Racist Obama privately pushing former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick to run for president

why was 'benedict arnold' traitorous
-------------------------------------------------------- sure , other bad Presidents i suppose but mrobama as well as being a bad president was an 'unamerican' traitorous and bad president . He worked purposely to hurt the USA Monte .

Sorry, I don't buy that. The idea that presidents or administrations want to hurt the country just doesn't make a lot of sense IMO. I mean, the politicians are going to be living here. :)
---------------------------------------------------- yeah right , mrobama has houses in chicago and hawaii , he is a hero in 'kenya' and was a 'boy scout ' in indonesia . Frenchies love him as well as most muslim countries . And last but not least , if he stays in the USA he just buys a huge lot or area and fences it off and protects it with taxpayer paid secret service and lethal private security Monte .

That still doesn't explain why he, or any other president, would be trying to harm the country.

No, I think that when people make such claims, it's really a matter of disagreeing with the policies promoted by that politician or administration.
---------------------------- he is a traitorous racist cur Monte !!

He was yet another politician. I can't speak to his supposed racism, but I don't recall anything he did that would fit the definition of treason. Of course, that word gets tossed about on this board quite a lot. I continue to believe that it is really based on partisanship and differences of opinion on policy.
---------------------------------------------------- yeah , yeah , yeah , speaking in American now but mrobama was an unamerican 'president' and unamerican translates to he was TRAITOROUS in a generic meaning Monte .
 
Last edited:
Here’s Who Obama Is Pushing To Run For President

DOES NOT HAVE A PRAYER.

We had a black president and he about destroyed this country.

Hey, the last half black, half Muslim, half Kenyan, know-nothing, do-nothing, black racist, anti-Semitic president never did do his job.

Obama likes him solely because he is black. The same person in white skin would not interest obama at all. He is a complete racist and hates white people vehemently.

You won't see another Black President for the next 2000 years ! Obama Killed that deal
Sounds like you don't have my daughters brains who started a $150mm business. And her daughter who is in medical school.
You are right though, the hidden white supremist genes really are released now

Your daughter a started a $150mm business you say. What exactly is a $150mm business?

The same as a $15cm business or a $0.15m business!
 
Here’s Who Obama Is Pushing To Run For President

DOES NOT HAVE A PRAYER.

We had a black president and he about destroyed this country.

Hey, the last half black, half Muslim, half Kenyan, know-nothing, do-nothing, black racist, anti-Semitic president never did do his job.

Obama likes him solely because he is black. The same person in white skin would not interest obama at all. He is a complete racist and hates white people vehemently.

You won't see another Black President for the next 2000 years ! Obama Killed that deal
Not in our lynching white high school rube country.
You personally know this mr white boy?
Uppity nixxers smarter than you mr high school are really irritating aren't they?
Ah our white lynching genes are never far from the surface.
And where are you sir and where is the Kenyan?
Do tell


Um, wha?
 
OMG john Wayne, another supremists.
Say no more

John Wayne was not a white Supremacist, you flicking retard just because he said that he thought whites were the superior race of his time.

He was simply giving an objective opinion on what the three races had accomplished till then, and it is hard to dispute it given the facts of his time.

This is rapidly changing as more wealth and technological know-how has been shifting to the Orient and a considerable amount to Africa as well.
 
Sorry, I don't buy that. The idea that presidents or administrations want to hurt the country just doesn't make a lot of sense IMO. I mean, the politicians are going to be living here. :)

While that may be true, technically, do you really think that the power people of Congress cannot simply move to another country whenever they want?
 
Sorry, I don't buy that. The idea that presidents or administrations want to hurt the country just doesn't make a lot of sense IMO. I mean, the politicians are going to be living here. :)

While that may be true, technically, do you really think that the power people of Congress cannot simply move to another country whenever they want?

They could, but what would be the point? Why try to ruin this country, forcing yourself to move to another?
 
Sorry, I don't buy that. The idea that presidents or administrations want to hurt the country just doesn't make a lot of sense IMO. I mean, the politicians are going to be living here. :)

While that may be true, technically, do you really think that the power people of Congress cannot simply move to another country whenever they want?

They could, but what would be the point? Why try to ruin this country, forcing yourself to move to another?
----------------------------------- its not forcing them , they travel a lot to begin with , obama lived in kenya , indonesia , hawaii , chicago , yada , yada and he considers himself to be a citizen of the world . He likes foreigners over Americans Monte . I mean , you see all that i say , its probably that you approve of mrobama and his liberal open borders , world citizen , globalist style Monte . As a closing comment , john kerry is the same as 'mrobama' Monte .
 
Last edited:
They could, but what would be the point? Why try to ruin this country, forcing yourself to move to another?
To suck it dry of every penny that they can squeeze from it.

These people are the largest organized criminal syndicate on the globe, in fact in the history of mankind.

