Rational, Sane, Non-Super-Liberal-Leftist-Socialist People Oppose Obama Because They Are Racists


Discovered at Moonbattery.com, here is the bare truth about opponents of Barack ‘The Holy Messiah’ God Obama (truth as defined by liberals)…

THEY ARE RACISTS.

Which means that Malaysians who will be negatively affected by Obama’s presidency are racists too.

Via Bookworm Room:

When I vote against Obama on November 4, 2008:

  • It won’t be because Obama wants to withdraw from Iraq, which I think will weaken America’s interests beyond repair, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama thinks that a nuclear Iran is no threat to the Western World, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because I think it’s an incredibly stupid idea for the most powerful nation in the world to approach evil totalitarian dictators as a supplicant, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because I hate the idea of a President who will subordinate America’s interests to the UN (as he inevitably will), it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama has the thinnest resume ever in the history of Presidential candidates, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because I think Obama’s Leftist connections (Ayres, Dohrn, Soros, Pfleger, Wright, etc.) show him to be either stupid about or complicit with an agenda antithetical to basic American values, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama wants to socialize American medicine, which I believe will destroy the high quality of medical care available to most Americans, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama wants to gut the military and reduce us to a nation with a big target painted on our collective backside, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama wants to gut the Second Amendment and destroy Americans’ Constitutional right to protect themselves from foreign and domestic enemies, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama has already announced loud and clear that he will support activist judges who place their “feelings” above the law, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama supports judicial decisions creating a right to gay marriage, when I think that decision is one for the voters, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama’s announced that he will dramatically increase taxes, putting the slow, inflexible, ill-informed government in charge of what should be a quick-reacting, knowledgeable marketplace, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama’s record in the Senate (albeit short and undistinguished) has been so liberal he makes Teddy Kennedy look like a reactionary, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama’s an open-borders kind of guy, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama has shown himself to be a scarily slow thinker and speaker when released from the teleprompter (which really doesn’t bode well for those cozy private chats with Ahmadinejad, Jong-Il, and Assad), it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama’s wife clearly loathes America and everything it stands for, despite the fact that she’s done pretty well out of it, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama was affiliated for more than 20 years with a church that preached white hatred and began to care only when it looked as if it would affect his campaign, it will be because I’m a racist.
  • It won’t be because Obama was good buddies with Tony Rezko, and other sleazy characters (showing again that Obama was complicit or a singularly bad judgment of character), it will be because I’m a racist.

——————————————

And another round from Moonbattery:

If you object to Obama raising your payroll, capital gains and estate taxes you…may be a racist.

If you’re in favor of drilling for oil and building nuclear power plants you…may be a racist.

If you wonder why Obama was hanging around William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn you…may be a racist.

If you don’t want the majority of justices on the Supreme Court to be like Stephen Breyer you…may be a racist.

If you think the surge is working and that’s a good thing you…may be a racist.

If you oppose racial preferences in employment, school admissions and contracting you…may be a racist.

If you prefer that a president have a smidgen of executive experience you…may be a racist.

If you’re appalled that Obama voted against treating infants born after an abortion attempt the same medically as other infants born alive you…may be a racist.

If you were proud of your country even before Obama’s candidacy you…may be a racist.

If you don’t care how Hollywood or the European elite think you should vote you…may be a racist.

———————————————

NotObamaIsRacist

NotObamaIsRacist

But remember… Anyone who spews racial epithets at non-Caucasian Republicans is definitely NOT a racist.

Oh, and by the way… You are a racist even if you vote for Obama. Congrats, you bigot!

Be sure to check out his amazing lack of achievements and compare with related 46 Lies of Barack Obama.

Michelle Malkin has the context for the following:

Following from Michelle Malkin:

Following from Day by Day:

See Obamedia Loves Obama for the Britney card.

Obama Bunch

Obama Bunch

Following from Day by Day:

Sarah Palin cartoon

Sarah Palin cartoon

Obamedia

Obamedia

Palin cartoons from this post which has more:

Sarah Palin cartoon

Sarah Palin cartoon

Sarah Palin cartoon

Following from The Ryskind Sketchbook:

Sarah Palin cartoon

Sarah Palin cartoon


Tags: , , , , , , ,

11 Responses to “Rational, Sane, Non-Super-Liberal-Leftist-Socialist People Oppose Obama Because They Are Racists”

  1. hutchrun Says:

    Barack Obama has a new web site dedicated to fighting “right-wing smears” on the internet. I think this is good news. Every time I come across a rumor, I can simply e-mail the Obama campaign at: watchdog@barackobama.com, and theoretically, they will answer the rumor. I have decided to test the system:

    Dear ‘Fight the Smears,’
    Over at The Obama File web site they are claiming that Barack Obama Sr. bought his first of three wives for 14 cows. Is this rumor accurate or is this a right-wing smear? Many thanks for your assistance on this matter and I look forward to squashing this rumor as soon as possible.

    Joe

    I hereby promise to post whatever response I get.

    http://neoconexpress.blogspot.com/2008/06/testing-obamas-new-fight-smear-web-site.html

  2. hutchrun Says:

    Barack Obama has a new web site dedicated to fighting “right-wing smears” on the internet. I think this is good news. Every time I come across a rumor, I can simply e-mail the Obama campaign at: watchdog@barackobama.com, and theoretically, they will answer the rumor. I have decided to test the system:

    Dear ‘Fight the Smears,’
    Over at The Obama File web site they are claiming that Barack Obama Sr. bought his first of three wives for 14 cows. Is this rumor accurate or is this a right-wing smear? Many thanks for your assistance on this matter and I look forward to squashing this rumor as soon as possible.

