Obama didn't attend a racist church. Someone please point me in the direction in which anything Wright says has something to do with white people, and how they're bad because of the color of their skin as opposed to their ACTIONS... Race war, eh Mikey? You're an idiot.

Because America is a white country so any criticism of it by a non-white is racist.

Your comment above is racist in and of itself. 

America is NOT a white country.

It is a country where the white race is the majority race in the country.

It is to racist scumbags like Savage.

Yes, Wright IS a RACIST! He surrounds himself with the Likes of Louis Farrakan and Black Panther Leaders as well. This goes to show you can't convert the converted. You people will follow Obama blindly right off the edge of the Precipace before you would look at the truth that's right in front of you. Many of J. Wrights sermons have mention of "The Man" or " Those White Men..." isn't that a bit Racist?

"isn't that a bit Racist?"

Racism is the belief that one race is genetically superior to another.  The word you need to be using is "bigoted" - but not having heard the sermons you say you are quoting, I would presume to judge whether he is bigoted or not.

Nothing Wright said is half as disheartening as the homophobic crap promoted by Sarah's old pastor. But I guess that doesn't count. 

Church should stay out of politics, period. Otherwise all Catholics are guilty by association with rampant pedophelia.  Wright's just theater. You don't understand the dramatics of a Black Church.  

Here we have the results of Weiner and Sissy boy and alot of fear of change.  It's so sad I can't believe it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itEucdhf4Us

Paranoia strikes deep in the heartland - Paul Simon These people are coming unglued. BTW, in a race war wouldn't the advantage go to the majority? What benefit would Obama derive from trying to stir one up? Total idiots.

Ah, but they claim white males are  a persecuted minority. Math isn't their strong suit.

Savage later said: "I want you to call this show and tell me what you fear about Barack Hussein Obama as president."

Must have been a fun episode.

BTW, exactly what is a race war?

I think Dr. Weiner is  getting all Charlie Manson-y here.

I waiting for him to start proceeding his nutbag rants with "Helter Skelter" by the Beatles.

The Secret Service better keep an eye on Hitler-Savage here. This is starting to remind of the rats shouting "Kill him!" and "Terrorist!" during the Sarah Palin meetings.

By the way, Savage, what you're accusing Obama of is what YOU would do when you become "President" - yeah, remember that fake PR stunt "bid" for the Presidency?

Savage is the king of projection...

Well AA, you keep claiming that the right isn't pushing race, whether it be the right wing churches or the right wing pundits. We've had a solid month of evidence to the contrary. Care to keep defending your claim?

I think Conservatives like Savage and others is doing enough to stir a race war between African- Americans and the U.S. and Osama Bin Laden and  the members of Al- Gadea couldn't be more happier. Not only is the world against us in our fight  we are  now fighting amongst ourselves and to you neo-cons accusing me of inciting violence I think White Conservatives and their media organs are more repsonsible for any racial animus that will occur whether Obama wins or loses.

The irony of this is that Bin Laden didn't predict an Obama and America's most latent racism to come to the fore , but I bet you right him and his followers are praying to Allah urging conservatives like Limbaugh , Wiener, Buchanan, Fox New, and Hannity to keep the race- baiting going so we will impolode from within.

"I fear that Obama will stir up a race war. You want to ask me what I fear ? I think Obama will empower the racists in this country and stir up a race war in order to seize absolute power".

Hmmm - change the year to 2002 and replace 'Obama' with 'Bush'. Somehow that seems extremely accurate.

White folks greed runs a world in need.

And White Folks need that world of greed.

I fear that Michael Weiner will start a race war...in order to sell copies of his photo-copied collection of fictional radio stories, "Psychotic Inanity".

"I fear"... If Weiner and all his wingnut collleagues, and all of their fans and followers, would just start every sentence with those two words, they would at least make a little more sense.

It's when they try to pass of their emotional paranoid ranting as facts that the crazy shines through.

I see the republican base is now out in force. McCain should be real proud of the race war he kindled. He has shown that hs is nothing but an angry racist who will say anything to win.

Yikes, Snoop, that's the base, alright.

And the naysayers were claiming there's no passion in the GOP this election!

I've heard some folks that I work with refer to Obama as that ni****.

I've heard people say the same thing about Senator Obama. And right after that they said, "But, I'm still going to vote for him".

Snoopy, you have any good race war cartoons at hand? I'd like to see what they're putting out in that vein.

There's a great one at all hat no cattle, but I can't copy it for some reason. I'm trying to find the original so I can post it.

If this mythical "race war" the Klan-istas are always taking about was ever going to happen it would have happened decades ago.

To channel Bill O'Reilly for a second: "I'm not making a comparison so don't go crazy but you know who used to talk about a race war a lot?  Charles Manson."

I don't know shaggles.....

Just two months ago a white guy that listened and appearantely read this fools work went into a church and shot the place up......

Basically doing what Manson did...... he used certain catch phrases and worded things a certain way to get his followers to kill......

