she has played her part in getting the first black man elected president. now she is NOT going to associate herself with a man who said one thing and does the other. he is mud to her now and she will endorse ron paul because she has similar beliefs about people owning their own liberties, freedoms, etc...
IT IS THE UNITED NATIONS THAT IS IMPLEMENTING THIS ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT OLIGARCHY. THEY WILL STRIP ALL SOVEREIGNTY AND FORCE US INTO SLAVERY AND ASSASSINATE ALL THOSE THAT WON'T COMPLY. THE U.N. IS PAYING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO STRIP AND ENSLAVE ALL AMERICANS!
~
RESIST FOR OUR CHILDREN'S SAKE! START PROTESTING UN MASS NOW! BEFORE IT IS TO LATE~!~
omg i watched a video where she declares she is going to vote 4 obama 2012 and... and saying stuff like he is the man for it!!! what???????
Is she blind??? what about the wars? he didnt stop the wars, he didnt STOP the wars he created new ones??? how can she endorse him??? can she be so ignorant?? my opinion on her being a moral vertical just gut slammed...
Sure the racist Oprah will support Obama. Even with this fact:
Under Obama the African-American unemployment rate stands at an outrageous 16.2 percent—not a number the Obama White House wants under the mantle of the nation’s first black president. Black teenagers have a devastating unemployment level of 41 percent. -cbsnews
My guess is she will support Obama for the same reasons she supported him a few years ago. Of course the obedient sheep followers of Oprah will lap up everything which comes out of her precious lips.
Are you miserable yet? Lose your house yet? Still think that oprah should pick our president? Are you still gonna follow this dumb broad's advice on how to vote like you did last time? Face the facts! Doperah doesn't care about you. She will never care about you. Tell her to talk to her people and get them to quit beating on people and stealing while running with flash mobs. See how far you get.
RON PAUL IS GOING TO BE PROSECUTED BY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! ITS UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO CALL AMERICAN PEOPLE INVADERS AND INITIATORS OF WARS.
RON PAUL SAID THE USA INVADES COUNTRIES AND STARTS WARS, WHICH GIVES USA A BAD REPUTATION AROUND THE WORLD , THEREFORE IT IS CONSIDERED A CRIME . A US CITIZEN WHO,
WAS BORN IN USA CANT GO AGAINST GOVERNMENT POLICIES WHICH MIGHT THREATEN THE FUTURE OF THE COUNTRY'S SECURITY .
Congressman Ron Paul has continued to run his Congressional office in a frugal manner, and was able to return more than $100,000 from his allotted office budget to the Treasury this year, an increase over the $90,000 returned last year.
Ron Paul 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Put a true statesman in office.
Umm she shouldn't support Obama in 2012 because his policies are approximately those of Bush. Though I'd still vote for him to keep the Republican out of office.
@Houshalter That's correct. Unfortunately the two party monopoly long ago colluded to shut third party candidates out of the debates. Beyond that, outcomes in US elections are in large part determined by campaign spending. Libertarian or Green candidates can do good by injecting real issues into the debate, but ultimately there's no way to change things until the society itself changes. Until that time, Democrats are a better choice than Republicans imo.
@PurpleHoneyBear As a note to my previous point about injecting real issues into the debate: Even pitching ideas into the mainstream is difficult because of little to no media coverage and, again, no access to the debates. I'd say the Libertarian and Green parties (to name a couple) are practically irrelevant in US politics for these reasons (among others).
But I understand that feeling. I just think that the socio-political climate has to change before any viable alternatives can compete.
@PurpleHoneyBear this is why I'm against democracy. It becomes a religion, issues get polarized, and anyone outside "mainstream" is ostracized or ignored. Eventually the system fails in some way, and then it's used as justification to take it even farther.
@Houshalter But are you against resolving issues by discussion, as well as recording those conclusions for everyone else to examine? Are you against ANY kind of process of coming to agreement?
Or do you believe nobody should ever listen to anybody about anything?
@Houshalter You are right. "majority vote with the rights of everyone else taken away" is not "resolving issues by discussion". But then do you agree with me that we should have a system that formally resolves issues by discussion as a requirement, and does NOT allow "majority vote with the rights everyone else taken away"? BOTH are forms of democracy.
Or do you believe in "minority power with the rights of everyone else taken away", which is the TRUE antithesis of democracy, and the default?
@Houshalter You want middle ground between mob rule and rule by tyrants? Let me propose a different way, as before. Discussion-resolution-based rule. It goes tyrant rule->mob rule->discussion-resolution-based rule in that order of quality. i.e. Minority->majority->widest possible majority->everybody. Unfortunately, you HAVE to choose something along that spectrum.
The best system is LAWS made OR repealed by an exhaustive DISCUSSION between a representative cross section of public opinion.
You do realise that the reality YOU want can only become real by discussion, right? Yet you want NO system to make this possible. How ignorant does that make you? That is ignorance MULTIPLIED by ignorance.
The notion of "property rights" itself was borne out of discussion and the proof is that tyrants have enslaved for self-interest. If "property rights" were obvious WITHOUT ANY REASONING, slavery would've never existed.
You see discussion as beneath you, but in reality you are beneath it.
@TheNavigateur If someone comes to my house and tries to kill me or take my stuff, I don't need to discuss it or bring it to a democratic vote, I just shoot them, or presumably the next best thing.
@TheNavigateur I'll agree with your IRS statement, though doubt this guy meant legally taking things, but the Mafia? Some of us have the training, former military, and equipment, current security officer and avid hunter, to send any Mafia force short of a small army running.
These aren't the Mafia of the 1940s, the modern day "mob" focuses mostly on tech crimes and can't handle a field job if their life depended on it, as for "gangs", those kids aren't sober enough to hit a fat man a foot away
@lgvereor And what of the poor old man who cannot combat potential thugs? Fuck him right? Every nation has a fundamental choice: universal guaranteed rights or ZERO rights. You can't have it both ways.
@Houshalter How is your ideal world achievable? Give me the steps needed to make it possible. You simply want to dismantal law enforcement as it currently is,
then mafias WILL prevail over non-mafias, AND become wealthier.
So what are the steps that you propose that will prevent this?
@TheNavigateur Yes it is guaranteed to work because, if government magically protects us from "the mafia" like you claim, people that want that protection will stay, and people that don't or think otherwise won't. You might as well say that making grocery stores voluntary and letting people buy their own food would lead to starvation!
@Houshalter So let me see, hiring a government that protects everybody, or hiring a mafia that protects only you AND makes you extra money by extortion and robbery. Who do you think will prevail?
Good people will hire a government. Self-interested people will hire self-interested mafias. Given that government is voluntary, who do you think would make more PROFIT, and thus GROW quicker? That's right, the purely-self-serving robbers, extortionists and violent enslavers. Dream shattered. Wake up.
@TheNavigateur If they want to risk it, why not? Shouldn't it be their choice? If a government really does offer such stability, why wouldn't it be in everyone's self interest to choose them? Also, how are these gangs going to be profitable at all, even without a gov.? More people will be on the opposite side, defending themselves, just like it is now.
@Houshalter By your logic, you're happy with the current system, because the government IS the gang, and it seems to be prevailing. But also, you'd be happy with ANY system, the Nazi regime, the Somalian sub-systems, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and every system throughout history, because they're all "gangs" that are simply prevailing and aren't defeated.
Your "Shouldn't it be their choice?" comment proves this. That's because "making government voluntary" does NOT stop tyrannical ones forming.
@TheNavigateur That same argument better applies to your position, since you are the one supporting a monopoly "gang" being in control and whatever they do being justified on the apparent grounds that if they didn't, someone else would anyways (gee, like every criminal ever hasn't used that excuse.) Anyways, states don't just exist by default, they require the universal operational support. About 90% of the population, usually more, supports them or is indifferent. I question that...
...support and I get bitched at for being "happy with ANY system". It makes no sense whatsoever.
If a tyrranical government had support of the people or existing infrastructure to take over, yes, it could form, but rarely is it ever going to have any advantage over any other faction, esspecially ones that are more popular, at least without outside intervention.
@Houshalter Nope, I don't support just ANY government, I support a VERY SPECIFIC political system and a VERY SPECIFIC methodology for being able to change it. So it's not "whatever they do" AT ALL.
You on the other hand, offer a methodology that would GUARANTEE ONLY arbitrary governments, but only because you want no government. An ideal world has no government, or even laws, but we live in the real world where injustice happens at the drop of a hat, and you know this.
@TheNavigateur States do not form because of natural economic laws like you assert, they form in contradiction to them. It has to have an existing power structure and the support of the vast majority of the population to get past that, and if they don't have either, let alone both, then they can't exist at all.
@Houshalter Every person is a state unto themself. Every family is a state unto itself.
Are you telling me that Josef Fritzel wasn't an oppressor?
Thus, when I say "arbitrary governments", I mean anything from large to micro level. "Making government voluntary" won't prevent these, including EXTREME ones, from forming, at all. Thus arbitrary governments.
@Houshalter People wouldn't have a choice who they are oppressed by. It'd simply be arbitrary.
That's because the link between actual demand and outcome would be broken. The wealthiest would simply be those who could enslave and extort the most, thus giving them even more power. It's a vicious cycle, seen throughout history. The link between actual demand and outcome can only occur when laws against slavery and extortion for personal benefit, fraud, etc., exist by enough power to stop it.
Our leaders are not leading. They need to put their feet in the shoes of working Americans…. Instead, all they think about is re-election and implementing United Nations Agenda 21 and ICELI. If you don't know what UN Agenda 21 and ICELI are, then LEARN before you vote! It's why Obama did nothing to help US people--Obama wants WORLD redistribution of wealth.
You Americunt fuckers,too bad that your goverment didnt shutdown.but your shitty gov is gonna cut the cost.Too bad you cant receive benefits anymore.Hey,why dont you borrow more money from China?The more money you borrow from us,how faster you be our slaves.And fuck you Japan
death to America.Americunts are uneducated,poorr,homeless and jobless,Americunt men are Child-Molesters and women are cheap 2nd hand whores.Americunts need some faggety attention
Don't care what people do with their private life. But the minute she supports Obama on her show... well then it becomes somewhat of one side biased issue.
Naturally, she lost supporters. She should just stick to her show and do what she does best; people weren't tuning in for 20 years because of her politics. Were they? Shit. I've never seen her show. LOL.
Just don't become a propaganda machine, is what I say.
I had no problems with her supporting Obama. She is an example of Racial/Sexist roadblocks being destroyed, and she saw the same potential growth in Obama.
Personally I don't care if she supports him or not. He is just a person and so is she. If Obama were to declare that Oprah was the most important person on the planet, how would that change what I think of her?
It's best just to be phoney & not say anything you really think because of what others might think. Say agreeable stuff all the time I say. Ana, did I just sum up your thinking or what?
TIME IS OVER.IT WOULD START 1994,NOSTRADAMUS SAID BET.7 AND 20 YRS.1994 PLUS 7,SEPT.2001, NEW YORK’S TWIN TOWER.THE KING OF TERROR WOULD ENTER EUROPE.OSAMA WAS GIVEN CITIZENSHIP IN BOSNIA,SOUTHERN EUROPE IN 1993..NEWS TODAY:MID.EAST UPRISING,AL QAEDA IN LIBYA..FAMINE,PESTILENCE,EARTH¬QUAKES EVERYWHERE.TO NON BELIEVERS REPENT SAVE YOUR SOULS AND PRAY FOR OTHERS.JESUS IS COMING,RAPTURE IS COMING!LISTEN TO PROPHET OWUOR WHO MADE THE RAIN FALL.type in dr owuor rain AND PAUL BEGLEY IN YOUTUBE.
lol if Oprah supports Obama its because the only thing they have in common is they are both black...thats sad but very true...America has been racially divided ever since the Civil Rights so blacks will support blacks in general...not true in all cases but generally its true
@AiresQX4 Who in the world thought of Obama as a messiah? I voted for Obama and I'm disappointed, but never did I think of him as a messah. That's crazy talk.
@quidproquo2004 Maybe you don't consider him a Messiah but many of his die hard supporters do. I am however willing to bet you defended him vigorously from those who knew he was just another puppet and wasn't going to "Change" anything at least not for the good.
@VictimOfBoredom Maybe it was the feeling of complete embarrassment how you chanted "Change" "Hope" "Yes we can" to everyone you know. Or going door to door preaching the gospel of "Change we can believe in" Don't get down on yourself I would feel like a complete ass too.. Hey maybe next time you shouldn't listen to the Mainstream media as they try to convince you the next candidate they catapult into the Presidency isn't really working for the people. I doubt you'll learn though.
Obama is no better than Bush as Obama has completely failed in carrying out his promises I really dont see why he is worth it. It seems that Ralph Nader would be a better choice.
@jmjfanss Meh, Beck says he's a libertarian. Voting for a "party" is never a good idea. I listen to what they are saying and pick whose pile of bullshit smells the best. Ron Paul ftw
@MsIhatespics The last time I checked I wasn't michelle obama. Not really a decent question, I was say it was actually a red herring fallacy :). I guess it wouldn't be racial for a klansman/woman/creature like yourself to climb out from under your rock to spew your racial prejudices.
lol @ Oprah is a smart business woman. C'mon... she ran a show and it was a hit. YOU REALLY think she is the one investing her own money? When you get that rich people you HIRE invest your money. Shes a show-woman not a businesswoman.
Well unless she denounces Obama publicly she'll never get back that goofy conservative crowd she lost. I guess for Oprah it is "all about the money." Another African American role model exposed as a fraud.
Obama has not delivered even one quarter of what he's promised in his progressive promises in his campaign. Whatever the reason it is, Oprah made a good choice not backing Obama, seriously.
