Bill Maher: Conservatives Don’t Like Obama On Syria Because He’s Black

[Jeff]

OK we all knew it was coming and should of figured it would of come from this idiot, if ya disagree with Obama you are a racist , I know old news but it is again being thrown around.



It was just a matter of time before someone played the race card regarding U.S. intervention in Syria, and specifically Obama’s decision to go to Congress to seek authorization. It seems the executive branch has already decided to attack Syria, and they don’t really feel obligated to seek Congress’s approval or disapproval. Obama wants a pat on the back for going to Congress, but it’s not going to earn him any points, because he’s dead set on starting another war, regardless of what the Congress says.


http://minutemennews.com/2013/09/bill-maher-conservatives-dont-like-obama-syria-hes-black/

[DragonStryk72]

OK we all knew it was coming and should of figured it would of come from this idiot, if ya disagree with Obama you are a racist , I know old news but it is again being thrown around.



It was just a matter of time before someone played the race card regarding U.S. intervention in Syria, and specifically Obama’s decision to go to Congress to seek authorization. It seems the executive branch has already decided to attack Syria, and they don’t really feel obligated to seek Congress’s approval or disapproval. Obama wants a pat on the back for going to Congress, but it’s not going to earn him any points, because he’s dead set on starting another war, regardless of what the Congress says.


http://minutemennews.com/2013/09/bill-maher-conservatives-dont-like-obama-syria-hes-black/




Um... Bush went to the Congress, too. I don't see what's so ennobling about Obama doing what Bush did.

[Jeff]

Um... Bush went to the Congress, too. I don't see what's so ennobling about Obama doing what Bush did.

The problem isn't Obama's actions it is the fact that if you disagree you are a racist, and honestly I felt when GW did it we had reason to be going, now we are just going to fight with the very savages that killed Americans

[Truth Detector]

Um... Bush went to the Congress, too. I don't see what's so ennobling about Obama doing what Bush did.

There's a HUGE difference between what Bush did in Afghanistan and Iraq. Both involved boots on the ground, long term engagement and regime change.

All Obama wants to do is lob a few cruise missiles from a safe distance to show he really really meant it when he drew that red line by golly gee whiz. But as is typical with this feckless, narcissistic politically motivated fool, he has to play politics with the issue rather than act.

The man is an embarrassement and now claims it wasn't HIS red line, but 98% of the worlds Democracies ( another incredible lie ).

[Truth Detector]

OK we all knew it was coming and should of figured it would of come from this idiot, if ya disagree with Obama you are a racist , I know old news but it is again being thrown around.



It was just a matter of time before someone played the race card regarding U.S. intervention in Syria, and specifically Obama’s decision to go to Congress to seek authorization. It seems the executive branch has already decided to attack Syria, and they don’t really feel obligated to seek Congress’s approval or disapproval. Obama wants a pat on the back for going to Congress, but it’s not going to earn him any points, because he’s dead set on starting another war, regardless of what the Congress says.


http://minutemennews.com/2013/09/bill-maher-conservatives-dont-like-obama-syria-hes-black/




The man is a complete dolt; further proof that Obama won thanks to extreme low information voters.

[DragonStryk72]

The problem isn't Obama's actions it is the fact that if you disagree you are a racist, and honestly I felt when GW did it we had reason to be going, now we are just going to fight with the very savages that killed Americans

Sorry, but no, I don't think we were right entering Iraq. Watching it, it was another case of Saddam running his punk game. World's still better off without him, but we still overstepped. Here, we have another massive overstep, and Obama hasn't even said what side of the fight we'll be coming in on. While it could be a straightforward point where the regime used chem attacks against its own people, it could be that it was a botched attempt by the rebels, but since we don't have the real facts of what's going on, Obama's talking about going in blind.

[Trigg]

Meanwhile Carville is still blaming bush. At least he doesn't think it's racism :lame2:


http://www.examiner.com/article/james-carville-blames-bush-for-lack-of-support-for-war-syria




"You know, what I would say and maybe a little bit of a different view here. I think what really is freaking people out is the incompetence of the Bush administration in Iraq," he told O'Reilly.
"You're going to blame Bush (http://www.examiner.com/topic/blame-bush)?" O'Reilly shot back.

[aboutime]

Maher is a nobody, and he must know. Most of us just don't like him, or Obama.