A corralation?  Of course...... that's 'guilt by association' of specific tactics used.... how unfair of me!

he used certain catch phrases and worded things a certain way to get his followers to kill......

How long have I been saying this very thing on these pages.  That is Savage's goal - to cause conflict.  He openly admits he is trying to stir people up.  He laments at length about his failure to get "the people to rise up."  He mocks the public and calls them "Sheeple."  He has callers call up and say they are buying more bullets.  Remember his rant about bombing Iran last year?  Well, in portion of that rant, which MMFA left out, by the way, he called on "all hunters in American to rid out country of these throwbacks."  (that would be his name for Arabs and Muslims).  He then went on to say that the FBI needs to give the mafia the green light to kill them. 

SAVAGE OPENLY PROMOTES THE KILLING OF OTHERS.  JUST LISTEN.

Savage fears Obama trying to exert absolute power? My fear is that this hatemonger will still have his show even after one of his brainwashed listeners goes and tries something stupid...... Which begs the question: I wonder if Savage would be saying any of this at all if Obama were white or if his name was Barry Obama or Barack O'Neil? or a Republican black man? Imagine the arguments from slime like Savage.... If McCain was the Democrat and Obama was the corporate owned smear merchant Republican..... would old wrinkly white guys suddenly be the ones to fear? Would that be enough for this bottom feeder to play nice with those that are of a different color?

No Michael Savage is NOT a Racist. He would in fact have voted for a Conservative Black man and has said so on the show. He, like many of us, just doesn't want to see an Unquaified non-citizen, radical Muslim (thought claiming to be Christian when the moment calls for it) running the country.

You're long on innuendo and short on proof. Stop wasting our time with your paranoia, boy. Put up or shut up.

For the record, presidents don't run the country. At least, they don't so long as we still have separation of powers. Now, I know you cons have done your best to transform the presidency into a dictatorship with your unitary executive model, but here in America, real patriots are not afraid of taking ownership of our democracy. 

"He, like many of us, just doesn't want to see an Unquaified non-citizen, radical Muslim (thought claiming to be Christian when the moment calls for it) running the country."

Good!  Since Obama is NONE of those, you can "safely" vote for him.  Aren't you relieved now?

I fear Michael Savage will stir up a race war in a futile attempt to bolster flagging ratings.

Nothing is more important than the bottom line of course.

Wonder how much blood will be on MS's hands when he finally kicks off.

whether or not Obama stirs up a race war is yet to be seen...but Savage has some legitimacy to his statements. Obama has associations in his past that lead anyone to be at least cautious of this man. Growing up he had a mentor (and I forget the name) but the man was a big part of the communist movement/party in Hawaii...but no media discusses this. Plus the man is so far left it is absolute left. What about coming to your house and having your guns removed by force? If Obama and Chris Dodd have their way it could happen....and now that this country is a socialist nation (With Bush and McCain heading the way with Obama) who knows what a Democratic congress and President could do...let alone who Obama would appoint to the Supreme Court......but I know I know...I'm am "absolutely crazy"...!!

From Raw Story:

When MSNBC host and former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough appeared on the Colbert Report on Wednesday, Stephen Colbert immediately got him off balance by noting, "The last time you were here, you admitted that you took money from Jack Abramoff."

"What's with that!" yelled Scarborough. "This is all you have for me?"

"That was just the preamble of the question," Colbert explained. "I just wanted to know if you wanted to reveal anything about your relationship with William Ayers while you were here."

After Scarborough had denied having ever been involved in bomb-making, Colbert asked, more seriously, "No, but are you covering this whole thing, that Obama's buddy-buddy with Ayers?"

"We talked about it," Scarborough acknowledged, adding, "It is not relevant to where the story is right now."

"But that's why you talk about it, right?" asked Colbert. "You've got to talk about it even if it's not relevant."

"I don't think you understand," explained Scarborough. "We talk about it because it's not relevant."

"I've heard you guys say, like, 'We shouldn't be talking about this -- this is the McCain campaign making us connect the dots," insisted Colbert.

"You get it backwards," replied Scarborough. "You see, what we do is we talk about it for a very long time, and then we reveal -- after the ratings come in and it helps us out -- that we shouldn't be talking about it."

so i need to take my cues in life from the media?  It is amazing to me that a guy who couldn't get cleared to be a Secret Service Agent based on his past associations will be President.  My family member is a cop...and to hear from him the background checks and the drilling down they do for someone to protect and serve...and yet we really don't know a whole lot about this man...his past...his associations...his beliefs...I am starting to think he most likely will be President...hopefully all will be well and he will be a great President who looks out for America and Americans

I guess I didn't dumb it down enough...

"We talk about it because it's not relevant."

So Obama wanted to be a secret service agent?

We don't know a lot about this man? I'll give you a clue. Read more. He wrote 2 large books about his life, and his associations. Read them, you might figure something out. Plus, since he's been running for President, people have crawled through his entire life, rightfully so I believe, and if you don't think that there is enough information out there about Obama, you've not been paying attention methinks.

