Moreover, I do think many muslims who are outraged by the alleged mocking of their prophet are by and large hypocrites for their own hateful expressions against jews, but also lose a lot of credibility for their violent behavior in response to what is merely a video and even though the violence is not perpetrated by all or even a majority of muslims it clearly meets with the approval of a majority of muslims and that is a pretty big problem imo.

no, thanks...

Duffy, stop mentioning the video. There was no repsonse to a video; if anything was "responded to" it was Obama & Co. telling the world they offed Osama 21 times at the DNC. The muslims were in the streets yelling "we are all Osamas".

This wasn't about the video that had been on the net for 1/2 of a year. This was a coordinated attack that got in the way of Obama's false narrative that Al Qeada is under control.

The outcome from his incompetence is 4 Americans dead, and a scandal trying to cover up the incompetence & false narrative.

Screw the Muslim extremists too. We can't "blaspheme" Uncle Mo? Whatever!!! You do realize that being any other religion than Muslim is blasphmeous to them, right?

So, just to say, "hey, I am skop & I love me some Jesus" is an invite for them to get a crack at 72 virgins...truth is, they should get a shower & shave, put some Deodorant on, maybe some laundry once a decade, and maybe they'd hook up w/o strapping a bomb to themselves.

This isn't about Free Speech...It's about an incompetent President.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 88  Next >