I think that she will support Obama. As for her loss in ratings, people kind of knew what to expect from her show. When Ellen began her show, it was hip, cool and something different. Oprah will always be the Queen of Talk but she couldn't stay on top forever. You can't really blame her endorsement of Obama for her slip in the ratings solely on that.
Hurry up and do a story on Trump going bankrupt thousands of times always paying the bondholders but firing employees and never paying small businesses.
@maradona2 are you serious. you know, just because you support the other party it doesn't mean logic and reason should be thrown out of the window just to prove a point.
@rza1m ...He isn't worse than Bush?? Ok let's see.... he didn't close Guantanamo, authorized THE KILLINGS OF AMERICANS!!!, HE IS FUCKING UP THE ECONOMY EVEN MORE, HE CONTINUED BUSH'S WAR.... THE ONLY THING HE DID DIFFERENT IS TO SOCIALIZED HEALTHCARE... WHICH HAS FUCKED US UP EVEN MORE BECAUSE EVERYONES' PREMIUM HAS GONE UP. YOU STILL THINK OBAMA ISN'T WORSE THAN BUSH?? WAKE THE FUCK UP SUNSHINE, BOTH DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN FUCKING US UP.
@maradona2 can you tell this to my racist dad, he tries to hide it but he still talks about skin color. and talking on youtube is talking to strangers, overly protective. He supports obama, and I don't support anything for the governement as we lead ourselves to oblivion by following this governement...
@maradona2 he didnt close Guantanamo? he didn't open it.... what Americans killings has he authorized? He did not fuck up the economy, it was handed to him fucked up. It was obvious when there was 8 years of economic downturn an noone said anything. Premiums going up has nothing to do with Obama and everything to do with the insurance companies. repubs and democrats are both ruining the economy but lets not forget who put the economy in the toilet first, ok sunshine.
@rza1m See this is the problem with you Dems and Rep, you're saying "Well your party is worse than mine" Didn't he say he was going to close Guantanamo?? Wasn't that the"CHANGE"? He didn't start the economy collapse... BUT HE WORSENED IT!!!!!! AND YES RON PAUL WAS TALKING ABOUT THE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE SINCE 1978!!!! BUT SPECIALLY IN THE EARLY 2000's. AND EVEN THE YOUNGTURKS DID A WHOLE SECTMENT ON OBAMA AUTHORIZING THE ASSASINATION OF AMERICANS!!! HOW OLD ARE YOU?? 12?
@maradona2 im not a dem or a rep. i dont say any party is better im just a realist. it seems people don't look at actual fact, what the problem is and how to fix it, rather who to blame for things that go wrong. 'people like you turn politics into blame games. link to obama assassination video?
@snowbaordguru Lol it's people like you who put their party in front of ideology.... STOP DEFENDING THIS PUPPET!!!! NAME ON THING, BESIDES HEALTHCARE REFORM, THAT HE HAS DONE DIFFERENTLY FROM BUSH. HE IS JUST AS OR EVEN WORSE THAN BUSH!!!
@maradona2 1.) Foreign policy. 2.) Started draw down of Iraq war. 3.)Pushed for a an international policy of nuclear non proliferation. 4.) Actually started reducing our nuclear arsenal, which was mirrored by Russia.
Should I continue?
P.S. Do you see how easy it is to convey a message without using all capital letters?
@snowbaordguru Lol Foreign policy??????? Once again, how old are you kid? And no what he did is just shift troops around, more troops in Afghanistan. And now we are fighting Libya??? THAT'S THE SAME FUCKING FOREIGN POLICY. Reply once you stop sucking Obama's dick and realize he is just as bad of a president as Bush was.
@maradona2 I'm 28, what difference does that make? You call me a kid, yet the context clues in your grammar elude to you not having made it out of 8th grade, educate yourself, then try to debate people.
Right, less troops in Iraq is a draw down, moron. Take a course in Intl Poly Sci if you want to understand grown folks business. Until then you look like an idiot.
@snowbaordguru No dumbass. Fine call it "draw down".... if it makes you feel like Obama is just a little bit better than Bush because he shifted around troops in the middle east, then yes I guess he is a lot different from Bush..... SAME FOREIGN POLICY!!!, moron!
@maradona2 You actually fail for a third time. Bush refused to work with the U.N. towards a resolution (Iraq was not approved by the U.N. while Afghanistan was). Obama seeks to not alienate the entire Intl. community by working with the U.N. as opposed to going at the situation unilaterally. This has massive ramifications for foreign policy, but of course, you're the genius right?
@mamum1 Do you vote based on race? No? Then why would you expect Oprah to? Oh of coooourse, because she's black. That explains everything! Great point, compelling and rich.