Dont believe me?

look at how they exempt themselves from laws all the time, can engage in insider trading legally and are protected from prosecution of all but the most serious crimes and often not even them.
 
They could, but what would be the point? Why try to ruin this country, forcing yourself to move to another?
To suck it dry of every penny that they can squeeze from it.

These people are the largest organized criminal syndicate on the globe, in fact in the history of mankind.

Dont believe me?

look at how they exempt themselves from laws all the time, can engage in insider trading legally and are protected from prosecution of all but the most serious crimes and often not even them.

OK, but that still doesn't make sense. It would make far more sense to keep the country going and wring out everything they can from a rich, powerful nation than to ruin it and, by so doing, ruin the source of their income and power.

It's much easier to believe that the elites aren't thinking about the possible damage they do in their quest for more wealth and power than that they are intentionally trying to destroy the country.
 
Sorry, I don't buy that. The idea that presidents or administrations want to hurt the country just doesn't make a lot of sense IMO. I mean, the politicians are going to be living here. :)

While that may be true, technically, do you really think that the power people of Congress cannot simply move to another country whenever they want?

They could, but what would be the point? Why try to ruin this country, forcing yourself to move to another?
----------------------------------- its not forcing them , they travel a lot to begin with , obama lived in kenya , indonesia , hawaii , chicago , yada , yada and he considers himself to be a citizen of the world . He likes foreigners over Americans Monte . I mean , you see all that i say , its probably that you approve of mrobama and his liberal open borders , world citizen , globalist style Monte . As a closing comment , john kerry is the same as 'mrobama' Monte .

Oh, of course. If I don't accept your opinions on Obama, it must be because I'm a big fan of his. :lol:

This forum. :p
 
OK, but that still doesn't make sense. It would make far more sense to keep the country going and wring out everything they can from a rich, powerful nation than to ruin it and, by so doing, ruin the source of their income and power.

But not if they dont control everything, which is more important to them than becoming wealthy.

They are paranoid, fearing a popular uprising that will sort them all out, and so they pull strings from behind the scenes with their caucuses, crony networks and byzantine legal systems.

It's much easier to believe that the elites aren't thinking about the possible damage they do in their quest for more wealth and power than that they are intentionally trying to destroy the country.

I think that their minions dont realize what they are doing, while the top bastards know entirely.

The Middle Class has not had stagnant wages for four decades while top executives have seen a doubling of their income all by accident.

440c34f52d3d1d344a1cca6b755557ae.png

The top 5% have gone from 3 times average middle class income to over seven times average income and the top 1% is much higher.
 
OK, but that still doesn't make sense. It would make far more sense to keep the country going and wring out everything they can from a rich, powerful nation than to ruin it and, by so doing, ruin the source of their income and power.

But not if they dont control everything, which is more important to them than becoming wealthy.

They are paranoid, fearing a popular uprising that will sort them all out, and so they pull strings from behind the scenes with their caucuses, crony networks and byzantine legal systems.

It's much easier to believe that the elites aren't thinking about the possible damage they do in their quest for more wealth and power than that they are intentionally trying to destroy the country.

I think that their minions dont realize what they are doing, while the top bastards know entirely.

The Middle Class has not had stagnant wages for four decades while top executives have seen a doubling of their income all by accident.

440c34f52d3d1d344a1cca6b755557ae.png

The top 5% have gone from 3 times average middle class income to over seven times average income and the top 1% is much higher.

I just don't ascribe that sort of income disparity to any Machiavellian plot to plunge the nation into disarray; I think that is simply a case of the wealthy finding more efficient ways to accumulate wealth. :)
 
I just don't ascribe that sort of income disparity to any Machiavellian plot to plunge the nation into disarray; I think that is simply a case of the wealthy finding more efficient ways to accumulate wealth. :)
Are you familiar with the Peasants Rebellion?

The Peasants' Revolt, also called Wat Tyler's Rebellion or the Great Rising, was a major uprising across large parts of England in 1381. The revolt had various causes, including the socio-economic and political tensions generated by the Black Death in the 1340s, the high taxes resulting from the conflict with France during the Hundred Years' War, and instability within the local leadership of London. The final trigger for the revolt was the intervention of a royal official, John Bampton, in Essex on 30 May 1381. His attempts to collect unpaid poll taxes in Brentwood ended in a violent confrontation, which rapidly spread across the south-east of the country. A wide spectrum of rural society, including many local artisans and village officials, rose up in protest, burning court records and opening the local gaols. The rebels sought a reduction in taxation, an end to the system of unfree labour known as serfdom and the removal of the King's senior officials and law courts.