Why wouldn't he look out for America? Why wouldn't he look out for Americans? Who else is he going to look out for? And bear in mind, the President takes an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Perhaps we DON'T know as much as you'd like us to know about Obama, though it's most likely that what YOU'D like to know about him are things that would preclude him from being elected and you're PO'd no end that such material has NOT been found. The real problem is that what we DO know about McCain--his choice for VP, his second wife, the people running his campaign, the absurd statements he makes time and again--are sufficient to disqualify him from being considered sane, let alone president of this country!

Yes CPA, you ARE absolutely crazy. Thats the first step to recovery, though. I'm hopeful for you.

You forget the name? How convenient. Just go to your email and find the name, any name. Doesn't have to make sense, does it? Just give us any old unsavory character, any name association will do, won't it? So long as it fits your anti-American Democrats are terrorists narrative.

Screw that.

Now. Put up or shut up, kid. I don't want to hear your bullcrap innuendo and insinuation. Given the theft of our civil right to assemble freely in the streets, that we are corralled into "free" speech zones, and given the robbery of our right not to be spied on by the authoritarian right-wing thugs, your nightmarish gun paranoia sounds like the the fear of a coward. Give us some straight talk, boy. Give us the facts.

Anyway, Savage has no relevance whatsoever. He is a straight up eliminationist.

"What about coming to your house and having your guns removed by force? If Obama and Chris Dodd have their way it could happen"

“If you’ve got a gun in your house, I’m not taking it,’’ Obama said. But the Illinois senator could still see skeptics in the crowd, particularly on the faces of several men at the back of the room.

So he tried again. “Even if I want to take them away, I don’t have the votes in Congress,’’ he said. “This can’t be the reason not to vote for me. Can everyone hear me in the back? I see a couple of sportsmen back there. I’m not going to take away your guns.’’

What else do you need him to say?

He doesn't really care if Obama says he won't. CPA is a dyed in the wool fanatic. Fanatics don't really care if there's anything there, they would just make something else up because winning is more important to them than actually practicing the constitutions foundations.

Fanatic is right, Snoop. This is the same guy who said, "That is not speech....the founding Fathers didn't or wouldn't have ever envisioned Free Speech  being anything but Verbal or Written Communications...not physical actions....."

"What about coming to your house and having your guns removed by force? If Obama and Chris Dodd have their way it could happen"

You really, honestly believe that can happen?  Even if this truly was "Obama and Dodd's way," which it's not, let's look at it from a practical standpoint.

You think that both houses of Congress, which contains gun-owning Democrats like Joe Biden and Jim Webb, are going to vote to amend the Constitution in such a way?  And if monkeys fly out of my backside and they do vote in favor of it, do you think that the necessary 38-state majority is going to RATIFY IT?

Take the phony talking points to forum where people are more prone to fall for it.

You have this completely wrong.  Obviously, Obama cannot grab guns in the way that you have explained...anyone can understand that.  What Obama will do, however, is plant liberal/progressive judges to the supreme court.  Remember that little ruling back in June of this year regarding the Second Amendment?  Had that taken place after just 1 Obama appointee, we quite possibly would have lost the individual right to own guns.  THAT is the way in which Obama can and will implement his radical agenda.  At the very least he will push legislation similar to the Chicago gun ban on the whole country, making it harder or impossible for normal law abiding citizens to get whatever guns they want.  Needless to say, if he is elected, there is going to be a run on guns and ammo in this country between november and january.

As John McCain would say, my friend, you're wrong about where OBama stands on the 2nd Amendment, and ownership of guns. Flat out wrong.

Barack Obama is committed to upholding the Second Amendment

From: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/imsm?source=sem-lb-google-con-sport-search-national&gclid=CM3MpYfnm5YCFQNaFQod8VY76Q

Your hallucinations are fascinating, John#####.

How do you feel about Bill Ayers exercising his 2nd amendment rights?

Ayers, wow.  What a stupid example.  Under the law, sure, I guess he can go get whatever guns he wants.  I obviously think he should have fried in the electric chair a long time ago, been put in jail for life, or at the very least be a felon out on parole and ineligible to purchase guns.  Not like that would matter though, its Chicago, you can get any weapon you want....criminals do not abide by the pointless gun ban...duh!

Whatever guns they want? What do normal law abiding citizens need assault rifles and armor piercing bullets for? Please son, you're paranoid.

But if you want to talk about extremist ideologies, look no further than Sarah Palin's Rapist Bill of Rights. It's her believe that life begins at conception and that abortion should be criminalized, even in the case of rape or incest. I don't know about you, but I am sick of religious zealots attempting to use our government to force their religious beliefs on the rest of us.

An advanced society, such as ours here in America has the obligation to protect the weak and most vulnerable.  You can't get much weaker and vulnerable than an unborn child.  The abortion issue has nothing to do with religion when you get right down to it...it has everything to do with preserving life that cannot defend itself yet.  And it is absolutely sick to think that our society allows women to freely choose to kill what will be a wonderful baby in a few short months.  It is even sicker that my tax dollars fund this mass murder.

Now, I know you clearly do not think life begins at conception, or you would not be in support of abortion.  All I can do is laugh at people like you, because through your own argument and logic, you have no choice but to believe that for the first few months of your existence, you were not a human.  What exactly do you think you were until you reached the point where you could consider yourself human?  A goat?  A horse?  A bird?  I mean, by default, you defined yourself as a piece of matter that is susceptible to getting hacked up and sucked out because the woman who carried you "needs her choice."  Wow, how brave and liberating you are.

And for the record, I would prefer to have abortion stay legal ONLY in cases of rape or incest.  I only feel that way because I am a man and cannot understand how or what a woman may feel after an experience like that.  It is still murder of a human life, and I hate to see it happen.  That innocent baby doesn't deserve to die just because some guy committed a disgusting crime.

So, in your haste to paint me as immoral and yourself as a sententious zealot, bent on telling me that you have the right to tell me how to conduct my life, you totally dodge the point that normal law abiding citizens really have no use for assault rifles and armor piercing bullets.

And don't try to use the language of liberals when it suits your agenda. How fake you sound. You have no concern for protecting the weak and most vulnerable among us. If you did, we would have seen you on these threads making the case for healthcare for all, workers rights to organize, quality public education and equal pay for equal work.

No. Don't bother, phony.

1.  I do not intend to paint you as immoral.  I just want to point out that in order to justify abortion, you have to believe that for a while at the beginning of your existence you were not a human.  That's not immoral, it just is what it is.

2.  I didn't mean to dodge assault rifles and armor piercing bullets, I just felt it was redundant to respond to.  Citizens have no use for them?  How about the basic fact that if the gun interests them, and they want to buy it, we live in a free country and can do that.  There is no reason why a "normal law abiding citizen" should be deprived of something they want.

3.  Language of liberals?  You cleary have the opinion that I am not a dynamic individual.  I hold a range of beliefs.  Protecting the weak is one of them.  We may have different definitions of what constitues weak and vulnerable though.

3.  Healthcare for all - I'm all for that, as long as we develope a plan that does not include the government taking control of the system.  Workers rights to organize - yeah, I'm all for that, why wouldn't I be?  I don't "make the case" for it here because I think its a given, and there are larger issues to cover.  Quality public education - Why would I not be for this?  Of course I am.  I believe public education reform starts at home, with the family.  A strong traditional family involved in their child's life will lead to success.  And yes, we need more funding for public schools to actually get enough textbooks and supplies for students...how can we do that?  Well, let's stop giving illegal aliens free education in our public schools and offering them free and reduced lunches.  That will free up tons of cash to spend on books and supplies for students who are actually American citizens.  Equal pay for equal work?  Again, I am all for it, however, it does not lead to much of a discussion here.

So, phony my behind.

Don't lie, John. You were definitely trying to paint me as immoral, in fact, you were very clearly painting me as an immoral murderer of human life. Have enough backbone to tell it like it is and I'll give you some respect. And don't try to tell me when life begins, about being human. If I gave you picture of a horse, a dog, an elephant and a human in the first few weeks after conception, I guarantee you would not be able to distinguish among them. But, you know, how about the basic fact that if abortions interest them, and they want to have it, we live in a free country and can do that.  There is no reason why a "normal law abiding citizen" should be deprived of something they want.

As for the rest of your post, we have some common ground.

"If I gave you picture of a horse, a dog, an elephant and a human in the first few weeks after conception, I guarantee you would not be able to distinguish among them. "

Unfortunately, we are not dealing with pictures; and we do not make our decisions on how something "looks."  The human fetus is just that...human.  It is made up of human DNA, while the others are not.  So, yes, we do live in a free society, and we can make our own choices.  However, I feel that when a woman makes the choice to terminate the life of an innocent/defenseless human, she should face prosecution just like anyone else who chooses to murder would.  

I mean, seriously, this is an extreme example, but I would rather see the baby adopted by a gay couple than be aborted.  For a pro-traditional family conservative like myself, it's hard to say that, but it's the truth, and it shows just how strongly I feel about how backwards and barbaric abortion is.

I'll tell you what I told another con. Since you have the arrogance to tell us when life begins, I guess it is consistent, at least in your mind, to elide the living with the unborn. Kudos to you omniscient one.

When can we expect, on the count of murder, the executions of rape victims and victims of incest to begin? Murder is murder, right? Does your zealotry prepare you to stay as rigid in regard to executing rape victims as it does in forcing the rest of your, "abortion is murder," beliefs on us?

No, you're the one that's wrong.

As president, Obama only has the power to nominate Supreme Court judges, not appoint them or "plant" them, as you have incorrectly put it.  The Senate has to confirm that nomination, preventing Obama from unilaterally "implementing his radical agenda."  That's called "checks and balances."  Ring a bell?  It's something we use to have a lot more of before George "so-long-as-I'm-the-dictator" Bush became president.

As far as that recent Second Amendment ruling, did you even bother to read what Obama had to say about it?

"I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures. The Supreme Court has now endorsed that view, and while it ruled that the D.C. gun ban went too far, Justice Scalia himself acknowledged that this right is not absolute and subject to reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe. Today's ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country.

As President, I will uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners, hunters, and sportsmen. I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact common-sense laws, like closing the gun show loophole and improving our background check system, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Today's decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe."

That's RADICAL???  Does that sound to you like he's coming for your guns WITH FORCE???

You are also encouraged to take your phony talking points to a place where people are more prone to fall for it.

"...reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe."

If that is indeed what Obama thinks, he clearly fails to see what goes on in his own backyard.  A few weekends before this statement was made, there were around 37 shootings in one weekend in Chicago...an extreme example?  Yes, but it displays the fact that gun bans do not work.  Also, these quotations come after he had the nomination in his pocket...and had shifted to the middle with his rhetoric.  I'm not going to get into a big argument about gun bans.  My main point is this:  I lived in Chicago for a long time.  Because I lived within the city (I had to for my job), the oppressive government there forced me to give up my right to own a handgun.  I do not have a criminal record, and I handle guns with the respect and safety precautions they require.  Tell me, what part of denying me my 2nd Amendment right just because I lived inside the city limits is "reasonable?"

What did Obama have to do with the handgun ban you speak of?  I suspect not a whole lot, since the ban came to be in 1982, when Obama was in college in New York.

Not that it will prove any point I have to make, but how many of those shootings during that weekend were committed using handguns?

You're not being denied your 2nd Amendment right, your being denied the ownership of a small weapon, so get a bigger one, and rejoice over how much more badass you look in the mirror holding it.

While you worry about your gun, you may want to worry about that job you spoke of while you're at it.

"You're not being denied your 2nd Amendment right, your being denied the ownership of a small weapon"

The 2nd Amendment gives me the right to own that small weapon, plain and simple.  Hence, we have a confilct here.  Also, last I checked, a shotgun or rifle will not fit into my girlfriend's purse or coat pocket.  God forbid if any sicko actually tried to rob or rape her (which is not uncommon in a city like Chicago), and she has been made defenseless by her government.  And no, pepper spray and tasers are b.s., they force the victim to allow the attacker to get too close, and do threaten with death from a well placed shot.

Also, my current job is secure, therefore I worry about things.  Whichever of these two absolute clowns gets into office next, he will not fix the problems in our economic system.  Corruption in government and on wall street will continue, simply because we the regular people are powerless stop it.

You disgust me with your defeatist talk that we regular people are powerless to change the culture of Wall St. I don't believe capitalism takes precedence over democracy. I believe that, together, we have the power to change the world with our voice.

I'm just glad your cowardly ass wasn't around when our founding fathers were plotting revolution against oligarchic tyranny. You would have been too busy cowering in your home stroking your weapon and jumping at shadows and things that go bump in the night.

You are going to cast your vote for Obama this year, and hope that he actually changes things.  Wow, how brave and powerful of you.  I personally would love to have fought in the revolutionary war.  It was a magnificent step for people to take, and paid off immensly.  However, if any group of people were to revolt like that today in an attempt to change things, they would be labeled as terrorists, and I don't even want to think about the punishments they would receive. 

So, what it boils down to in current times is "protesting" (laughable), lobbying, and special interest groups.  The latter two play right into the corrupt system in which they are attempting to change.

I mean, I want to have faith.  I thought the voice of the people was heard when the first bailout bill was shot down.  That was a victory for the people, but what happened next?  They loaded the darn thing with 450 pages of earmarks, gave the big middle finger to the American people and passed it.  Both of the presidential candidates voted for it....McCain being extremely hypocritical by talking about fighting pork and earmarks, and then signing his name to this bill.  So yeah, our voice was heard for about 5 minutes, then they went back to business as usual.

You're right. We should just quit. Give up. That's what Americans do when faced with adversity. And we're all just too easily corruptible to participate in our democracy without being tainted by the lure of big money.

What a pathetic stance to take. To laugh at protest, to laugh at organizing, to defer to the powerful and buy so completely into the savior myth. On behalf of my grandfather, who died united shoulder to shoulder with his fellow Americans in the fight against tyranny, I am thoroughly disgusted by your fecklessness. 

I will not share your cynicism.

You ignore and underestimate the long, powerful history of grassroots organizing. It was the grassroots that brought us the right to organize, child labor laws, voting rights for women and blacks.

Pathetic, truly. Just quit. Accept the status quo. 

"...to defer to the powerful and buy so completely into the savior myth."

That is exactly what you and so many others are doing with Obama.  Well put!

And no, I haven't given up.  The Savage Nation Party had it's official beginnings this week.  We will have members in Congress in 2-4 years.  This will be a true conservative party, unlike the republican posers.  Borders, Language, Culture...keep it simple.

Whatever, keep your mischaracterizations to yourself. I am and always have been a populist progressive. I and millions like me put our faith in the power of organizing, community, local politics and participation.