@OneLinerLarry - Every Democrats since JFK has gotten 75-95% of the black vote. It has little to do with race for most black voters since most would still have voted for Obama even if he had been a white man named "Barry O'Malley".
If you want to talk about statistics why has no black candidate before Obama ever gotten most than 1% of the white vote?
she has played her part in getting the first black man elected president. now she is NOT going to associate herself with a man who said one thing and does the other. he is mud to her now and she will endorse ron paul because she has similar beliefs about people owning their own liberties, freedoms, etc...
ilindah 1 day ago
Well she's not supporting those republican candidates and I don't blame her.
TheCaliCapitalist 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Anyone here, hear of Ron Paul ? If you don't know who to vote for by now do our children a favor and don't vote.
GovernMentalFreedom 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WE NEED TO OPEN OUR EYES TO AGENDA 21 AGAIN.
IT IS THE UNITED NATIONS THAT IS IMPLEMENTING THIS ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT OLIGARCHY. THEY WILL STRIP ALL SOVEREIGNTY AND FORCE US INTO SLAVERY AND ASSASSINATE ALL THOSE THAT WON'T COMPLY. THE U.N. IS PAYING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO STRIP AND ENSLAVE ALL AMERICANS!
~
RESIST FOR OUR CHILDREN'S SAKE! START PROTESTING UN MASS NOW! BEFORE IT IS TO LATE~!~
~
Agenda 21 For Dummies
/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM
FrancineStar 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Accept my video response thank you.
~
OBAMA: THE EXECUTION OF AMERICA
/watch?v=0W0Llj-rbPc
~
FrancineStar 1 month ago
omg i watched a video where she declares she is going to vote 4 obama 2012 and... and saying stuff like he is the man for it!!! what???????
Is she blind??? what about the wars? he didnt stop the wars, he didnt STOP the wars he created new ones??? how can she endorse him??? can she be so ignorant?? my opinion on her being a moral vertical just gut slammed...
prskaloo1 1 month ago
2008 "HE IS THE ONE!" - Oprah.
2012 "That 2008 thing was puppy love. Maybe he's not the one I thought he was." -Oprah
FOR THE LOVE OF FREEDOM, DON'T VOTE FOR OBAMA 2012 !
jasswildabeast 1 month ago 2
i would like to see obama and his family meet the same fate as mussolini!
SonsOfLiberty65 1 month ago
She will support Obama because he is black like she is.
LameBrainMcCain 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Your PIMP's are SELECTED not elected no one is electable. GERMANY worked with HITLER why not America?
Obamawarmongers 2 months ago
Sure the racist Oprah will support Obama. Even with this fact:
Under Obama the African-American unemployment rate stands at an outrageous 16.2 percent—not a number the Obama White House wants under the mantle of the nation’s first black president. Black teenagers have a devastating unemployment level of 41 percent. -cbsnews
chuck9788 4 months ago
My guess is she will support Obama for the same reasons she supported him a few years ago. Of course the obedient sheep followers of Oprah will lap up everything which comes out of her precious lips.
cheeriosinabowl 5 months ago
Are you miserable yet? Lose your house yet? Still think that oprah should pick our president? Are you still gonna follow this dumb broad's advice on how to vote like you did last time? Face the facts! Doperah doesn't care about you. She will never care about you. Tell her to talk to her people and get them to quit beating on people and stealing while running with flash mobs. See how far you get.
bendoverhereitcomes1 6 months ago
@bendoverhereitcomes1
... Doperah ???
Loved that word! LOL.
cheeriosinabowl 5 months ago
Oprah's show is not just on diets...and she's not a "broad" but an intelligent woman.
These two are very sad people....
Osayannx 6 months ago
Support our troops STOP OBAMA
GovernMentalFreedom 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL IS GOING TO BE PROSECUTED BY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! ITS UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO CALL AMERICAN PEOPLE INVADERS AND INITIATORS OF WARS.
RON PAUL SAID THE USA INVADES COUNTRIES AND STARTS WARS, WHICH GIVES USA A BAD REPUTATION AROUND THE WORLD , THEREFORE IT IS CONSIDERED A CRIME . A US CITIZEN WHO,
WAS BORN IN USA CANT GO AGAINST GOVERNMENT POLICIES WHICH MIGHT THREATEN THE FUTURE OF THE COUNTRY'S SECURITY .
RON PAUL WILL BE PROSECUTED BY US GOVERNMENT!
democratsaresmart 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
YouTube - 135 people accept Islam after Br. Yusuf Estes Lecture! 1/3
MRafh979 7 months ago
Congressman Ron Paul has continued to run his Congressional office in a frugal manner, and was able to return more than $100,000 from his allotted office budget to the Treasury this year, an increase over the $90,000 returned last year.
Ron Paul 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Put a true statesman in office.
Slatrelle 8 months ago 3
Watch YouTube video: ...Crime Inc. Obama, Joel Rogers & Van Jones in Collusion, Knowledge Of The Lie
memama2 10 months ago
Watch YouTube video: .....Church Of Oprah #3
memama2 10 months ago
Oprah is on the side of reverse racists & lying self christ godless gurus. Obama fits right in
memama2 10 months ago
now thats funny.
hint0122 10 months ago
@MsIhatespics
obvious troll is obvious....
Gabrielregalado2 10 months ago
Umm she shouldn't support Obama in 2012 because his policies are approximately those of Bush. Though I'd still vote for him to keep the Republican out of office.
PurpleHoneyBear 10 months ago
@PurpleHoneyBear the lesser of two evils is still evil.
Houshalter 10 months ago
@Houshalter That's correct. Unfortunately the two party monopoly long ago colluded to shut third party candidates out of the debates. Beyond that, outcomes in US elections are in large part determined by campaign spending. Libertarian or Green candidates can do good by injecting real issues into the debate, but ultimately there's no way to change things until the society itself changes. Until that time, Democrats are a better choice than Republicans imo.
PurpleHoneyBear 10 months ago
@PurpleHoneyBear As a note to my previous point about injecting real issues into the debate: Even pitching ideas into the mainstream is difficult because of little to no media coverage and, again, no access to the debates. I'd say the Libertarian and Green parties (to name a couple) are practically irrelevant in US politics for these reasons (among others).
But I understand that feeling. I just think that the socio-political climate has to change before any viable alternatives can compete.
PurpleHoneyBear 10 months ago
@PurpleHoneyBear this is why I'm against democracy. It becomes a religion, issues get polarized, and anyone outside "mainstream" is ostracized or ignored. Eventually the system fails in some way, and then it's used as justification to take it even farther.
Houshalter 10 months ago
@Houshalter But are you against resolving issues by discussion, as well as recording those conclusions for everyone else to examine? Are you against ANY kind of process of coming to agreement?
Or do you believe nobody should ever listen to anybody about anything?
TheNavigateur 10 months ago
@TheNavigateur majority vote with the rights of everyone else taken away != "resolving issues by discussion".
Houshalter 10 months ago
@Houshalter You are right. "majority vote with the rights of everyone else taken away" is not "resolving issues by discussion". But then do you agree with me that we should have a system that formally resolves issues by discussion as a requirement, and does NOT allow "majority vote with the rights everyone else taken away"? BOTH are forms of democracy.
Or do you believe in "minority power with the rights of everyone else taken away", which is the TRUE antithesis of democracy, and the default?
TheNavigateur 10 months ago
@TheNavigateur that's a false dichotomy. It's not either mob rule or rule by tyrrants. There is a middle ground.
Houshalter 10 months ago
@Houshalter You want middle ground between mob rule and rule by tyrants? Let me propose a different way, as before. Discussion-resolution-based rule. It goes tyrant rule->mob rule->discussion-resolution-based rule in that order of quality. i.e. Minority->majority->widest possible majority->everybody. Unfortunately, you HAVE to choose something along that spectrum.
The best system is LAWS made OR repealed by an exhaustive DISCUSSION between a representative cross section of public opinion.
TheNavigateur 10 months ago
@TheNavigateur You do not have a right to my property no matter how much you discuss it. Good bye.
Houshalter 10 months ago
You do realise that the reality YOU want can only become real by discussion, right? Yet you want NO system to make this possible. How ignorant does that make you? That is ignorance MULTIPLIED by ignorance.
The notion of "property rights" itself was borne out of discussion and the proof is that tyrants have enslaved for self-interest. If "property rights" were obvious WITHOUT ANY REASONING, slavery would've never existed.
You see discussion as beneath you, but in reality you are beneath it.
TheNavigateur 10 months ago
@TheNavigateur If someone comes to my house and tries to kill me or take my stuff, I don't need to discuss it or bring it to a democratic vote, I just shoot them, or presumably the next best thing.
Houshalter 10 months ago
@Houshalter Good luck with shooting the IRS jackass.
TheNavigateur 10 months ago
@Houshalter Oh and if the IRS ceases to exist, good luck shooting your local mafia that will take your property anyway.
TheNavigateur 10 months ago
@TheNavigateur I'll agree with your IRS statement, though doubt this guy meant legally taking things, but the Mafia? Some of us have the training, former military, and equipment, current security officer and avid hunter, to send any Mafia force short of a small army running.