As for Syria. If Obama really wants to bolster his Legacy. He should pretend he's ordering an attack on Syria, and just go into Iran to bomb the Nuke facilities first, and on the way out. A Nice DRONE, aimed at Assad...sort of like a "GOTCHA" for the Middle East would kill TWO BIRDS with One Drone.

[Truth Detector]

Sorry, but no, I don't think we were right entering Iraq. Watching it, it was another case of Saddam running his punk game. World's still better off without him, but we still overstepped. Here, we have another massive overstep, and Obama hasn't even said what side of the fight we'll be coming in on. While it could be a straightforward point where the regime used chem attacks against its own people, it could be that it was a botched attempt by the rebels, but since we don't have the real facts of what's going on, Obama's talking about going in blind.

I disagree with you on Iraq; if the world and UN were never supposed to enforce UN resolutions, then why bother going through the expense and trouble of ejecting Saddam from Kuwait? What could possibly have been the purpose for Saddam to "punk" the US? He was trying to "punk" Iran into thinking he still had WMD capability because he was more fearful of Iran than the UN. What he didn't count on was a US President that actually meant what he said and backed it up.

Unfortunately for the US, the sheeple were duped by a lamestream media into believing Bush lied and chose a real liar with less experience than Palin to be in charge. This is how you get IRS scandals, Benghazi's and Syria's.

Syria, on the other hand, has no other purpose than backing up the moronic bluster of the inept Cheif Admonisher.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The problem isn't Obama's actions it is the fact that if you disagree you are a racist, and honestly I felt when GW did it we had reason to be going, now we are just going to fight with the very savages that killed Americans We are going to fight to help those same savages that have in the past murdered our troops and as always used terrorist tactics to further their Islamic cause! Obama wanting to aid the rebels there is his wanting to help establish ISLAM as the dominant force in the world! Its also an act of treason on his part for he is putting their survival and betterment ahead of that of this nation. His true allegiance lies with Islam just as his own words proclaimed once. -Tyr

[P.Kersey]

I disagree with you on Iraq; if the world and UN were never supposed to enforce UN resolutions, then why bother going through the expense and trouble of ejecting Saddam from Kuwait? What could possibly have been the purpose for Saddam to "punk" the US? He was trying to "punk" Iran into thinking he still had WMD capability because he was more fearful of Iran than the UN. What he didn't count on was a US President that actually meant what he said and backed it up.

Well, Iraq had an historic claim to Kuwait going back to the ottoman empire prior to the area being divided up post WWI. ...and saddam was certainly "our guy" as long as he was killing iranians for us in the iran-iraq war. We gave him weapons, technology, satellite info, etc.


Essentially it's the u.s. efforts to keep the ME destabilized in order to manipulate and exert our "influence" in the area.

Through a CIA aided coup, the shah of iran, our puppet, came to power. HE was brutal and ruthless and oppressive but as long as he was "our guy" it was cool.
Then he was finally deposed and he fled to the u.s. The iranians were pissed off and they invaded our embassy and took hostages.

That was settled when pansy carter left office and reagan took control.

In 1990, when US ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam the US did not have an official position on disputes between Arab countries, it's no wonder that saddam thought the US would look the other way when he invaded Kuwait, especially after this close and very supportive relationship with the Republican administrations throughout the 1980s.

That was the basis for gulf war I.

So then gulf war II. First bush claimed iraq was part of the "axis of evil" and had ties to alqaeda - 9/11. It makes perfect sense...to american politicians and low intelligence voters, that is...
Saudi nationals attack the u.s...we invade iraq... :rolleyes:

After no ties to al qaeda were found, the mission became WMD...blah..blah...when no WMD were found the mission became "regime change" and to bring "democracy" to iraq...more B.S.

Look at afghanistan..Same type of u.s. manipulation...As long as afghan was killing russians, they were our buddies..we gave them weapons, technology and satellite info and we did NOT care how brutal and oppressive they were, as long as they danced when we pulled the strings. Just kill russians for us.

Then bin laden (supposedly) was in afghan post 9/11 so we had to go kill a bunch of afghans.

Now this foolishness in syria where we support al qaeda in their fight against hezbollah..WHAT??!!?? ....insanity...

You know who the ONLY people who benefit from the u.s keeping the ME unstable? Israel...as long as the muzzies are at each other's throats and u.s. troops are being killed, it keeps the pressure off of "precious" israel. They're "special", ya know. :rolleyes:

Etc..etc...rinse and repeat...

