Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
...is that people like Donah get to vote.
One thing I've noticed in the letters posted here:
it seems that many of the people who are getting (and believing) these emails are the very same people who live in the states that went republican in the last two elections.
So what's the bog deal? And why again, are we worrying about changing their minds? We won't. And frankly, I'm not entirely sure it has anything to do with Obama, per se, or whether these voters in the "fly over states" already have this predisposition anyway. IOW, if the nominee was Clinton, they'd be saying some other weird shot to not vote for her, you know?
So no surprises here. The good news is that he does have some constituencies in those states anyway (thanks to the primary season) and maybe THEY can do some of the rumor-busting work. All marketers know that word of mouth and person-to-person recommendations are more powerful than any other advertising medium.
In the meantime, Obama would be good to concentrate on the swing states (MI, OH, PA, FL) and the three or four purple states (like CO, NV, NM, AK, VA) where he stands a chance of upsetting McCain. This is exactly what he HAS planned to do and IS DOING.
No need for us to panic about this. Really.
...upon which I rest most of my cases (and am I related to any of you morons?) I notice someone stated that the average IQ in the US is 100 and extrapolated from this unscientific statistic (which is commonly believed but utterly proof proof), that it meant half the populace (even the part which has never taken an IQ test) has an IQ below 100. An average, brothers and sisters, is the aggregate number associated with any trait, divided by the number of subjects involved. It is only an average. Were the mean IQ of US citizens 100, then half would be below and half above. The average means almost nothing, since a handful of geniuses could skew it up to 100 and damn near all the rest of us could be virtually brain dead (which appears to be the case).
Having read through the whole thread, I'm inclined to believe, based on this purely anecdotal evidence, that something like 90 per cent of us are below that golden 100 mark. The conversation here pretty much speaks for itself. A handful of very bright folks trying to argue with a big bunch of willfully stupid fuckwads.
Based on the psychological mechanism of projection, it would appear about 75 per cent of letter writers here secretly wish they were Muslims. Of course, if you honestly believe Obama is a Muslim you a) never heard of projection or b) don't believe in that psychological mumbo jumbo.
Oddly, despite all this unscientific observation I continue to believe this aberrant behavior will not be enough to prevent the clear win by Obama in November.
Thank you Jesus, Praise Allah, give way to the Hummingbird, whatever!
I was shocked a few years ago when I was talking to an American woman I know, an intelligent and likeable person, and I said a few firebrand things about America's healthcare system. To my amazement she began to defend it, trying to convince me that everything was fine and 'we have the emergency rooms' and so on. I realized that she knew next to nothing about the subject. Because she and her husband had a good health plan from his previous employment which continued into retirement she was blind to what was really going on. But later I decided she just didn't want to know. She had made a choice not to know. It's the same with Barack Obama: anyone who doesn't know by now that he's not a Muslim, doesn't want to know. They're willing to be lied to, just the way she was. He should still try to combat the misinformation campaign but there are limits to how much 'the truth will set you free'. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink - or think.
... Be that as it may, I'll counter some of Donah's bullshit:
Donah603: "Obama is a non-US born Muslim !!"
Nope - that's a lie twice over. Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, and is a Christian.
http://www.obamafactcheck.com/myths/10/obama_at_church_326504.shtml
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp
Donah603: "Obama is Muslim according to the MUSLIM WORLD"
Still more bullshit.
___________________
Sherman A. Jackson, a professor of Arabic and Islamic studies at the University of Michigan, cited an ancient Islamic jurist, Ibn al-Qasim, who said, "If you divorce a Christian woman and ignore your child from her to the point that the child grows up to be a Christian, the child is to be left," meaning left to make his own choice. Jackson said that there was not total agreement among Islamic jurists on the point, but Luttwak’s assertion to the contrary was wrong.
___________________
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/opinion/01pubed.html?pagewanted=2&_r=5
Donah603: "His dad and grandfather were Arab Muslims. Both Obama and his father are "African born" Arabs..."
Bullshit higher and deeper.
Per an extensive genealogical history going back several generations, there is no indication that Obama is of Arab descent:
http://genealogy.about.com/od/aframertrees/p/barack_obama.htm
Even if there was, however, to assert that being of Arab descent is "troubling" is nothing short of naked racism. Do you also think that it's "troubling" that, for example, the former Commander of the United States Central Command (CENTCOM) John Abizaid, Republican Congressman Darrell Issa, Apple CEO Steve Jobs, and rock star Sammy Hagar, amongst many others, are racially Arab, Donah603?
[ Considerably more bullshit snipped. ]
Donah603: "P/S:- this is no joke."
No, but you are. Or you would be, if racist liars like you didn't vote.
Crawl back under your rock, Donah603.
I only have a couple o' minutes to post, but damn, did I imagine (really truly did I actually hallucinate?) a change in the headline subtitle to "other tall tales" versus "other stories" on ONE link on Salon, but not on the other links to the same article? Did viewer perceptions of this odious main headline actually lead to a...semi-change? "Semi" meaning that Salon says we can click here for "other stories," or click there for "tall tales." Tall tales indeed, and Salon somehow manages to keep perpetuating them. What are you trying to do to this candidate and to the Democrats? If you want McCain, keep it up. It's like a fishing pond recently stocked. I've gotta go. Not my most thought-out, well-conceived comment, but geez, I got mad. Is this site *becoming* the trolls now out to get him? Just my two cents because I was incensed and enthralled and very (and not newly) irritated with the editor of this site. (p.s. believe it or not, even though I hated the original headline, I did think upon seeing it that "other tall tales" would have been preferable--guess somebody agreed, at least partially)
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
