Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
HyperVocal State Sen. Barack Obama s First Published Response to 9 11 Attacks
Is there a reason Obama chose to sit this one out?
Even when we were attacked he refused to call it terrorism. He relates to these animals. The left does too, they elected him twice and defend him at every betrayal.
Don't be a simpleton. His words and his inaction are only debatable to idiots like yourself who are in denial.HyperVocal State Sen. Barack Obama s First Published Response to 9 11 Attacks
Is there a reason Obama chose to sit this one out?
Even when we were attacked he refused to call it terrorism. He relates to these animals. The left does too, they elected him twice and defend him at every betrayal.
Don't be a simpleton. His words and his inaction are only debatable to idiots like yourself who are in denial.HyperVocal State Sen. Barack Obama s First Published Response to 9 11 Attacks
Is there a reason Obama chose to sit this one out?
Even when we were attacked he refused to call it terrorism. He relates to these animals. The left does too, they elected him twice and defend him at every betrayal.
The link I gave is 100% sympathetic towards the terrorists as well as the victims. You can't have it both ways, he is lying about one.
Don't be a simpleton. His words and his inaction are only debatable to idiots like yourself who are in denial.HyperVocal State Sen. Barack Obama s First Published Response to 9 11 Attacks
Is there a reason Obama chose to sit this one out?
Even when we were attacked he refused to call it terrorism. He relates to these animals. The left does too, they elected him twice and defend him at every betrayal.
The link I gave is 100% sympathetic towards the terrorists as well as the victims. You can't have it both ways, he is lying about one.
Such nonsense randomly thrown into conversations. What is the purpose other than some kind of warped effort to promote disinformation. Fathers of fascism and ultra conservative right wing dictators being called progressives as if they are in some fashion or way comparable to how the term progressive is used in today's modern world is just a perversion.The rest of the world thinks we're insane for the tens of thousands of gun deaths we gladly endure so the lesser lights among us can pretend that they are the saviors of democracy....
Care to hand over your weapons to appease them?
Anyone who has lived under a Progressive Dictatorship would disagree. In the 20th century alone, Progressive Dictators murdered over 100 million of their own unarmed citizens. Look at North Korea, it's 4 generation of total Progressive dictatorship and they can STILL find some offense to torture or murder they own unarmed people.
Listening to you Progressive fuckers, today you can smell the blood lust. You're already calling us "the enemy". So there's no chance at all we're giving up our weapons
You think North Korea is progressive? Are you some relation to Sarah? I can hear the family resemblance in your statements.
All of history's mass Murderers were true Progressives who thought the State should trump individuals. Hitler, Stalin and Mao are the founding fathers of the modern Progressive movement, they did Progressive government right
When
Such nonsense randomly thrown into conversations. What is the purpose other than some kind of warped effort to promote disinformation. Fathers of fascism and ultra conservative right wing dictators being called progressives as if they are in some fashion or way comparable to how the term progressive is used in today's modern world is just a perversion.The rest of the world thinks we're insane for the tens of thousands of gun deaths we gladly endure so the lesser lights among us can pretend that they are the saviors of democracy....
Care to hand over your weapons to appease them?
Anyone who has lived under a Progressive Dictatorship would disagree. In the 20th century alone, Progressive Dictators murdered over 100 million of their own unarmed citizens. Look at North Korea, it's 4 generation of total Progressive dictatorship and they can STILL find some offense to torture or murder they own unarmed people.
Listening to you Progressive fuckers, today you can smell the blood lust. You're already calling us "the enemy". So there's no chance at all we're giving up our weapons
You think North Korea is progressive? Are you some relation to Sarah? I can hear the family resemblance in your statements.
All of history's mass Murderers were true Progressives who thought the State should trump individuals. Hitler, Stalin and Mao are the founding fathers of the modern Progressive movement, they did Progressive government right
Progressives lie so much they believe their own bullshit. Progressives support the all powerful state trumping and trampling the individual. That's who they are. Right now in the USA we still have a second amendment so the jury is still out of how much further toward progressive fascism we'll march. If the sad day ever comes when Marxist democrats and their statist republican brothers get us to their utopia, Hitler Mao and Stalin will be reveared as true heroes
Then you're just too stupid to be arguing the point.Don't be a simpleton. His words and his inaction are only debatable to idiots like yourself who are in denial.HyperVocal State Sen. Barack Obama s First Published Response to 9 11 Attacks
Is there a reason Obama chose to sit this one out?
Even when we were attacked he refused to call it terrorism. He relates to these animals. The left does too, they elected him twice and defend him at every betrayal.
The link I gave is 100% sympathetic towards the terrorists as well as the victims. You can't have it both ways, he is lying about one.
There is absolutely nothing anywhere in your link that in any way substantiates your false view.
No fucking piss head Biden sticking his tongue into a ten year old girl's ear while the world watches.Look at the bright side, no Hillary, Obama or Biden saying stupid shit for the whole world to hear.Isn't France one of our allies? Why was nobody there to represent the USA??? THAT is the question.
Then you're just too stupid to be arguing the point.Don't be a simpleton. His words and his inaction are only debatable to idiots like yourself who are in denial.HyperVocal State Sen. Barack Obama s First Published Response to 9 11 Attacks
Is there a reason Obama chose to sit this one out?
Even when we were attacked he refused to call it terrorism. He relates to these animals. The left does too, they elected him twice and defend him at every betrayal.
The link I gave is 100% sympathetic towards the terrorists as well as the victims. You can't have it both ways, he is lying about one.
There is absolutely nothing anywhere in your link that in any way substantiates your false view.
Because they are full of Bull Shit...it's that simple.Then you're just too stupid to be arguing the point.Don't be a simpleton. His words and his inaction are only debatable to idiots like yourself who are in denial.HyperVocal State Sen. Barack Obama s First Published Response to 9 11 Attacks
Even when we were attacked he refused to call it terrorism. He relates to these animals. The left does too, they elected him twice and defend him at every betrayal.
The link I gave is 100% sympathetic towards the terrorists as well as the victims. You can't have it both ways, he is lying about one.
There is absolutely nothing anywhere in your link that in any way substantiates your false view.
No, the problem is that you are completely full of shit. There is not one word in your entire link that could be in any way interpreted as sympathetic with terrorism.
Begs the question: Why do you people have to lie about everything all the time?
Then defend it. Instead you just deny then accuse me of lying, I don't need to lie. Typical left lack of ability to actually think.Then you're just too stupid to be arguing the point.Don't be a simpleton. His words and his inaction are only debatable to idiots like yourself who are in denial.HyperVocal State Sen. Barack Obama s First Published Response to 9 11 Attacks
Even when we were attacked he refused to call it terrorism. He relates to these animals. The left does too, they elected him twice and defend him at every betrayal.
The link I gave is 100% sympathetic towards the terrorists as well as the victims. You can't have it both ways, he is lying about one.
There is absolutely nothing anywhere in your link that in any way substantiates your false view.
No, the problem is that you are completely full of shit. There is not one word in your entire link that could be in any way interpreted as sympathetic with terrorism.
Begs the question: Why do you people have to lie about everything all the time?
Many obvious reasons. The march was about UNITY and Obama is all about DIVISION, and the march wasn't a good representative of "European Imperialists and Colonialists oppressing the less advantaged people of the world".
Are you fucking kidding or what? Are you in fourth grade? Is superficial rhetoric really as far as your thinking takes you?
Superficial rhetoric is what's usually coming out of this administration. Keep up.
I see....so then your goal must be to emulate that behavior and dumb things down just a little bit more.
Have you studied Obama's past, including his book?
How Obama Thinks - Forbes
"So who was Barack Obama Sr.? He was a Luo tribesman who grew up in Kenya and studied at Harvard. He was a polygamist who had, over the course of his lifetime, four wives and eight children. One of his sons, Mark Obama, has accused him of abuse and wife-beating. He was also a regular drunk driver who got into numerous accidents, killing a man in one and causing his own legs to be amputated due to injury in another. In 1982 he got drunk at a bar in Nairobi and drove into a tree, killing himself.
An odd choice, certainly, as an inspirational hero. But to his son, the elder Obama represented a great and noble cause, the cause of anticolonialism. Obama Sr. grew up during Africa’s struggle to be free of European rule, and he was one of the early generation of Africans chosen to study in America and then to shape his country’s future.
Anticolonialism is the doctrine that rich countries of the West got rich by invading, occupying and looting poor countries of Asia, Africa and South America. As one of Obama’s acknowledged intellectual influences, Frantz Fanon, wrote in The Wretched of the Earth, “The well-being and progress of Europe have been built up with the sweat and the dead bodies of Negroes, Arabs, Indians and the yellow races.”
Anticolonialists hold that even when countries secure political independence they remain economically dependent on their former captors. This dependence is called neocolonialism, a term defined by the African statesman Kwame Nkrumah (1909–72) in his book Neocolonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. Nkrumah, Ghana’s first president, writes that poor countries may be nominally free, but they continue to be manipulated from abroad by powerful corporate and plutocratic elites. These forces of neocolonialism oppress not only Third World people but also citizens in their own countries. Obviously the solution is to resist and overthrow the oppressors. This was the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. and many in his generation, including many of my own relatives in India.
Obama Sr. was an economist, and in 1965 he published an important article in the East Africa Journal called “Problems Facing Our Socialism.” Obama Sr. wasn’t a doctrinaire socialist; rather, he saw state appropriation of wealth as a necessary means to achieve the anticolonial objective of taking resources away from the foreign looters and restoring them to the people of Africa. For Obama Sr. this was an issue of national autonomy. “Is it the African who owns this country? If he does, then why should he not control the economic means of growth in this country?”
As he put it, “We need to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now.” The senior Obama proposed that the state confiscate private land and raise taxes with no upper limit. In fact, he insisted that “theoretically there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed.”
Remarkably, President Obama, who knows his father’s history very well, has never mentioned his father’s article. Even more remarkably, there has been virtually no reporting on a document that seems directly relevant to what the junior Obama is doing in the White House.
While the senior Obama called for Africa to free itself from the neocolonial influence of Europe and specifically Britain, he knew when he came to America in 1959 that the global balance of power was shifting. Even then, he recognized what has become a new tenet of anticolonialist ideology: Today’s neocolonial leader is not Europe but America. As the late Palestinian scholar Edward Said–who was one of Obama’s teachers at Columbia University–wrote in Culture and Imperialism, “The United States has replaced the earlier great empires and is the dominant outside force.”
From the anticolonial perspective, American imperialism is on a rampage. For a while, U.S. power was checked by the Soviet Union, but since the end of the Cold War, America has been the sole superpower. Moreover, 9/11 provided the occasion for America to invade and occupy two countries, Iraq and Afghanistan, and also to seek political and economic domination in the same way the French and the British empires once did. So in the anticolonial view, America is now the rogue elephant that subjugates and tramples the people of the world.
Anti colonialism? What kind of fucking half wit finds Dinesh D'Souza horseshit to be compelling. You really have to be a shallow thoughtless moron to be inspired by that kind of speculation.
i surprise you because you dont read the posts in here....and you yourself have told me that.....you have aligned me with the farther right assholes here because you dont read what is posted...he is on their side?.....when was the last time they invited him over for dinner?....the last thing these assholes see when a drone takes them out is this image on the front of the drone....I don't think Obama would be a target by terrorists. He's on their side, and they know it.
He didn't go because the attention would NOT be on him and that's what he lives for.
Harry Dresden
You surprise me.
Good for you.
well those people you are talking about will not be content no matter what the guy does....Obama could be in the Hospital after major heart surgery and the farther right people will still get on him for not going....the farther left jerks would be the same way with a Republican President....
Is there a reason Obama chose to sit this one out?
These threads are really stupid. Obama does things that he has to do for the country -- he doesn't go places because his nutty haters DEMAND it. Most of the time, people writing these articles don't really even know if the POTUS is going or not -- they are banking on the fact that no one who reads this garbage is even going to bother checking.
1.5 million people marching in France. Many major world leaders showing up and symbolically marching for human rights and free speech. Yet the U.S. president and the leader of the free world didn't find it necessary to either attend or at least send his Vice President or secretary of state to send a message of solitary with the the free world and democracy on such a historical event?!
Shame on the US. Shame shame shame.
Shame on the left and the leftist media for not holding Obama accountable for this huge mistake.
US was abset today.
Fareed Zakaria, hos of CNN's "Global Public Square," called the absence of top U.S. officials a mistake.
France is the United States' "deepest ideological ally," he said, and it would have been a meaningful image to have a senior administration member, or the President, standing shoulder to shoulder with other leaders.
Kerry defends absence from unity rally will go to Paris on Thursday - CNN.com
here is one of those i speak of.....if he would have went Katz would find something to say like.... why is he there?,he should have sent a better Representative.....and if he would have sent someone else Katz would be then calling Obama an ass for not going himself...you are not fooling anyone Katz....I'm glad he didn't go. It shows the world exactly who he is.
1.5 million people marching in France. Many major world leaders showing up and symbolically marching for human rights and free speech. Yet the U.S. president and the leader of the free world didn't find it necessary to either attend or at least send his Vice President or secretary of state to send a message of solitary with the the free world and democracy on such a historical event?!
Shame on the US. Shame shame shame.
Shame on the left and the leftist media for not holding Obama accountable for this huge mistake.
That tells us more about you than me.
i agree they should have sent someone.....if they were worried about security then send one of the Red Shirts....Keep wondering. I doubt your opinion is bothering him.When did the POTUS have to give low level scrubs like you a reason?
Is there a reason Obama chose to sit this one out?
Yes, I'm merely a low level citizen wondering why our president was absent during such a historical event.
Apparently my opinion bothers you more than anything. Do you actually believe it was okay for America not to have a high level representative, when the entire world has gathered in solidarity?