Seen the price of gas lately?
Let's keep the ME unstable while our narcissist in chief purposely cripples the oil and coal industries in his plan to further damage the country he hates....the u.s.
This country could be 100% energy independent if it wanted to...but the powers that be don't WANT it that way...anyway, that's off topic but it's relevant.




Unfortunately for the US, the sheeple were duped by a lamestream media into believing Bush lied and chose a real liar with less experience than Palin to be in charge. This is how you get IRS scandals, Benghazi's and Syria's.

Syria, on the other hand, has no other purpose than backing up the moronic bluster of the inept Cheif Admonisher.

This country is finished, anyway. The manchurian candidate and his Cloward-Pivens strategy is wrecking the u.s. economically, morally and physically.

[PostmodernProphet]

not voting to bomb brown people is racist.....

[aboutime]

not voting to bomb brown people is racist.....


PostmodernProphet. How'd you manage to finally disclose what OBAMA is always thinking???

[Truth Detector]

Its time to dredge this pile of bullshit you posted up and reins to it.


Well, Iraq had an historic claim to Kuwait going back to the ottoman empire prior to the area being divided up post WWI. ...and saddam was certainly "our guy" as long as he was killing iranians for us in the iran-iraq war. We gave him weapons, technology, satellite info.

Wrong; Iraq didn't exist during the Ottoman Empire. It didn't exist until it was created by the Imperilist efforts of Great Britain. It had no more right to invade a smaller member state to the UN than the US would invading Canada.

I am amused by the continual Liberal leftist lie hat Saddam was "our" guy. He wasn't anymore "our" guy than Chairman Mao was Stalins guy.

We never armed Sadam; thats a lie. We never gave him technology; that's a lie. And we may have shared intel ONLY when it appeared war was shifting in Irans favor.

The US position with both nations was that as long as they kept killing each other and neither nation was winning, it was good for everyone.

What is it about AmeriKa hating leftists like you who feel compelled to lie and distort the historical record to defend despots?

[Truth Detector]

Essentially it's the u.s. efforts to keep the ME destabilized in order to manipulate and exert our "influence" in the area.

This claim is nothing more than a steaming pile of bullshit. The US was brought into the mess created by European Imperilalism and the collective guilt of Europe to carve out the nation of Israel against US objections to mediate and find resolution for this mess.

You can thank Europe for the destabilized mess. Of course historic dunces might want to argue that things were better under Ottoman rule.


Through a CIA aided coup, the shah of iran, our puppet, came to power. HE was brutal and ruthless and oppressive but as long as he was "our guy" it was cool.
Then he was finally deposed and he fled to the u.s. The iranians were pissed off and they invaded our embassy and took hostages.

The Shah was never "our" puppet but rather a British one if you want to fabricate a meme that pretends he wasn't the Shah before this coup.

But then those who parrot this meme also pretend that Mosadeque (sp) was elected which is also a lie. Those who parrot these dullard memes also pretend that the Soviet Union had no interest in the region or was arming Arabs to the teeth in an effort to....yes, destabilize the region and exert its influence.

I am amused by the argument the Shah was brutal and repressive compared to despots like Saddam and Syria's Assad. Or with now with the obvious more brutal repression practiced by Islamic fundamentalists. It is a naive and stupid claim one can expect from illiterate dunces in the ME and not from the Western intelligentsia.

Yes, the Iranian regime declared war on he US when they took over our embassy and held our citizens hostages. And as is typical with naive dumb Liberals like Carter; we did nothing.

But again; your parroting of leftist anti-American bullshit has nothing to do with the topic do they?

[Truth Detector]

In 1990, when US ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam the US did not have an official position on disputes between Arab countries, it's no wonder that saddam thought the US would look the other way when he invaded Kuwait, especially after this close and very supportive relationship with the Republican administrations throughout the 1980s.

That was the basis for gulf war I.

More unadulterated bullshit; you can't help yourself. You must be a low information Liberal.

The ONLY basis for Gulf War I was a brutal dictators efforts to take over a neighboring member State of the UN to control vast oil resources and his refusal to withdraw.

What level of lunacy does it take to defend the despotic actions of Saddam?

More proof you have the historic literacy of a lemming.

[Truth Detector]

So then gulf war II. First bush claimed iraq was part of the "axis of evil" and had ties to alqaeda - 9/11. It makes perfect sense...to american politicians and low intelligence voters, that is...
Saudi nationals attack the u.s...we invade iraq... :rolleyes:

After no ties to al qaeda were found, the mission became WMD...blah..blah...when no WMD were found the mission became "regime change" and to bring "democracy" to iraq...more .