    Joe

    I hereby promise to post whatever response I get.

    http://neoconexpress.blogspot.com/2008/06/testing-obamas-new-fight-smear-web-site.html

  3. hutchrun Says:

    LGF article on Democrats and fraud:

    Secretary of State Jay Dardenne said Tuesday he will meet today with a
    Democrat-affiliated group responsible for a voter registration effort that is inundating East Baton Rouge and other parish registrars with bogus and incomplete applications.
    http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/politics/19754129.html

    So who is “VIP?”

    VIP is an operation run by the Muslim American Society, a front group for the jihad movement known as the Muslim Brotherhood. But don’t take my word for it; here’s a detailed report on the Muslim American Society from the Investigative Project.
    http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/85.pdf

  4. hutchrun Says:

    David Boren, the only Democratic congressman from Oklahoma, told reporters yesterday he’s not ready to endorse Mr. Obama. “Unfortunately, his record does not reflect working in a bipartisan fashion,” he told reporters. Mr. Obama’s designation by the nonpartisan National Journal magazine as the Senate’s most liberal member may be catching up with him.

    Then there is Rep. Tim Mahoney of Florida, who says he will remain an uncommitted superdelegate and may not even attend the party’s convention. Asked how he felt about running with Mr. Obama as his party’s nominee, he told the Palm Beach Post: “I’m a Democrat, but am I going to have a pep rally or something like that? No I’m not going to do that.”

    Another potential dissident is Rep. Jim Marshall of Georgia. He has refused to tell reporters if he thinks Barack Obama would make a better president than John McCain. Finally, Rep. Lincoln Davis of Tennessee has been outed by his state’s governor, Phil Bredesen, who told the Philadelphia Inquirer that a Democratic congressman from this state, who could only be Rep. Davis, had told him both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were “poison” politically to him.

    Source WSJ

  5. wits0 Says:

    CNN is clearly rooting for Obama and attempts to put him only in good light.

  6. wits0 Says:

    Excellent piece from Melanie Phillips:
    Princess Obama Derangement Syndrome
    http://tinyurl.com/5nag9l

    My oh my, what a firestorm I appear to have started with my remarks two days ago on Obama’s background! It was wholly expected, of course, but nevertheless the posters’ comments are so revealing. They graphically illustrate the way in which Obamania has quite obviously destroyed the capacity for reason.

    First, it is quite clear that any questioning at all of Obama’s background is entirely off-limits. Next, the posters fail totally to grasp that the real point isn’t what faith he professed or was brought up in as a child – it is the fact that he has not told the truth about his early background. Then, some even compare such questioning with the ‘truthers’ who allege that 9/11 was perpetrated by a conspiracy between America and Israel. They thus demonstrate that they cannot tell the difference between rationality and lunacy, evidence and fantasy, failing to grasp that the sole reason for the questions about Obama is the many discrepancies in the accounts of his early life — including his own accounts — plus his many questionable associations……………..

  7. wits0 Says:

    Hussein half brother said :

    http://tinyurl.com/547jrm
    Barack Obama’s half brother Malik said Thursday that if elected his brother will be a good president for the Jewish people, despite his Muslim background.

    In an interview with Army Radio he expressed a special salutation from the Obamas of Kenya.

    —–
    But CNN asserts that Hussein is/was a Christian.

  8. hutchrun Says:

    Say, I wonder when,where and how Hussein Obama was circumcised.

  9. hutchrun Says:

    Koran class: In his autobiography, Dreams of My Father, Obama relates how he got into trouble for making faces during Koranic studies, thereby revealing he was a Muslim, for Indonesian students in his day attended religious classes according to their faith. Indeed, Obama still retains knowledge from that class: Nicholas D. Kristof of the New York Times, reports that Obama “recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them [to Kristof] with a first-rate accent.”

    http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5544

    Saudi Arabia has bought over CNN lock, stock, barrel.

  10. Scout Says:

    And more people voted for Barack Obama than any president in U.S. history.

  11. Scott Thong Says:

    Apparently, your US history stretches back only a couple of years.

    In terms of absolute numbers, yes, the 2008 election saw the most votes for a candidate ever. But the population in 2008 was also the highest ever.

    Meanwhile, look at the percentage of votes as follows:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008

    Barack Obama vs John McCain
    Electoral vote 365 vs 173
    States carried 28 + DC + NE-02 vs 22
    Popular vote 69,456,897 vs 59,934,814 (116:100 ratio)
    Percentage 52.9% vs 45.7%

    Compared to:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1984

    Ronald Reagan vs Walter Mondale
    Electoral vote 525 vs 13
    States carried 49 vs 1 + DC (Head to the link and look at the map! It’s almost entirely red!)
    Popular vote 54,455,472 vs 37,577,352 (145:100 ratio)
    Percentage 58.8% vs 40.6%

    So in 1984 Reagan got a far higher ratio of the electoral vote, states and popular vote than Obama in 2008. Obama is a featherweight compared to what Reagan achieved! And note that Reagan was running for a second term, which means people voted for his 4 years of proven policies – very different from the untested Obama benefiting from anti-Bush sentiment.

    In fact, adjusting for total population (2008’s 302 million which is 28% more than 1984’s 236 million), if Reagan’s 58.8% of the popular vote were transposed to 2008’s voting population he would have gotten 76,082,326 votes – 6,625,429 more than Obama managed!

    And if the 2010 elections are anything to judge by, 2012 will see an even more massive landslide for the Republican nominee – just as 1980 saw Reagan first elected on the back of Carter’s failed Democrat policies!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: