GOP sends image of Obama w/bullet in forehead- Sec service investigates

[chrisrobin]

The images prior to 2008 and the staements by members on this very board were similar irt George W Bush.

Hypocrite much?

Let me call you a wahhhhhhhmmbulance!!!!!!!!!!!!

Both depictions are despicable and worthless IMHO.

It is amusing to watch people flip and flop depending on who is in office though. Shows the true character.

Please see below:

http://freakingnews.com/

I didn't see much partisan politics here. The one of Ms. Clinton is kind of funny.

 

[Jack Springer]

Here's the target map from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee showing bullseye targets. It appeared before the other map with the target that got all the press from the fair and balanced MSM.

 

[chrisrobin]

Here's the target map from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee showing bullseye targets. It appeared before the other map with the target that got all the press from the fair and balanced MSM.

So what's your point?

 

[JayHawk]

oh yeah?

care to tell us exactly what people said in 2008 have to do with the people here now who are saying this?

look, you can say what you want but the GOP made this, and it is not the first time stuff like this has happened.

when has a democratic party of any local area, state, or national chapter... when have they ever done this?

How does one equate with the other?

No actually I could give two fucks BUT since the people who identified as the party were saying it in 2008 but the leaders were too weak kneed to actually parrot what was being said in their party.... I cant help that Democrats caint lead.

 

[BostonPirate]

so the dems are bad now because their leaders act with dignity and restraint in public?

 

[JayHawk]

so the dems are bad now because their leaders act with dignity and restraint in public?

Exactly. So restrained that healthcare becomes a destined to fail bloated giveaway to corporate america, so polite that the 15 fucking Tea Party Congressmen own their policy decisions and so darn effective that even Democrats question the efficacy of the leadership instead of standing behind the effort.

This was the turn whether you liked it or not. The libs got somethings done and I think will have about a year more after 2012 before things lock up again. Yet they get very little of what they want done in the way they want it accomplished.

 

[JayHawk]

I can't tell if you're moving the goal posts or just misunderstanding.

I was replying to the statement of "The extreme hatred for the President is disturbing. It was never like this before."

the pictures I posted have nothing to do with democratic leadership or officials or the national organized party, just a reflection of extreme hatred for a sitting President.

First tactic is to move the goal post. Second is to compare you to some vile figure in history.

 

[BostonPirate]

I can't tell if you're moving the goal posts or just misunderstanding.

I was replying to the statement of "The extreme hatred for the President is disturbing. It was never like this before."

the pictures I posted have nothing to do with democratic leadership or officials or the national organized party, just a reflection of extreme hatred for a sitting President.

I cant tell if you are being misleading or intentionally antagonistic

So I will ask you again...

when has a political party in the USA openly used so much violent imagery as the GOP does today?

I am talking about institutional inner party activity. Links sent to its members showing their adversary with a bullet in his head. Or as a chimp family. or growing watermellons on the lawn... or sent out barack the magic negro, set to puff the magic dragon.. it just goes on and on, and it comes from within the heart of the GOP, from its leaders.

THe dems have radical fringes that do that shit, but it is NOT mainstream, as it is in the GOP.

 

[BostonPirate]

First tactic is to move the goal post. Second is to compare you to some vile figure in history.

you can't handle the truth and you wont even address it.

 

[JayHawk]

Whatever dude. It is funny that responsible discourse occurs and then you return from occupying wall street...... but I digress.

How did the occupation go? Did ya get to kibutz with the right people?

On the political party thing you have access to google I presume? Figure it out.

 

[Ambrocious]

You need to cite "high crimes and misdemeanors per the U.S. Constitution. Please enlighten us as to which laws have been violated.

When Obama sued the state of Arizona, he violated the 11th amendment.


Also, in September 24th of 2009, Obama committed treason by heading the United Nations security Council. Barack Obama is the first President in history to hold two posts simultaneously. Article 1 section 9 of the constitution forbids and President from holding any nobility or title simultaneously.

"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State." LINK.

Don't try to have a play on words either, someone already tried to say that there were no Princes or Kings involved in this, as if the United Nations is void of such rule and authority at all. Prime Ministers, Kings, Generals, Presidents, and other titles all hold power or say so over the United Nations deals and talks. They may not always attend (or ever attend), but rest assured, their part of it all is usually entwined somewhere, just not presiding over it.

When Obama took this position, good intentions or not, he actually committed treason as he held the position as ruler of the world AND President of the United States as he headed the United Nations council.

Watch "The Obama Deception" and Fall of the Republic" for the full scoop.

 

[BostonPirate]

When Obama sued the state of Arizona, he violated the 11th amendment.


Also, in September 24th of 2009, Obama committed treason by heading the United Nations security Council. Barack Obama is the first President in history to hold two posts simultaneously. Article 1 section 9 of the constitution forbids and President from holding any nobility or title simultaneously.

"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State." LINK.

Don't try to have a play on words either, someone already tried to say that there were no Princes or Kings involved in this, as if the United Nations is void of such rule and authority at all. Prime Ministers, Kings, Generals, Presidents, and other titles all hold power or say so over the United Nations deals and talks. They may not always attend ( or ever attend), but rest assured, their part of it all is usually entwined somewhere, just not presiding over it.

When Obama took this position, good intentions or not, he actually committed treason as he held the position as ruler of the world AND President of the United States as he headed the United Nations council.

Watch "The Obama Deception" and Fall of the Republic" for the full scoop.

I am going to be honest champ.

That sounds really nutty.

 

[Ambrocious]

I am going to be honest champ.

That sounds really nutty.

Truth is stranger than fiction. Im known as a conspiracy theorist around here. Just wait...the trolls will be quick to show you any and all of my past discrepancies. Of course, those discrepancies are usually a failure to communicate but that's OK, not everyone can accept the truth and bullshit at the same time.

By the way, just for fun, you can see those two documentaries that I stated up above on YouTube in full. I urge you to see them. Something that "sounds" insane isn't always insane just because it seems out of our bounds of acceptable reality.

 

[rareboy]

Why is it that Americans always seem to resort back to the idea that every problem is solved with a bullet?

 

[rareboy]

http://zombie.wikia.com/wiki/How_To_Kill_Zombies

 

[chrisrobin]

Why is it that Americans always seem to resort back to the idea that every problem is solved with a bullet?

Have you seen Bowling for Columbine? Michael Moore brings up the point that in Canada, there are lots of guns. The difference between Canada and the U.S. is that Canadians seem to be able to refrain from shooting each other.

 

[CowboyBob]

Have you seen Bowling for Columbine? Michael Moore brings up the point that in Canada, there are lots of guns. The difference between Canada and the U.S. is that Canadians seem to be able to refrain from shooting each other.

This is true. However America is a country borne out of a revolution and Canada was born out of negotiations. American culture is violent...... the Wild West, the glory of the Revolutionary War, WWII, General Eisenhower as President.... it's all mired in violence.

 

[Kulindahr]

Here's the target map from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee showing bullseye targets. It appeared before the other map with the target that got all the press from the fair and balanced MSM.

I have gone shooting for years, and I have never, ever seen a shooting target that looks like one of those.

I have, OTOH, seen a LOT of dart boards that look exactly like those.

When Obama sued the state of Arizona, he violated the 11th amendment.


Also, in September 24th of 2009, Obama committed treason by heading the United Nations security Council. Barack Obama is the first President in history to hold two posts simultaneously. Article 1 section 9 of the constitution forbids and President from holding any nobility or title simultaneously.

"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State." LINK.

Don't try to have a play on words either, someone already tried to say that there were no Princes or Kings involved in this, as if the United Nations is void of such rule and authority at all. Prime Ministers, Kings, Generals, Presidents, and other titles all hold power or say so over the United Nations deals and talks. They may not always attend (or ever attend), but rest assured, their part of it all is usually entwined somewhere, just not presiding over it.

When Obama took this position, good intentions or not, he actually committed treason as he held the position as ruler of the world AND President of the United States as he headed the United Nations council.

Watch "The Obama Deception" and Fall of the Republic" for the full scoop.

You sounded almost rational until "ruler of the world". The head of the U.N. Security Council is nothing of the sort -- he's more like the ring master for a circus . . . of nothing but cats.

Royalty or nobility not being involved is irrelevant -- the key is the final pair of words: "foreign state". The U.N. is not a state.

This is true. However America is a country borne out of a revolution and Canada was born out of negotiations. American culture is violent...... the Wild West, the glory of the Revolutionary War, WWII, General Eisenhower as President.... it's all mired in violence.

Blame James I of England. He set events in motion that led to a wave of settlers heading for America who were all from a background where settling issues by violence was SOP -- most notably the Irish Scots.

 

[Kulindahr]

BTW, who here knows the significance of 88 and 14 in that plot against Obama that Boston mentioned early ion the thread?

 

[BostonPirate]

I know the 88 refers to Mien kampfs description of a white man.its the number of words hitler used to define the white race. it doesn't bear repeating...lol

I do not remember the 14 though.