You have your leftist talking points backwards. But again you are illustrative of the low information voter who is inclined to parrot the leftist "terrorist loving" talking points you have been spoon-fed rather than anything factual or remotely intelligent.

I suggest you read the Joint Resolution which was about enforcing the UN resolutions Saddam thumbed his nose at the entirety of the Clinton Presidency because Billybob was more concerned with his dick than what was happening in the rest of the world.

Bit you do have that moronic "we were attacked by Saudi Arabia" meme down. ;)

[Truth Detector]

Look at afghanistan..Same type of u.s. manipulation...As long as afghan was killing russians, they were our buddies..we gave them weapons, technology and satellite info and we did NOT care how brutal and oppressive they were, as long as they danced when we pulled the strings. Just kill russians for us.

So let me get this idiot strawman "terrorist" talking point correctly; it isn't manipulation when Communist Soviet Troops invade a neighboring Arab nation and install a puppet regime controlled by the Kremlin, but sending stinger missiles and arms to the Afghans fighting the illegal invasion is.

Where do you come up with such ignorant bullshit?


Then bin laden (supposedly) was in afghan post 9/11 so we had to go kill a bunch of afghans.

LMAO; your version of history requires a special level of low information ignorance that Terrorists would love.

You have to be a low information Liberal leftist to erupt with such utter nonsense.

[Truth Detector]

Now this foolishness in syria where we support al qaeda in their fight against hezbollah..WHAT??!!?? ....insanity...

What foolishness? Last time I looked, the collective world is just sitting on the sidelines watching Syrians and terrorists kill each other. Are you going to claim the US secretly convinced Syrians to overthrow their brutal despot of a leader?


You know who the ONLY people who benefit from the u.s keeping the ME unstable? Israel...as long as the muzzies are at each other's throats and u.s. troops are being killed, it keeps the pressure off of "precious" israel. They're "special", ya

LMAO; yeah low information voter, Israel survives by ME instability and being continuously assaulted by Arab States trying to destroy her.

Im going to need hip waders for the amount of bullshit your capable of erupting with.

So youre not just your everyday low information AmeriKa hater, but have some anti-Semitic leanings as well.

[Truth Detector]

Seen the price of gas lately?
Let's keep the ME unstable while our narcissist in chief purposely cripples the oil and coal industries in his plan to further damage the country he hates....the u.s.

Have you seen the gas prices in Europe or Canada lately? You do know that we get very little oil from the ME.

There is a tiny shiny light of truth in the massive pile of bile you have erupted with; Obama definately hates this country like many Liberal lefttards; but not because of anything we have done in the past, but because it doesn't fit his arrogant narcisistic unintelligent naive world view.


This country could be 100% energy independent if it wanted to...but the powers that be don't WANT it that way...anyway, that's off topic but it's relevant.

Wrong; we could never be 100% energy independent. And what is wrong with using up everyone else's oil first?

Everything you have posted is off-topic; why stop now?


This country is finished, anyway. The manchurian candidate and his Cloward-Pivens strategy is wrecking the u.s. economically, morally and physically.

I wish I had a dollar for everytime I have heard this over my 60 years.

Carry on. I take it you are one of those left leaning Libertarians who sit on the sidelines every election choosing candidates who don't have a chance in hell winning so that you can rejoice in your presumed ideological purity and whine and bitch when idiots like Obaa win elections thanks to voters like you.

;)

[aboutime]

Truth Detector. Most capable, thinking, personally responsible Americans know the Dem's/Liberal/Progressives like Obama are still following the DNC talking points, created during the Bush 1 years to destroy everything closely related to Republican, or Conservative thinking.

Remember. The Liberal Nuckleheads back then, as today. Still preach the lies about how Bush only wanted IRAQ, and KUWAIT Oil supplies to fill his pockets.

Ask any of those liberals today...how much Oil we have gotten from Kuwait, or Iraq since Operation Desert Storm ended in 1991, and how Bush became an IRAQ Oil Mogul at the expense of Saddam, and Half a Million Americans in uniform.

Let them provide the FACTS. THE TRUTH. THE DOCUMENTED, VERIFIABLE TRUTH to back up their nonsense, Programmed Liberal, DNC claims.

Other than gabby, and a few others who lie like Obama.
We should see that PROOF....right here....right now????

Not holding my breath.