These aren't the Mafia of the 1940s, the modern day "mob" focuses mostly on tech crimes and can't handle a field job if their life depended on it, as for "gangs", those kids aren't sober enough to hit a fat man a foot away
lgvereor 10 months ago 6
@lgvereor And what of the poor old man who cannot combat potential thugs? Fuck him right? Every nation has a fundamental choice: universal guaranteed rights or ZERO rights. You can't have it both ways.
TheNavigateur 10 months ago
@TheNavigateur yes, because if we didn't have people with guns taking everything we own, they would be replaced with...
...people with guns taking everything we own. Do you realise how stupid you sound when you make these comments?
Houshalter 9 months ago
@Houshalter How is your ideal world achievable? Give me the steps needed to make it possible. You simply want to dismantal law enforcement as it currently is,
then mafias WILL prevail over non-mafias, AND become wealthier.
So what are the steps that you propose that will prevent this?
Or do you have any?
TheNavigateur 9 months ago
@TheNavigateur make government voluntary.
Houshalter 9 months ago
@Houshalter You would prevent mafias by making government voluntary?
Is that guaranteed to work?
If not, what would you do if it doesn't work?
If yes it is guaranteed to work, what is the logic as to how it is guaranteed to work?
TheNavigateur 9 months ago
@TheNavigateur Yes it is guaranteed to work because, if government magically protects us from "the mafia" like you claim, people that want that protection will stay, and people that don't or think otherwise won't. You might as well say that making grocery stores voluntary and letting people buy their own food would lead to starvation!
Houshalter 9 months ago
@Houshalter So let me see, hiring a government that protects everybody, or hiring a mafia that protects only you AND makes you extra money by extortion and robbery. Who do you think will prevail?
Good people will hire a government. Self-interested people will hire self-interested mafias. Given that government is voluntary, who do you think would make more PROFIT, and thus GROW quicker? That's right, the purely-self-serving robbers, extortionists and violent enslavers. Dream shattered. Wake up.
TheNavigateur 9 months ago
@TheNavigateur If they want to risk it, why not? Shouldn't it be their choice? If a government really does offer such stability, why wouldn't it be in everyone's self interest to choose them? Also, how are these gangs going to be profitable at all, even without a gov.? More people will be on the opposite side, defending themselves, just like it is now.
Houshalter 9 months ago
@Houshalter By your logic, you're happy with the current system, because the government IS the gang, and it seems to be prevailing. But also, you'd be happy with ANY system, the Nazi regime, the Somalian sub-systems, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and every system throughout history, because they're all "gangs" that are simply prevailing and aren't defeated.
Your "Shouldn't it be their choice?" comment proves this. That's because "making government voluntary" does NOT stop tyrannical ones forming.
TheNavigateur 9 months ago
@TheNavigateur That same argument better applies to your position, since you are the one supporting a monopoly "gang" being in control and whatever they do being justified on the apparent grounds that if they didn't, someone else would anyways (gee, like every criminal ever hasn't used that excuse.) Anyways, states don't just exist by default, they require the universal operational support. About 90% of the population, usually more, supports them or is indifferent. I question that...
Houshalter 9 months ago
...support and I get bitched at for being "happy with ANY system". It makes no sense whatsoever.
If a tyrranical government had support of the people or existing infrastructure to take over, yes, it could form, but rarely is it ever going to have any advantage over any other faction, esspecially ones that are more popular, at least without outside intervention.
Houshalter 9 months ago
@Houshalter Nope, I don't support just ANY government, I support a VERY SPECIFIC political system and a VERY SPECIFIC methodology for being able to change it. So it's not "whatever they do" AT ALL.
You on the other hand, offer a methodology that would GUARANTEE ONLY arbitrary governments, but only because you want no government. An ideal world has no government, or even laws, but we live in the real world where injustice happens at the drop of a hat, and you know this.
TheNavigateur 9 months ago
@TheNavigateur States do not form because of natural economic laws like you assert, they form in contradiction to them. It has to have an existing power structure and the support of the vast majority of the population to get past that, and if they don't have either, let alone both, then they can't exist at all.
Houshalter 9 months ago
@Houshalter Every person is a state unto themself. Every family is a state unto itself.
Are you telling me that Josef Fritzel wasn't an oppressor?
Thus, when I say "arbitrary governments", I mean anything from large to micro level. "Making government voluntary" won't prevent these, including EXTREME ones, from forming, at all. Thus arbitrary governments.
TheNavigateur 9 months ago
@TheNavigateur I never said it would prevent anything, it will simply give people a choice.
Houshalter 9 months ago
@Houshalter People wouldn't have a choice who they are oppressed by. It'd simply be arbitrary.
