Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-24-2008, 09:35 PM   #321 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
Like they say, talk is cheap. He does craft a fine speech. His record has a lot of catching up to do.
"A lot of catching up to do"....compared to....another candidate, who?
host is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 03:16 AM   #322 (permalink)
let me be clear
 
ottopilot's Avatar
 
Location: Waddy Peytona
Quote:
Originally Posted by host
"A lot of catching up to do"....compared to....another candidate, who?
Himself, his words of change and hope. His record to date does not reflect his ideals. They are fine sentiments, but his actions are yet to match his rhetoric. Perhaps history will prove differently. He is not a unifier in the senate where he maintains status as the most liberal US senator (by activity and voting record). He still attends a black separatist values church from where he proclaims the racially bigoted pastor to be his inspiration and mentor (look those up in the dictionary). Hardly presidential for all Americans, except for the far left activist types with white guilt (if you're white).
__________________
"It rubs the lotion on Buffy, Jodi and Mr. French's skin" - Uncle Bill from Buffalo

Last edited by ottopilot; 03-25-2008 at 03:25 AM..
ottopilot is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 03:19 AM   #323 (permalink)
Getting it.
 
Charlatan's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Lion City
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
Hardly presidential for all Americans, but for the far left activist types with white guilt (if you're white).
I think that's a bit much...
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
Charlatan is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 03:29 AM   #324 (permalink)
let me be clear
 
ottopilot's Avatar
 
Location: Waddy Peytona
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlatan
I think that's a bit much...
It would seem so if we choose to look at him with such adoring eyes and not fully examine his record and his actions.
__________________
"It rubs the lotion on Buffy, Jodi and Mr. French's skin" - Uncle Bill from Buffalo
ottopilot is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 05:27 AM   #325 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
Himself, his words of change and hope. His record to date does not reflect his ideals. They are fine sentiments, but his actions are yet to match his rhetoric. Perhaps history will prove differently. He is not a unifier in the senate where he maintains status as the most liberal US senator (by activity and voting record). He still attends a black separatist values church from where he proclaims the racially bigoted pastor to be his inspiration and mentor (look those up in the dictionary). Hardly presidential for all Americans, except for the far left activist types with white guilt (if you're white).
How does Oprah manage to be a member of the very same church, yet not get "tarred", even one iota, as you are tarring Obama?

Why are blacks asked, ad infinitum, to justify what other blacks say and do, when the press would never contemplate asking the same thing of whites, in regard to the speech and action of other whites?

You and like minded people do not grasp how ridiculous and petty your "Op" makes you look...you've been carrying on with this stupid bullshit for at least 54 weeks..... please stop NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/06/us...gin&oref=login
Disinvitation by Obama Is Criticized

By JODI KANTOR
<h2>Published: March 6, 2007</h2>

....“Fifteen minutes before Shabbos I get a call from Barack,” Mr. Wright said in an interview on Monday, recalling that he was at an interfaith conference at the time. “One of his members had talked him into uninviting me,” Mr. Wright said, referring to Mr. Obama’s campaign advisers.

Some black leaders are questioning Mr. Obama’s decision to distance his campaign from Mr. Wright because of the campaign’s apparent fear of criticism over Mr. Wright’s teachings, which some say are overly Afrocentric to the point of excluding whites. .....

...Instead, Mr. Obama asked Mr. Wright’s successor as pastor at Trinity, the Rev. Otis Moss III, to speak. Mr. Moss declined.

In recent weeks, word of Mr. Obama’s treatment of Mr. Wright has reached black leaders like the Rev. Al Sharpton and given them pause.

“I have not discussed this with Senator Obama in detail, but I can see why callers of mine and other clergymen would be concerned, because the issue is standing by your own pastor,” Mr. Sharpton said.

Mr. Wright’s church, the 8,000-member Trinity United Church of Christ, is considered mainstream — Oprah Winfrey has attended services, and many members are prominent black professionals. But the church is also more Afrocentric and politically active than standard black congregations.

Mr. Wright helped organize the 1995 Million Man March on Washington and along with other United Church of Christ ministers was one of the first black religious leaders to protest apartheid and welcome gay and lesbian worshippers.

Since Mr. Obama made his presidential ambitions clear, <h3>conservatives have drawn attention to his close relationship to Mr. Wright and to the church’s emphasis on black empowerment. Tucker Carlson of MSNBC called the precepts “racially exclusive” and “wrong.” Last week, on the Fox News program “Hannity & Colmes,” Erik Rush</h3>, a conservative columnist, called the church “quite cultish, quite separatist.”

In Monday’s interview, Mr. Wright expressed disappointment but no surprise that Mr. Obama might try to play down their connection....
host is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 06:58 AM   #326 (permalink)
Living in a Warmer Insanity
 
Tully Mars's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Yucatan, Mexico
I thought Oprah stop attending the church because of Rev. Wright?
__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club
Tully Mars is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 07:13 AM   #327 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
So 'white guilt' is the new catch phrase here in Tilted Politics, guess 'cut and run' and 'stay the course' are gonna be dropped by the conservatives who frequent this board, oh well good too see the party gave them a new line to use.

I believe you're correct Oprah left the church, not too sure of the reason though I expect some of our conservative members think it was because Rev. Wright was eating an unborn white child at the altar, all the while preaching about the black man revolting against the white man for keeping him down all these years, and burning down his cities.
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 07:18 AM   #328 (permalink)
Junkie
 
sapiens's Avatar
 
Location: Some place windy
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid
Just because this isn't QUITE sufficiently driven into the ground yet, here's what conservative author Charles Murray (co-author of The Bell Curve) has to say about Obama and his famous Race Speech, emboldening mine:
Thank you for the Charles Murray statement. I had not seen it before.
sapiens is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 07:38 AM   #329 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by host
How does Oprah manage to be a member of the very same church, yet not get "tarred", even one iota, as you are tarring Obama?
She isn't running for president.

Quote:
Why are blacks asked, ad infinitum, to justify what other blacks say and do, when the press would never contemplate asking the same thing of whites, in regard to the speech and action of other whites?
If Clinton were in a white separatist church you'd better believe she'd not only be questioned, but crucified for it.


Quote:
You and like minded people do not grasp how ridiculous and petty your "Op" makes you look...you've been carrying on with this stupid bullshit for at least 54 weeks..... please stop NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry Host. You and I tend to see eye to eye politically a lot, and I really. . .REALLY. . wanted Obama to win too but this is a pretty big bruise on his reputation. The man's been listening to this hate-filled rhetoric for 20 years, and by continuing to listen to it has indicated his approval of it. I do have a serious problem with that.
shakran is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 08:47 AM   #330 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
Sorry Host. You and I tend to see eye to eye politically a lot, and I really. . .REALLY. . wanted Obama to win too but this is a pretty big bruise on his reputation. The man's been listening to this hate-filled rhetoric for 20 years, and by continuing to listen to it has indicated his approval of it. I do have a serious problem with that.
You didn't listen to his speech last week, did you?
ratbastid is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 09:01 AM   #331 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid
You didn't listen to his speech last week, did you?

yeah, actually I did. But that speech is just words. Words set against the backdrop of spending all those years sitting in that man's church listening to and therefore approving of, what he said.
shakran is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 09:43 AM   #332 (permalink)
Her Jay
 
silent_jay's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario for now....
So listening to equates to approval? I'm pretty fuckin sure lot's of people who were in 're-education camps' would disagree with you there, they listened, but I'm positive they didn't agree with what they heard.

So saying that Obama approved of these comments because he listened to them is well flimsy. I have to listen to Ustwo here, does that mean I automatically approve what he says? Ustwo has to listen to us, does that mean he agrees with what we say? So you see listening and approving are two different things that aren't related in any way, but nice shot at trying to make a connection.
__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
silent_jay is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 09:50 AM   #333 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
yeah, actually I did. But that speech is just words. Words set against the backdrop of spending all those years sitting in that man's church listening to and therefore approving of, what he said.
Interesting. You can listen to his speech without approving of it.... But he can't listen to some sermons without approving of them.
ratbastid is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 10:40 AM   #334 (permalink)
 
abaya's Avatar
 
Location: Iceland
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
listening to and therefore approving of
I have major problems with this statement. I sat in a church for many years, and OFTEN did not approve of what was being said. Among a church membership of 3,000 (as my church was) with 10 different pastors, 3 services each Sunday (not to mention youth group and Sunday school), all taking turns speaking on a rotating basis, do you think it was my duty to go up to each and every one, every time he said something I disagreed with, and start a discussion about it? Maybe you do, but I didn't, and I still don't.

The point of going to church is not to fight with the pastor. For me, the pastor was just a sidenote, 20 minutes out of an almost 2 hour long service. I went because I used to love to worship God in that place, and I went because of the sense of community and fellowship that I felt with others there. There were a lot of things I did not like about the church(es) I attended, but disliking something (or even just listening to something scandalous) is not enough reason to walk away from a place like that, on its own. I was a Protestant, but I don't even think Catholics have much reason to walk away from the church as it is, even after all the shit that a lot of their priests have gotten away with... I would call that a cop-out reason to leave the church. Any church is bigger than its priests and pastors, if it's worth its salt. It is a body of people, a community, a place that transcends individuals. That's the whole point.

/waits for this to fall on very deaf ears, as usual.
__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.

--Khalil Gibran
abaya is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 11:26 AM   #335 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by abaya
I have major problems with this statement. I sat in a church for many years, and OFTEN did not approve of what was being said. Among a church membership of 3,000 (as my church was) with 10 different pastors, 3 services each Sunday (not to mention youth group and Sunday school), all taking turns speaking on a rotating basis, do you think it was my duty to go up to each and every one, every time he said something I disagreed with, and start a discussion about it? Maybe you do, but I didn't, and I still don't.

The point of going to church is not to fight with the pastor. For me, the pastor was just a sidenote, 20 minutes out of an almost 2 hour long service. I went because I used to love to worship God in that place, and I went because of the sense of community and fellowship that I felt with others there. There were a lot of things I did not like about the church(es) I attended, but disliking something (or even just listening to something scandalous) is not enough reason to walk away from a place like that, on its own. I was a Protestant, but I don't even think Catholics have much reason to walk away from the church as it is, even after all the shit that a lot of their priests have gotten away with... I would call that a cop-out reason to leave the church. Any church is bigger than its priests and pastors, if it's worth its salt. It is a body of people, a community, a place that transcends individuals. That's the whole point.

/waits for this to fall on very deaf ears, as usual.

I heard you and I agree with you. Unfortunately others likely won't. The simple fact is this. People who are looking for a reason to hate any candidate will find a reason to do so.
Rekna is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 11:27 AM   #336 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
The man's been listening to this hate-filled rhetoric for 20 years, and by continuing to listen to it has indicated his approval of it. I do have a serious problem with that.
So you know for a fact that for twenty years every Sunday at this church is nothing but hate-filled rhetoric? Did you hear the part of the speech where he explained how he thought Wright was wrong, but also that there was more to Wright than the 20 second clips that have been plastered about?

Do you agree everything that everyone you associate believes? Have you ever known someone whose outspoken beliefs you overlooked because they have other redeeming qualities?

I'm sorry, but I don't see how anyone who is capable of of forming independent relationships with other people could possibly have an intellectually honest problem with Obama's relationship with his pastor.
filtherton is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 11:48 AM   #337 (permalink)
Asshole
 
The_Jazz's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
My great-grandfather once tried to kill a preacher the Tuesday after a Sunday sermon where the preacher spoke about perils of alcohol and miscegination with the Negros. It wasn't that my great-grandfather wasn't a member of the Klan as well as teetotaler and Revenuer during Prohibition (he was), it was that the sermon mentioned my grandparents and my grandfather's brothers and their wives by name for going into a gin joint on a Saturday night before church. My great-aunt told me when I was about 21 or so that she was still drunk standing (or weaving) when she stood up with the choir.

There's a running joke in my family about "running off with a hoe" because the weapon my great-grandfather used to try to kill the preacher (who soon found a new job) was a hoe that smashed the preacher's car window and stayed wedged in the car as the preacher escaped. Apparently my great-grandfather never referred to the preacher afterwards as anything other than "that damn hoe thief". He showed up at church the next Sunday wearing a pistol and fully intending on shooting that "no good, thieving sonuvabitch" but the preacher was out sick.

Clearly, not all parishoners agree wholeheartedly with every sermon. But since everyone's already made up their minds, perhaps my anecdote will amuse.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
The_Jazz is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 12:05 PM   #338 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
Clearly, not all parishoners agree wholeheartedly with every sermon. But since everyone's already made up their minds, perhaps my anecdote will amuse.
Done and done!
ratbastid is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 01:36 PM   #339 (permalink)
Junkie
 
powerclown's Avatar
 
Location: Detroit, MI
Would you feel any differently about Obama if he went to a Church of Scientology for 20 years?
powerclown is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 01:55 PM   #340 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerclown
Would you feel any differently about Obama if he went to a Church of Scientology for 20 years?
Aside from both being considered religions, there isn't really much that Scientology and the UCC have in common.

Even then, the issue here isn't his particular beliefs, or the particular ideology espoused by his church- though I think if you looked into it you'd find the ideas and activities proposed by Obama's denomination much more benign than the ones proposed by Tom Cruise's. The real issue, the one that gets lost in the 20 second loops, is whether it is possible for a person to receive spiritual guidance from someone else when the two disagree about certain social issues.
filtherton is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 02:20 PM   #341 (permalink)
Junkie
 
powerclown's Avatar
 
Location: Detroit, MI
Quote:
Originally Posted by filtherton
The real issue, the one that gets lost in the 20 second loops, is whether it is possible for a person to receive spiritual guidance from someone else when the two disagree about certain social issues.
So if someone went to a Church of Scientology for that amount of time, would it infer a certain value system or set of beliefs on that person? Would you consider that person a scientologist?
powerclown is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 02:55 PM   #342 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
why is this an interesting line of questioning, powerclown?
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 03:43 PM   #343 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Seaver's Avatar
 
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Quote:
You and like minded people do not grasp how ridiculous and petty your "Op" makes you look...you've been carrying on with this stupid bullshit for at least 54 weeks..... please stop NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wow, this statement is amazing coming from you host. Honestly, it is.
__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas
Seaver is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 03:48 PM   #344 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by silent_jay
So listening to equates to approval? I'm pretty fuckin sure lot's of people who were in 're-education camps' would disagree with you there, they listened, but I'm positive they didn't agree with what they heard.
Are you suggesting Obama was forced to sit there for 20 years and listen to him? Was he forced to have the guy perform the marriage ceremony on him and his wife? A compulsory reeducation camp is a far cry from voluntarily and repeatedly for two decades choosing to go listen to messages of hate and racism.


Quote:
So saying that Obama approved of these comments because he listened to them is well flimsy.
I don't know about you, but if an organization repeatedly says things, and focuses on things that I do not agree with, I do not waste several hours per week sitting in their meeting hall listening to their message.

Quote:
I have to listen to Ustwo here, does that mean I automatically approve what he says?
If you go to Ustwo's house every week over 1,000 times and give him money so that he can continue to say what he's saying, yes, it does. Your point would be valid only if Ustwo were the voice of TFP. He isn't. None of us are. Wright IS the voice of his church. Going there, listening to him, over and over and over again, and putting money in the collection plate, means Obama either approves of what Wright says and what he believes, or he's an idiot.
shakran is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 04:06 PM   #345 (permalink)
Human
 
SecretMethod70's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
shakran: you're making one very large assumption: that Wright gave sermons like that every Sunday. I'm sure his sermons were consistently energetic (it'd be near impossible for Obama to go to a black church that didn't have energetic sermons like that), but I doubt he was saying "god damn America" week after week. (Which is not even bothering to address the already exhausted point that for a preacher to say "god damn America ... for killing innocent people" is not something that should be considered scandalous in the least.)

Also, you're assuming that the only reason Obama, or anyone, went to the church is because of Rev. Wright. As abaya pointed out, churches do far more than provide a pulpit to a preacher. There is also the overall church community which, in and of itself, is enough of a reason to attend a church for 20 years. Then there are all the things Trinity does around Chicago. For a lot of people, social service is a very important part of their Christian faith. And while Obama may not agree with certain things Rev. Wright said, such as expressing conspiratorial views about HIV, there is a much larger, much more important issue of the things Trinity does for the community, tangibly speaking. I'd be shocked if Obama could participate in Trinity's community outreach and not befriend Rev. Wright, regardless of any disagreements they may have had.

It's all nice to say "actions speak louder than words" as an excuse to hold Obama's 20 years of attendance against him. But then apply the "actions speak louder than words" metric to Rev. Wright and Trinity as a whole. Aside for being the largest United Church of Christ church in the nation, and one of the largest church of any kind in the Chicagoland area (clearly, either Chicago is an anti-American region, or just maybe there's a hell of a lot more to the church than what the media is showing), Trinity has a ton of ministry programs that provide service to the Chicago area and also work to help out poverty in Africa (because, frankly, no one else is doing it). They also provide free computer training and a number of scholarships (most of which are not limited to African Americans).

EDIT: And I still don't understand why so many people refuse to give Obama the benefit of the doubt regarding Trinity and Rev. Wright, despite him never having done or said anything to indicate that he is anti-American, a believer in the HIV conspiracy, or any of that. All while Clinton and McCain both get the full benefit of the doubt for their assocations with The Family and John Hagee respectively. Ultimately, I do think it comes down to the fact there are still plenty of Americans today who are afraid of "angry black men," consciously or not.

Let's look at this from a slightly different angle as well.

Had Rev. Wright said "god damn George Bush for killing innocent people" or "god damn the legislature for making drug laws that target lower income, and often black, abusers," it would have still been controversial, but it wouldn't have created such an enormous uproar. Now, if you think innocent deaths are a justifiable side effect for what you believe to be a just war, there is certainly room to disagree with such a statement. But unless you're incapable of putting yourself in another person's mindset, then you must also understand why some people (many people) would view the cause of innocent death in that manner as damnable.

Next - and I know there are some people who contest this, but let's put it aside for now - it is important to remember that George Bush was elected by the people of the United States. And he continues to conduct his administration in the way he does because the people of the United States tacitly accept of it. It doesn't matter that opinion polls say people are overwhelmingly against the war now: few people do anything about it. Make no mistake about it: if enough people put enough pressure on elected representatives, they would get the guts to impeach Bush and Cheney and fight against the Iraq war. The Congressional Democrats are spineless because the most many people are willing to do in order to express their opposition is answer a poll. That hardly gives them confidence that they can weather the storm it'd cause to stand up to this administration. The point is, we, the American people, and America as a whole, are responsible for our government's actions, regardless of whether or not we agree with them.

So, why again is it inappropriate to say "god damn America?" Disagreeable, sure...but inappropriate? No.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Last edited by SecretMethod70; 03-25-2008 at 04:28 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
SecretMethod70 is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 04:33 PM   #346 (permalink)
Junkie
 
powerclown's Avatar
 
Location: Detroit, MI
I think this has turned into the issue it has because Obama has promised so much from the very start. People are skeptical of false prophets, someone trying to sell them something that appears too good to be true. This is a very, very charismatic politician that is promising a hell of a lot, and I think people have a right to be skeptical. So when cracks start appearing on the surface, when flaws start showing, when skeletons start coming out of the closet, people start to question this person's authenticity. Is he for real? Didn't he promise to bring the whole country together (not just blacks and white liberals)? Can we trust what he says? Or is he just another wolfish politician in sheeps clothing who will do or say anything to secure for himself the most powerful position on the planet?

Last edited by powerclown; 03-25-2008 at 05:01 PM..
powerclown is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 05:36 PM   #347 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerclown
I think this has turned into the issue it has because Obama has promised so much from the very start. People are skeptical of false prophets, someone trying to sell them something that appears too good to be true. This is a very, very charismatic politician that is promising a hell of a lot, and I think people have a right to be skeptical. So when cracks start appearing on the surface, when flaws start showing, when skeletons start coming out of the closet, people start to question this person's authenticity. Is he for real? Didn't he promise to bring the whole country together (not just blacks and white liberals)? Can we trust what he says? Or is he just another wolfish politician in sheeps clothing who will do or say anything to secure for himself the most powerful position on the planet?
I think it's good to not trust politicians. That being said, this has become an issue because no matter how much Obama points out his disagreement with Wright, no matter how clearly he makes their differeces known, certain folks keep bringing it up like Obama hasn't said anything at all. It isn't Obama's fault that some people aren't able to understand that you can choose to associate with someone even though you don't agree with all of the things they say. It isn't his fault that no matter how much he explains what is wrong with the things Wright has said, the people who don't trust him still don't trust him.

The problem isn't that Obama's pastor said controversial things, it's that the fact that his pastor said controversial things gives the people who were looking for the smallest smidgen of a reason to not like Obama the smallest smidgen of a reason not to like Obama. And now they all furrow their brows, hem and haw, and say, "Well, you know, that Obama, he seemed like a good kid, but some guy he knows said things that in context aren't all that surprising or interesting, but when viewed 20 seconds at a time offend Sean Hannity. So, I just don't know anymore."

If it weren't for this, we'd probably be talking about how Obama's garbage man is a snake handler, or that his middle name is Hussein.
filtherton is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 06:08 PM   #348 (permalink)
Human
 
SecretMethod70's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Again, what has Obama done that indicates he doesn't intend to try and elevate the level of discourse, and what has he done that indicates he's not interested in hearing other points of view?

He's never promised that he's perfect - in fact, for a politician he's uncharacteristically willing to admit his own flaws, as is his wife. He's never promised that just because he listens to people he'll agree with them. All he has promised is that he is not interested in demonizing anyone simply because they disagree with him, and he has not done anything to indicate otherwise. In fact, his Senate record demonstrates that he is entirely sincere in his interest to work across the aisle, considering how many of his bills have had Republican co-sponsors. Part of the problem, I think, is the expectations people on the other side of the spectrum have when he says he wants to work together. Working together, for Obama, doesn't mean siding with a bill he disagrees with just so that he can get a bill that he agrees with passed. He hasn't demonstrated an interest in the "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" brand of working together. Instead, what he has demonstrated is that while he is not willing to compromise on his own principles, he is still willing to respect the fact that other people have different principles, and he will listen to them. So, many people on the other end of the spectrum say "he's not working together, he's unwilling to change his view on _____ which is really important to us!" Well, no, he's not going to change his stance just because some of his opponents disagree, but what he will do - and this is how he's managed to get Republican co-sponsors on many bills - is approach the issue with respect and try to find where there is common ground without compromising principles.

So, I haven't seen a single thing from Obama which would indicate he's not sincere in those intentions. His Senate record shows it, and even his handling of the Rev. Wright situation shows it. He's a very intelligent man, and rather than do what was politically prudent and simply unequivocally reject Trinity, Wright, and the whole nine yards, he gave a speech which he certainly knew would open a can of worms.

And seriously, "can we trust what he says?" It's impossible to run a political campaign without the occasional fib, but I haven't seen anything from him that was as much of a bald-faced lie as Clinton's "I was a critic of NAFTA from the start," or her sniper-fire-on-the-tarmac story, or McCain's "oops! I misspoke on perhaps the most important foreign policy issue facing the next president....three times in a row....oh wait, now that you'r criticizing me for it I'll try and point out how I was right all along!"

At worst, Obama is no worse than either McCain or Clinton in terms of honesty, etc, which isn't a reason not to vote for him, it simply means it's a wash on that issue. In which case, you look at other issues, like policy positions (there are plenty on his website, so don't say he's an empty suit), or track record (both Clinton and Obama have relatively short Senate records, but Obama more often has bills that get passed and more often has bills with Republican co-sponsors, or any co-sponsors at all for that matter, not to mention that he has clearly run a better campaign than Clinton, which is the closest comparison we're going to get of how the two of them would handle running an administration).
__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Last edited by SecretMethod70; 03-25-2008 at 09:38 PM.. Reason: clarity
SecretMethod70 is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 06:21 PM   #349 (permalink)
Junkie
 
powerclown's Avatar
 
Location: Detroit, MI
Quote:
Originally Posted by filtherton
The problem isn't that Obama's pastor said controversial things, it's that the fact that his pastor said controversial things gives the people who were looking for the smallest smidgen of a reason to not like Obama the smallest smidgen of a reason not to like Obama. And now they all furrow their brows, hem and haw, and say, "Well, you know, that Obama, he seemed like a good kid, but some guy he knows said things that in context aren't all that surprising or interesting, but when viewed 20 seconds at a time offend Sean Hannity. So, I just don't know anymore."

If it weren't for this, we'd probably be talking about how Obama's garbage man is a snake handler, or that his middle name is Hussein.
I honestly don't understand how people can dissassociate Obama from his pastor of 20 years, I really don't. This is a man who was very important to Obama personally, for so long, as he himself as said in his books and in public. It's a very complex situation. It's been said that Obama, coming from a doting white mother and an absent black father, was looking for radical elements in college and in the black community to solidify his own confused, yet ambitious, identity - and I think there is a lot of truth to that. SecretMethod70 insists there aren't any other types of churches in that part of Chicago but it simply isn't true - there are more mainstream, less militant black churches, so one wonders why Obama choose one of the largest, most militantly nationalistic churches in Chicago? Do people honestly think it's just a coincidence? This is a highly educated, sophisticated man with a family, who could pick and choose whereever and whatever type of church he thought best for his family. Do you know that his church had articles in their church magazine in support of Hamas? It all just looks very strange for someone claiming to be so much to so many people. I hear where you're coming from, but I think this church thing says more about who Obama really is (not everything), than what you're giving it credit for, or what he's told the public up to now. With that, I'll leave the soapbox.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SecretMethod70
At worst, Obama is no worse than either McCain or Clinton, which isn't a reason not to vote for him, it simply means it's a wash on that issue. In which case, you look at other issues, like policy positions (there are plenty on his website, so don't say he's an empty suit), or track record (both Clinton and Obama have relatively short Senate records, but Obama more often has bills that get passed and more often has bills with Republican co-sponsors, or any co-sponsors at all for that matter, not to mention that he has clearly run a better campaign than Clinton, which is the closest comparison we're going to get of how the two of them would handle running an administration).
Apart from the first sentence on ideological grounds, I agree with you 100%.
powerclown is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 07:10 PM   #350 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SecretMethod70
shakran: you're making one very large assumption: that Wright gave sermons like that every Sunday.
A good point. But it is equally, if not moreso, foolhardy to assume that Wright suddenly lost his mind and spewed hate-filled rhetoric "just this once." Especially considering he and Obama are supposedly close, and he has indicated that he wants Obama to win.

Quote:
I'm sure his sermons were consistently energetic (it'd be near impossible for Obama to go to a black church that didn't have energetic sermons like that),
I do not object to the energy.

Quote:
but I doubt he was saying "god damn America" week after week. (Which is not even bothering to address the already exhausted point that for a preacher to say "god damn America ... for killing innocent people" is not something that should be considered scandalous in the least.)
No, probably not, but he probably didn't avoid saying it every weekend either.



Quote:
Also, you're assuming that the only reason Obama, or anyone, went to the church is because of Rev. Wright. As abaya pointed out, churches do far more than provide a pulpit to a preacher.
Abaya is quite correct. However, if the guy's there for 20 years, leading the church, the mouthpiece of the church, the one who sets the course of the church, then it's reasonable to conclude that the church's congregation and higher-ups are OK with the message and the tone that Wright sets.

Quote:
For a lot of people, social service is a very important part of their Christian faith.
This is true, but one does not have to be in a church to volunteer or otherwise help out with social service.