And goody-goody. The Savage nation party! Just what we need...jingo-fascists involved in government. I can hardly wait to read the eliminationist platform.

Spare us your fake outrage. Oppressive government, indeed. You sound like one of those gun lusting Alaskan secessionists. I'm betting you're one of those bed wetting authoritarian thugs that bat not an eye at being spied upon by that same oppressive government you disdain because you put your own cowardly sense of security above my right to privacy. 

I dont sell drugs, I do not talk to people for terrorist sponsoring countries over the phone, I am not an active or former criminal, and therefore I am not being spied on.  However, I hope to God that the FBI and homeland security are spying on mosques, drug lords, gang activity, and really anything illicit.  That spying along with my guns is a sense of security.  I still have yet to see a case where an average American like you or me has been spied on, and then action taken against them by the government for something that wasn't true.

"I do not talk to people for terrorist sponsoring countries over the phone, I am not an active or former criminal, and therefore I am not being spied on."

Wake the F*** UP:

Adrienne Kinne, a former U.S. Army Reserves Arab linguist, told ABC News the NSA was listening to the phone calls of U.S. military officers, journalists and aid workers overseas who were talking about "personal, private things with Americans who are not in any way, shape or form associated with anything to do with terrorism."

David Murfee Faulk, a former U.S. Navy Arab linguist, said in the news report that he and his colleagues were listening to the conversations of military officers in Iraq who were talking with their spouses or girlfriends in the United States.

According to Faulk, they would often share the contents of some of the more salacious calls stored on their computers, listening to what he called "phone sex" and "pillow talk."

Both Kinne and Faulk worked at the NSA listening facility at Fort Gordon, Georgia. They told ABC that when linguists complained to supervisors about eavesdropping on personal conversations, they were ordered to continue transcribing the calls.

Wow.  Your ignorance abounds.  You do know that members of the military sign away their constitutional rights?  They live under military law, not American civilian law.  Also, it is VERY reasonable for military members overseas to have their calls monitored....ever hear of a "traitor" or "rat"?  Of course, in hindsight we know they were calling and talking to innocent Americans, but in real time, you would have no idea who they might be calling, or what kind of coded language they may be communicating in.

As for the journalists, have you not seen some of those disgusting reports from behind enemy lines, where the reporter is actually in a terrorist camp?  Our government and spy agencies had better be tapping into their calls with the intent of gaining intel from these lousy journalists who mix with the enemy.

For the aid workers...again...those people might see or hear things, or go to places where the enemy is located.  They may slip up and talk about that stuff on a personal phone call.  In a war like this one...a small piece of intel such as a single location can have dramatic effects on our military's success.

So, anyone in the military or other areas of work overseas had BETTER be getting listened to, or the government isn't doing its job.

You failed to provide any evidence that Joe the plumber from small town USA has been spied on, or suffered injustice.

Hey, I've got a neat idea. How about we talk about a real terrorist connection?

"but I know I know...I'm "absolutely crazy"...!! "

Yep!

You do realize that Mr. Frank Marshall Davis was a well respected writer right? And also that he disavowed any attachment to the communist party, but he was tarred as being a communist because he went on strike to gain wage parity in Hawaii. For example:

"Since as Davis recalls, "Not too long before my arrival, all Democrats were tarred with this same brush by the ruling Republican clique (1992, 323-24).  His problems multiplied when it became clear that there were concerted efforts to brand him an outside instigator, and even a Communist.  "The local establishment, which evidently had been given a file on me by the FBI, flipped," Davis recalls, "I was a Communist and a subversive and a threat to Hawai`i."

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~takara/frank_marshall_davis.htm

Davis was NOT a member of the communist movement in Hawaii, if such a thing even existed.

Also, "He warned against blacks accepting the Depression-era remedies being pushed by communists.[8]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Marshall_Davis

And the funniest thing is, is if you look up Frank Marshall Davis, the only people claiming him to be some sort of commie are the crazy wingnut websites such as WND, and many others of their ilk, and when I see that, it's a red herring to me, mostly because they traffic in misinformation.

Frank Marshall Davis from what I read, was a black leader in his community, and made great strides with his writing, and his activism.

If Obama is elected our guns won't get taken away. That's just pure fear factor being used by republicans right now because you have nothing else. Obama has not even talked extensively about gun control, or taking away guns. And he is not far left. To call him far left is simply ignoring evidence to the contrary, such as the fact that most of his policy positions are actually what mainstream American agrees on, and all of this talk about super lefty is put to rest, not to mention that McCain is much further right than Obama is left.

And yes, you are absolutely crazy to think that someone who was and is a Constitutional scholar would, you know, trash the document that he spent most of his life working for, unlike our current President.

"I'm am "absolutely crazy"...!!"

Yes you're are!

The Republicants have done a masterful job of planting this racist swill in the reptilian cranial cavities of their drooling base.