Inspired by the sermons of the radical cleric John Ball, and led by Wat Tyler, a contingent of Kentish rebels advanced on London. They were met at Blackheath by representatives of the royal government, who unsuccessfully attempted to persuade them to return home. King Richard II, then aged 14, retreated to the safety of the Tower of London, but most of the royal forces were abroad or in northern England. On 13 June, the rebels entered London and, joined by many local townsfolk, attacked the gaols, destroyed the Savoy Palace, set fire to law books and buildings in the Temple, and killed anyone associated with the royal government. The following day, Richard met the rebels at Mile End and acceded to most of their demands, including the abolition of serfdom. Meanwhile, rebels entered the Tower of London, killing the Lord Chancellor and the Lord High Treasurer, whom they found inside.

On 15 June, Richard left the city to meet with Tyler and the rebels at Smithfield. Violence broke out, and Richard's party killed Tyler. Richard defused the tense situation long enough for London's mayor, William Walworth, to gather a militia from the city and disperse the rebel forces. Richard immediately began to re-establish order in London and rescinded his previous grants to the rebels. The revolt had also spread into East Anglia, where the University of Cambridge was attacked and many royal officials were killed. Unrest continued until the intervention of Henry le Despenser, who defeated a rebel army at the Battle of North Walsham on 25 or 26 June. Troubles extended north to York, Beverley and Scarborough, and as far west as Bridgwater in Somerset. Richard mobilised 4,000 soldiers to restore order. Most of the rebel leaders were tracked down and executed; by November, at least 1,500 rebels had been killed....

The Peasants' Revolt was fed by the economic and social upheaval of the 14th century.[1] At the start of the century, the majority of English people worked in the countryside, as part of a sophisticated economy that fed the country's towns and cities and supported an extensive international trade.[2] Across much of England, production was organised around manors, controlled by local lords – including the gentry and the Church – and governed through a system of manorial courts.[3] Some of the population were unfree serfs, who had to work on their lords' lands for a period each year, although the balance of free and unfree varied across England, and in the south-east there were relatively few serfs.[4] Some serfs were born unfree and could not leave their manors to work elsewhere without the consent of the local lord; others accepted limitations on their freedom as part of the tenure agreement for their farmland.[5] Population growth led to pressure on the available agricultural land, increasing the power of local landowners.[6]

In 1348 a plague known as the Black Death crossed from mainland Europe into England, rapidly killing an estimated 50 per cent of the population.[7] After an initial period of economic shock, England began to adapt to the changed economic situation.[8] The death rate among the peasantry meant that suddenly land was relatively plentiful and manpower in much shorter supply.[9] Labourers could charge more for their work and, in the consequent competition for labour, wages were driven sharply upwards.[10] In turn, the profits of landowners were eroded.[11] The trading, commercial and financial networks in the towns disintegrated.[12]

The authorities responded to the chaos with emergency legislation; the Ordinance of Labourers was passed in 1349, and the Statute of Labourers in 1351.[13] These attempted to fix wages at pre-plague levels, making it a crime to refuse work or to break an existing contract, imposing fines on those who transgressed.[14] The system was initially enforced through special Justices of Labourers and then, from the 1360s onwards, through the normal Justices of the Peace, typically members of the local gentry.[15] Although in theory these laws applied to both labourers seeking higher wages and to employers tempted to outbid their competitors for workers, they were in practice applied only to labourers, and then in a rather arbitrary fashion.[16] The legislation was strengthened in 1361, with the penalties increased to include brandingand imprisonment.[17] The royal government had not intervened in this way before, nor allied itself with the local landowners in quite such an obvious or unpopular way.[18]

Over the next few decades, economic opportunities increased for the English peasantry.[19] Some labourers took up specialist jobs that would have previously been barred to them, and others moved from employer to employer, or became servants in richer households.[20] These changes were keenly felt across the south-east of England, where the London market created a wide range of opportunities for farmers and artisans.[21] Local lords had the right to prevent serfs from leaving their manors, but when serfs found themselves blocked in the manorial courts, many simply left to work illegally on manors elsewhere.[22] Wages continued to rise, and between the 1340s and the 1380s the purchasing power of rural labourers increased by around 40 percent.[23] As the wealth of the lower classes increased, Parliament brought in fresh laws in 1363 to prevent them from consuming expensive goods formerly only affordable by the elite. These sumptuary laws proved unenforceable, but the wider labour laws continued to be firmly applied.​

So the rural workers began moving into the urban areas to meet the demand for labor and grew into wealthy urbanites, relatively speaking. The urbanites did not like it, nor did the nobility nor the clergy that had long succored the wealthy.

So they came up with all kinds of taxes to pay for the war, but also to target the newly wealthy former peasants and bring them to heel.

Much as the corporate entities have been struggling to alienate the public from unions and to reduce the working class in this country to that of peasantry today with cheap third world labor and imported engineers to head off the move of the sons of industrial workers going to software engineering and other STEM fields.
 

Forum List

Back
Top