Quote:
It's all nice to say "actions speak louder than words" as an excuse to hold Obama's 20 years of attendance against him. But then apply the "actions speak louder than words" metric to Rev. Wright and Trinity as a whole.

And the hell's angels do an annual Toys for Tots drive. Many branches of the KKK volunteer for Adopt-A-Highway. This does not mean I should go become a member of these organization. It certainly does not mean that, assuming I joined the KKK, I should be surprised if people judge me based on the KKK's message rather than their laudable community beautification efforts.

Just because a group does a service which is valuable to the community does not mean you can join them and not be judged based upon the message that they put out.

Quote:
EDIT: And I still don't understand why so many people refuse to give Obama the benefit of the doubt regarding Trinity and Rev. Wright, despite him never having done or said anything to indicate that he is anti-American, a believer in the HIV conspiracy, or any of that.
I think there are two prongs to this answer. The first I've already covered above, so let's look at the second. Obama is a politician. He wants to attain the highest political office in the land. He's going up against the republican party, who's spin machine is legendary for chewing democrats up and spitting them out. Exactly how stupid can he be to think that associating with this guy, and beyond that continuing to associate and support this guy after this sermon got out, is a good move politically?

Quote:
Ultimately, I do think it comes down to the fact there are still plenty of Americans today who are afraid of "angry black men," consciously or not.
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe we're afraid of someone who supports a guy that believes in and preaches the insane HIV conspiracy theory.

Quote:
Had Rev. Wright said "god damn George Bush for killing innocent people" or "god damn the legislature for making drug laws that target lower income, and often black, abusers," it would have still been controversial, but it wouldn't have created such an enormous uproar.
No, because it would be based in fact rather than wild, lunatic-fringe theories about the Evil Government and How It's Trying to Kill You.

Quote:
Next - and I know there are some people who contest this, but let's put it aside for now - it is important to remember that George Bush was elected by the people of the United States.
I don't think you really can put it aside. He was definitely not elected the first go around, and the legitimacy of his win the second time has been called into serious question.

Quote:
The Congressional Democrats are spineless because the most many people are willing to do in order to express their opposition is answer a poll. That hardly gives them confidence that they can weather the storm it'd cause to stand up to this administration.
We disagree there. I think they're spineless because they're afraid of a fight. The american people overwhelmingly elected the democrats last election. They also overwhelmingly voted conservative on the issue votes. Not ONE gay marriage proposal went through, for instance. What does this tell us? The democrats were elected and sent to Washington with marching orders. Stop. The. War. They had the support of the public. They had the MANDATE from the public. And the first chance they got to do something about it, they caved, rolled over, and let Bush have his way. They didn't do it because they didn't think people would support them. They did it because they were stupid, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it cost them when those who voted with Bush are up for reelection.

Quote:
So, why again is it inappropriate to say "god damn America?" Disagreeable, sure...but inappropriate? No.

My main objection isn't to him saying that. It's to the hate-filled, insane rhetoric the guy spews. Again, back to the HIV conspiracy theory. It makes about as much sense as chem trails or a missile hitting the pentagon. And now the guy who wants to effectively run the government turns out to come from a church which thinks the government is out to get them? That, I think, should give people pause.
shakran is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 07:20 PM   #351 (permalink)
let me be clear
 
ottopilot's Avatar
 
Location: Waddy Peytona
Quote:
Originally Posted by host
How does Oprah manage to be a member of the very same church, yet not get "tarred", even one iota, as you are tarring Obama?

Why are blacks asked, ad infinitum, to justify what other blacks say and do, when the press would never contemplate asking the same thing of whites, in regard to the speech and action of other whites?

You and like minded people do not grasp how ridiculous and petty your "Op" makes you look...you've been carrying on with this stupid bullshit for at least 54 weeks..... please stop NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fine, let's include Oprah. Another hypocrite. However, the OP is about Rev, Wright ... but why not continue to mention the good reverend's influence on a presidential candidate who's church is based in black separatist philosophy, and to continue pointing out the willful hypocracy of his apologists?

And BTW - Obama is not being tarred as much as closely scrutinized. Why is it tarring to question a politician's life shaping motivations and motivators? I believe Rekna stated earlier ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekna
People who are looking for a reason to hate any candidate will find a reason to do so.
The only hate found in this debate is hate that spews in volumes from the mouth of Rev. Wright, the spiritual mentor, inspiration, and recent political adviser of a very popular presidential candidate. This bullshit is only stupid because it's an embarrassment to Obama's character and an eye-opener to the voting public.
__________________
"It rubs the lotion on Buffy, Jodi and Mr. French's skin" - Uncle Bill from Buffalo

Last edited by ottopilot; 03-25-2008 at 07:54 PM..
ottopilot is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 07:43 PM   #352 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerclown
I think this has turned into the issue it has..
Thing is? It hasn't. All the polls are showing ZERO result from this massive smear campaign. He dipped last week while it was hot news, but it did no long-term damage.

I'm clear that here in the online echo-chamber it's still a big deal for some people, but the mainstream has moved on. Obama appears to be done responding to it, and so am I.
ratbastid is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 08:01 PM   #353 (permalink)
let me be clear
 
ottopilot's Avatar
 
Location: Waddy Peytona
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid
Thing is? It hasn't. All the polls are showing ZERO result from this massive smear campaign. He dipped last week while it was hot news, but it did no long-term damage.

I'm clear that here in the online echo-chamber it's still a big deal for some people, but the mainstream has moved on. Obama appears to be done responding to it, and so am I.
It only takes mentioning the facts to bring the apologists back out of the woodwork. If a bear takes a documented shit in the woods, and a willing media decides to not report it, does it make the steaming pile any less a of a truth? Perhaps we should serve it up repackaged as elevated discourse?
__________________
"It rubs the lotion on Buffy, Jodi and Mr. French's skin" - Uncle Bill from Buffalo
ottopilot is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 08:07 PM   #354 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerclown
I honestly don't understand how people can dissassociate Obama from his pastor of 20 years, I really don't. This is a man who was very important to Obama personally, for so long, as he himself as said in his books and in public. It's a very complex situation.
I don't understand why he would need do disassociate himself from someone who is very important to him simply because that person says things that he doesn't agree with. Isn't there anyone you look up to on certain matters, who you also know is full of shit when it comes to other things?

You're trying to hold Obama responsible for things his pastor said, things Obama has unequivocally publicly rejected. If you want to claim that you think his criticism are disingenuous, then that's your choice. As it stands, I don't think there is much to the idea that Obama is somehow some sort of super secret under cover black nationalist, which is the logical conclusion of what you seem to be insinuating.



Quote:
It's been said that Obama, coming from a doting white mother and an absent black father, was looking for radical elements in college and in the black community to solidify his own confused, yet ambitious, identity - and I think there is a lot of truth to that.
So what? Are you the same person you were in college? One of my state senators was a Vietnam war protesting hippie- he even campaigned for Wellstone. He's now a republican and has consistently sided with the current administration on pretty much anything involving war. Even if Obama were searching for some sort of radical identity, how long ago was that? Even if Obama joined the church as a way of getting in touch with African Americans, what significance does that have?

Are you really trying to claim that twenty years ago, a young hotshot mixed-race lawyer with political ambitions decided that the best way to find long-term political success would be to embrace black nationalism?

Quote:
SecretMethod70 insists there aren't any other types of churches in that part of Chicago but it simply isn't true - there are more mainstream, less militant black churches, so one wonders why Obama choose one of the largest, most militantly nationalistic churches in Chicago? Do people honestly think it's just a coincidence? This is a highly educated, sophisticated man with a family, who could pick and choose whereever and whatever type of church he thought best for his family. Do you know that his church had articles in their church magazine in support of Hamas? It all just looks very strange for someone claiming to be so much to so many people. I hear where you're coming from, but I think this church thing says more about who Obama really is (not everything), than what you're giving it credit for, or what he's told the public up to now. With that, I'll leave the soapbox.
The UCC is one of the most liberal denominations in the whole of Christianity. They don't even believe in hell. It's not like catholicism, or evangelicalism, where you go to hell if you don't agree with the pastor. I think that for a young, progressive person it would seem like the natural choice, especially in light of the how active some UCC churches are in various progressive causes.
filtherton is offline  
Old 03-25-2008, 10:10 PM   #355 (permalink)
Human
 
SecretMethod70's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
My main objection isn't to him saying that. It's to the hate-filled, insane rhetoric the guy spews. Again, back to the HIV conspiracy theory. It makes about as much sense as chem trails or a missile hitting the pentagon. And now the guy who wants to effectively run the government turns out to come from a church which thinks the government is out to get them? That, I think, should give people pause.
Tell that to the Tuskegee victims. I don't think the government is behind HIV by any means, but like I've said before, if I were raised as a black kid in poverty and I heard about Tuskegee, then heard some conspiracy theory about HIV, I'm pretty sure I'd believe it.

There hasn't been a single thing, other than the church he chooses to attend, to indicate Obama is sympathetic to any of the more irrational views espoused by Wright and others. I'm not going to hold his church against him any more than I'd refuse to believe John Kerry is pro-choice simply because he attended Catholic church all his life. It's easy to pick out the conspiracy crackpots on TFP within only a couple posts. If Obama believed HIV were caused by the government, we'd know. To think that he'd make it to where he is now without ever personally expressing crackpot views like that, all while believing them, attributes a bizarre level of clairvoyance to him. As does the idea he'd choose his church 20 years ago based on what would help him become president. (And, note, he didn't "choose" his church, he fell into it by meeting Rev. Wright and being introduced to Christianity. That conversion experience can be very strong, and is yet another reason someone might stick around a church long after hearing some things (non-theologically speaking) that they vehemently disagree with.)

But let's say Obama does believe any of the conspiracy theories (a ridiculous presumption, but nonetheless let's say he does). Exactly what damage do you think he'd cause as president? If the government isn't behind HIV, he'll find that out. If he thinks it is but it isn't, what's he gonna do....encourage more HIV research? Oh noes! I don't think for one second that Obama holds that belief, but even if he did it's mostly a non-issue. I'm much more concerned about candidates who think our children shouldn't learn about evolution.

Funny thing is, though, that if you pay attention to pretty much anyone who has known Obama personally in his life, even going back to his party days at Occidental, they have nothing but good things to say about him, and almost everyone makes particular mention of his interest in bringing people together and listening to all sides of an issue. It's far more telling to read about what kind of professor Obama was than it is to hear about the preacher he followed. Like I said, McCain is also running for the highest office in the land, and he went out of his way to have the endorsement of John Hagee. I don't think he'll ignore natural disasters just because his most important religious endorsement is from someone who thinks they're punishments from god, and I don't think Obama will suddenly turn the United States into Africa 2.0.

Which begs the question, come to think of it, what exactly is anyone here afraid he'll do as president in light of Rev. Wright? Don't talk about how you think he's a socialist, don't talk about how he's a normal big city liberal politician. What bad things did you not think he'd do as president that you now think he'll do after hearing about Rev. Wright? Are you afraid he'll suddenly want to put an end to the genocide in Darfur? Maybe he'll want to help restabilize the Kenyan government? Perhaps he'll show concern for the serious problems with endangered species in Africa. All terrible things, for sure. I just don't get it: I can't think of a single tangible nefarious scheme that any sane person would attribute to Obama in light of his relationship to Rev. Wright. The worst that can be said is that he dines with whores (yes that's a Jesus reference, no I don't think Obama is the messiah ).