Some douchebag called Rush Limbaugh's show today, claiming that he had been a Democrat for 30 years (yeah, right).  He said he couldn't vote for Obama because of his "associations", and that the librul media refused to tell the truth about him.  "Associations" seems to be the talking point du jour, from Palindrone Twit on down.

Christ on a Cracker.... these people are stupid.

A big part of the problem seems to be Crackers on Christ!

What the hell does that mean?

Nice one, WK ! Now diagram it for Zamfir.

I just find it funny that this forum is always complaining about some derogatory term used against black or brown people but yet the usage of "Cracker" is somehow acceptable.  Excuse me while I go threaten to call INS on my neighbors gardener.

2 words for you. Persecuted majority.

Get over it.

Obama is a halfrican oreo.  Get over it.

I'm not going to flag that. I'm going to let your bigoted hatred stand for all to see.

Don't bother trying to act all carefully measured in your tone with me anymore because I know the seething hatred you have bubbling just under your thin veneer of cordiality. 

By the tone of this discussion, and magnolia's last comment I thought we were past getting upset over slang names.  "Cracker" is far more offensive, since it implies that I crack the whip on black slaves...but I was just told to "get over it."  Classic case of being able to dish it out but not take it back.  I suggest you take up the argument with magnolia for excusing the use of the term "cracker."

Seeing Wiener complain about someone spreading hate is hilariously entertaining. Good work, Wiener!

"It is amazing to me that a guy who couldn't get cleared to be a Secret Service Agent based on his past associations will be President."--CPA5 How do you know Obama would not be cleared? That appears to me to be mere conjecture/speculation. Please provide legitimate links to support your assertion. Thanks.

I just wish the orderly would come and take him back to his rubber room, so the rest of us don't have to listen to his crap.

Ever heard of switching the channel?

Mikie is not in the somebody elses problem column.

He'll spew his venom as long as he's able. We'll continue to call him on it.

On the side, what channel is he on?

Ever heard of being held to account for who you sponsor?

Probably not, too many big words.

Maybe his sponsor's agree with what he says?  Or maybe they don't care because he has so many listeners/potential customers for their products or services?

If the sponsor's agree with what he says, then the people should know.  Then the people can hold that sponsor to account for it.  Public pressure can and does put lucrative yet irresponsible enterprises to an end.  That's what's known as a free market, a concept normally embraced by you and those who think like you.

I think it's very safe to assume that his sponsors agree with his message, that's why they are advertising on his show.  They also know the audience, and feel their advertising will generate business from them.  Clearly there is not enough opposition to his show and sponsors to change anything.  Not even the almighty front-group CAIR could bring the show down.

Michael the Savage Wiener that is.

Megabot - do you have link to those chants at the Palin rallies?  I missed that one and would like to read about it.

...unlike Palin's WITCH DOCTOR homophobic anti-woman pastor...non issue, Savage. Tick, tick, tick. And people wonder why the fairness doctrine is bad? The conservative radio people say libs dont bring in the bucks? Because they're not STUPID, Savage.

You people - the right wing media - Fox cable news, etc. - those who are implying that Obama is a terrorist sympathizer - McCain and Palin - are playing with fire and may well ignite a race war.

But, hopefully, Obama will ride the wave into office, and will have such an overwhelming popular vote, that we can move ahead to create the kind of society we hoped for in the days of Camelot with JFK. There's a new chance to do it right.

I think that through his racist rhetoric, obama's own pastor of 20 years has done more to ignite a race war than anything mccain or palin could ever do. 

Click here to see what an Obama in office will bring us.

I still don't know how Reverend Wright's comments are racist. You could maybe argue unpatriotic, but racist? Please explain how his seromon was racist.

Well if Obama is a terrorist and TUCC  and Rev. Wright is a commie cell looking to end the "American Way Of Life" as Wiener and Hannity then African- Americans better get ready because those listeners of his show are a scary bunch along with some of the posters here who are paranoid about Obama, Ayers, and Wright teaching "those poor negreos to kill and hate whitey " lololol. I guess we Black folks are too stupid according to the logic conservatives use to think for our selves, after listening to those angst- ridden supporters of racism it's understandable why 90% of us vote Democratic and it ain't because we want some handout from the government.

It's because the GOP are lead by a bunch of loud-talking, rhyming,angst-ridden  white nationalist/racialist parasites which  drowns out any reasonable Republican message whatever it is. To the conservatives who post here, your party's attitude   towards African- Americans is no different than the Nazi Party except you don't have those charming uniforms, and Wagner songs to keep your hate warm.

I love it! I love it when I get slammed in this forum:) Keep it up guys....Fact is Obama's associations in the past to a DOMESTIC TERRIORIST would without a doubt not allow him to be in the SECRET SERVICE. Unfortunately I have to run to a meeting but I'll be back in here later to touch on some of my more MORONIC points that all you can snide at...MAN I LOVE THIS SITE:) :)

Man you're filthy with eliminationist rhetoric. You realize that kind of talk only promotes acts of violence against Mr. Obama. Furthermore, if you want to go there, I guess you understand that Palin has her own history of palling around with anti-American terrorist secessionists, like Mark Chryson.

I get it though, you sick bastards are desperate to change the subject because you have nothing but failure to cite for the last decade of conservative governance. Obama has real solutions for empowering and uniting our country. McCain/Palin, on the other hand has nothing but divisive hate speech and more irresponsible tax cuts for the same punks who have driven this country to financial ruin.

You must be so proud of your Republican criminal class.  

First off, what are talking about 'Eliminationist' rhetoric....because Obama has had ties to a 60's radical (who by the way is still a radical and is now using the public education system to spew his rhetoric) and I point out that these ties would pre-clude him from being a Secret Service agent....how is that a eliminationist view point.....how does that promote violence? (seriously now)  I have said nothing about violence....in fact I don't even call anyone names here on this forum...you all call me names and even worse...but yet I am the one promoting violence....that just isn't right.

Secondly, Roundhouse, if you think it is the fault only of Republicans and the President that our country is in this mess...that is just a little blinded.  I think it is the fault of: Republicans, Democrats, G.Bush, B.Clinton, current and past Senate, current and past Congress, Greed on Wallstreet, CEO Greed, Mortgage lenders who were greedy, unresponsible people who took loans they couldn't afford, as well as people who live WEEEEELLLLL beyond their means.....and I probably forgot a few others....but catch my drift I think alllllooooottt of people have had their hands involved in this current mess.

I hope this isn't too violent for you:)

It's hate speech. Plain and simple. It's rhetoric that draws the listener to the conclusion of eliminating the dangerous enemy within. I mean what is the penalty for treason? What do we do to terrorists? You're stupid if you think the intention of calling Obama a terrorist is not an invocation of violence.

The right is violence. Own it.

But hey, it's all the authoritarian right has left: call Democrats terrorists and try to make them share disproportionate blame for the failure of supply side economics. No, the conservative market fundamentalist ideology has ruined our economy, the conservative go it alone cowboy foreign policy has left us isolated in a world that will require cooperation to neutralize terrorism.

I suggest you practice some of that personal responsibility you Republicans are quick to mouth and slow to display. I suggest you own up to your Republican failures, it's the first step toward finding real solutions.

The only person in this discussion who has actually used violence as a means to get his point across is Bill Ayers, obama's friend and colleague.

Also, "cooperation" does not neutralize terrorism (more specifically defined as radical adherence to the muslim faith), US Navy SEALS, US Marines, US Army, and any other branch of our military, along with the military assistance from our allies neutralizes terrorism.  The only form of negotiation that a radical throwback muslim understands is that he will receive a bullet to the skull if he continues his current activities.

Nice elminationist imagery.

You're kind of a sick pig when you think nobody's watching anymore. Look anybody who supports a Party who puts a person at the top of their ticket who hangs around with, and marries, gun fetishist America hating secessionists in Alaska ought to have enough sense to stfu about guilt by association.

So we have 2 candidates that have spouses who, until they were involved in the election process, could be considered radical America haters.  Just goes to show what wonderful people our 2 party system provides us with.

And yes, it was nice eleminationist imagery.  Eliminate the radical muslim islamo-facist, and every normal person in every corner of our world is safer.

"I love it when I get slammed in this forum:) Keep it up guys"

That admittedly makes you nothing more than a troll.

I don't troll anything...all I do is respond to items that M.M. puts up about Savage.  The only reason why I even said it is because all of my views are slammed....which is fine...I do find it interesting though that I always act and write in a respectful manner whereas you guys always call me names and the like....I guess this is like the public school playground where the bullies call kids names.  Why can't you all just debate without calling others who don't share your views rude names?  Is it the internet that empowers you all to say whatever you want because we are not face to face...or do you all act like this in person as well when you meet people who might disagree with your political or otherwise views?

Have a nice weekend!!! 

Nah, most folks I meet in person have enough sensibility and respect not to repeat eliminationist rhetoric about the next president. I'm thinking you're the one empowered by anonymity to behave like an authoritarian thug.

You admitted that you derive entertainment from getting "slammed."

That means you fall into the long established and widely accepted definition of an internet troll.

TO MAGNOLIALOVER: (cited from wikepedia) In 1950, the congressional House Un-American Activities Committee accused Davis of involvement in several communist-front organizations. The committee concluded that the Honolulu Record was “a front for the Communist Party, despite the fact that the paper does not make this admission.”[2] The committee’s report on the Honolulu Record states the following about Davis: Mr. Davis' column defends Communists and attacks capitalism with the same vigor as columns appearing regularly in the Daily Worker and other frankly Communist publications. Typical of Mr. Davis' remarks are the following: “Democracy today lies weak and slowly dying from the poison administered by the divident doctors in Washington and Wall Street who have fooled a trusting public into believing that they are the specialists who would save us from the dread diseases of socialism and communism. . . . They hope to hand us fascism disguised as the healed democracy.” (Honolulu Record, July 28, 1949, p. 8). Mr. Davis constantly defended the 11 top United