Quote:
Originally Posted by filtherton
The UCC is one of the most liberal denominations in the whole of Christianity. They don't even believe in hell. It's not like catholicism, or evangelicalism, where you go to hell if you don't agree with the pastor. I think that for a young, progressive person it would seem like the natural choice, especially in light of the how active some UCC churches are in various progressive causes.
Thank you. There's a reason I provide links in my posts. It's a shame people don't follow them.

Instead, it's easier to complain about how Rev. Wright preaches that "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today [is] my own government."










Oh wait, that was the anti-American Martin Luther King, Jr. who said that. What a crackpot. God damn America indeed, for remaining true to this statement 40 years later and learning nothing.

Please Read: Just a Typical Black Person   click to show 
__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Last edited by SecretMethod70; 03-25-2008 at 11:00 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
SecretMethod70 is offline  
Old 03-26-2008, 03:59 AM   #356 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
It only takes mentioning the facts to bring the apologists back out of the woodwork.
See: "online echo chamber"

The media has cycled past it. Hillary made a mention of it yesterday which the media referred to as "after the fact". It's done. It's resolved for people. This particular wave has crashed on the beach, and has receded.

Moving on.

Last edited by ratbastid; 03-26-2008 at 04:03 AM..
ratbastid is offline  
Old 03-27-2008, 03:26 AM   #357 (permalink)
let me be clear
 
ottopilot's Avatar
 
Location: Waddy Peytona
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid
See: "online echo chamber"

The media has cycled past it. Hillary made a mention of it yesterday which the media referred to as "after the fact". It's done. It's resolved for people. This particular wave has crashed on the beach, and has receded.

Moving on.
Now that's funny!

I see, is your integrity determined by the news cycle? Apparently truth for you has less to do about facts and more about winning, outlasting the news cycle. I see no evidence of this ever going away completely. Some powerfully influential people have been left injured in the wake. I doubt the likes of Rev. Wright or Geraldine Ferraro are done with this one, planning, calculating in the background. Don't forget this issue is now fair-game for Hillary and McCain ... food for some very creative minds ... staffers, strategists, PR and advertising wizards ... you only hope this is gone.

It appears Obama used Rev. Wright to look extra black when he needed it, he threw them under a bus when light was shone on their racist beliefs, and now his church and new pastor are slamming him hard. He pissed off one of the most powerful women in the Democratic party with a cheap shot. He characterized typical white people as racist by experience. No, revenge is popular in politics and Democrats will eat their own. It's thinned out a bit, but I'd say it's not been put to bed just yet. Scorned political power brokers and influential racist preachers have long memories.

Recently, my interest in this has been largely for entertainment. Like a video game. Mention something truthful about Obama's poor judgement (push the button) and watch the hypocrites come out of the woodwork to argue disingenuous rationalizations and mindless slogans. You're right, we should call it the Echo Chamber. Available soon on PS2 and Xbox!
__________________
"It rubs the lotion on Buffy, Jodi and Mr. French's skin" - Uncle Bill from Buffalo
ottopilot is offline  
Old 03-27-2008, 05:30 AM   #358 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
I see, is your integrity determined by the news cycle? Apparently truth for you has less to do about facts and more about winning, outlasting the news cycle.
You are a true master at twisting others' words. You should go work for Hillary.

Hillary's ratings went down, not Obama's. So one man's truth is another mans bullshit. And let's not pretend the whole "scandal" wasn't about winning, ok?

What got left in the wake of this thing is the POSSIBILITY of a real conversation about race, a conversation that can make a difference. IF we don't let ourselves get distracted by our own political viewpoints, we can actually start LISTENING to each other, and THAT can make a difference. I have no illusions that this thread is about anything OTHER than the distractions at this point.
ratbastid is offline  
Old 03-27-2008, 05:36 AM   #359 (permalink)
Living in a Warmer Insanity
 
Tully Mars's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Yucatan, Mexico
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid
What got left in the wake of this thing is the POSSIBILITY of a real conversation about race, a conversation that can make a difference. IF we don't let ourselves get distracted by our own political viewpoints, we can actually start LISTENING to each other, and THAT can make a difference. I have no illusions that this thread is about anything OTHER than the distractions at this point.

Yep.
__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club
Tully Mars is offline  
Old 03-27-2008, 05:49 AM   #360 (permalink)
Easy Rider
 
flstf's Avatar
 
Location: Moscow on the Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
Recently, my interest in this has been largely for entertainment. Like a video game. Mention something truthful about Obama's poor judgement (push the button) and watch the hypocrites come out of the woodwork to argue disingenuous rationalizations and mindless slogans. You're right, we should call it the Echo Chamber. Available soon on PS2 and Xbox!
From a sporting standpoint this is getting interesting. Hillary's people are combing through his minister's sermons coming up with more radical statements he has made over the years and putting them into YouTube soundbites to be played over and over again. The goal is of course to insinuate that Obama must agree with them and is therefore unelectable. If they keep this up for a few more months they may just be able to destroy his ability to get elected.

Obama's people are combing through Hillary's false statements over the years especially since she is claiming superior experience as first lady. The goal is of course to show that she is a liar and will say anything to get elected. That along with her already high negative numbers may destroy her ability to get elected.

McCain seems to be making more mental mistakes lately. Is he getting too old and will these lapses increase when the general election campaign begins in earnest with debates etc.. where a quick grasp of the facts is necessary.
flstf is offline  
 

Tags
jeremiah, rev, wright, wrong


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:26 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360