That's because the link between actual demand and outcome would be broken. The wealthiest would simply be those who could enslave and extort the most, thus giving them even more power. It's a vicious cycle, seen throughout history. The link between actual demand and outcome can only occur when laws against slavery and extortion for personal benefit, fraud, etc., exist by enough power to stop it.
TheNavigateur 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Our leaders are not leading. They need to put their feet in the shoes of working Americans…. Instead, all they think about is re-election and implementing United Nations Agenda 21 and ICELI. If you don't know what UN Agenda 21 and ICELI are, then LEARN before you vote! It's why Obama did nothing to help US people--Obama wants WORLD redistribution of wealth.
vechorik 6 months ago
Statesman Ron Paul is one of the few leading men in the Nation who can lead the U.S. on the Wise & Prudent Path to American Strength.
Jenawahrheit 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You Americunt fuckers,too bad that your goverment didnt shutdown.but your shitty gov is gonna cut the cost.Too bad you cant receive benefits anymore.Hey,why dont you borrow more money from China?The more money you borrow from us,how faster you be our slaves.And fuck you Japan
USAsucks2hard 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
death to America.Americunts are uneducated,poorr,homeless and jobless,Americunt men are Child-Molesters and women are cheap 2nd hand whores.Americunts need some faggety attention
USAsucks2hard 10 months ago
I heard Glenn Beck was getting a show much like Oprah's. How funny would that be.
CHAOSoriginal 10 months ago
Don't care what people do with their private life. But the minute she supports Obama on her show... well then it becomes somewhat of one side biased issue.
Naturally, she lost supporters. She should just stick to her show and do what she does best; people weren't tuning in for 20 years because of her politics. Were they? Shit. I've never seen her show. LOL.
Just don't become a propaganda machine, is what I say.
DameunPutazo 10 months ago
I had no problems with her supporting Obama. She is an example of Racial/Sexist roadblocks being destroyed, and she saw the same potential growth in Obama.
Personally I don't care if she supports him or not. He is just a person and so is she. If Obama were to declare that Oprah was the most important person on the planet, how would that change what I think of her?
:P
Joxman2k 10 months ago
It's best just to be phoney & not say anything you really think because of what others might think. Say agreeable stuff all the time I say. Ana, did I just sum up your thinking or what?
MirraSyren 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
TIME IS OVER.IT WOULD START 1994,NOSTRADAMUS SAID BET.7 AND 20 YRS.1994 PLUS 7,SEPT.2001, NEW YORK’S TWIN TOWER.THE KING OF TERROR WOULD ENTER EUROPE.OSAMA WAS GIVEN CITIZENSHIP IN BOSNIA,SOUTHERN EUROPE IN 1993..NEWS TODAY:MID.EAST UPRISING,AL QAEDA IN LIBYA..FAMINE,PESTILENCE,EARTH¬QUAKES EVERYWHERE.TO NON BELIEVERS REPENT SAVE YOUR SOULS AND PRAY FOR OTHERS.JESUS IS COMING,RAPTURE IS COMING!LISTEN TO PROPHET OWUOR WHO MADE THE RAIN FALL.type in dr owuor rain AND PAUL BEGLEY IN YOUTUBE.
manforever15 10 months ago
I like Ben...but for the love of God can you stop mumbling 3/4 of your speech?
Kamikaze34 10 months ago
Oprah has the Midas touch -- or does she? Hmm...
necropolis71 10 months ago
you people don't speak for Oprah, you are simply using her name to get hits on your foolish opinions. Pathetic douchebag turks
MauiNion 10 months ago
@MauiNion They have roughly 430 million views. This is ONE video out of THOUSANDS. Get a fuckin' clue.
VictimOfBoredom 10 months ago
Forget her ratings.
How about Oprah doesn't support Obama because he's a fucking fraud?
johnnycanuck2 10 months ago
@eu000000000 fuzzy math
BrattyMaddy 10 months ago
fuck her and fuck comrade obama
100crawma 10 months ago
Who cares about the negro woman spewing her oprahganda
TreyLutrash 10 months ago
lol if Oprah supports Obama its because the only thing they have in common is they are both black...thats sad but very true...America has been racially divided ever since the Civil Rights so blacks will support blacks in general...not true in all cases but generally its true
123trymeout 10 months ago
@:20 is it just me or is it true that every time there is a pic of Obama smiling he always has that "FUCK YEAH LIFE IS GOOD" smile?
UncontestedTruth 10 months ago
Oprah won't stand by her convictions for fear of ratings dropping? Oh how the mighty have fallen! How many billions is enough honey?
dovespin1 10 months ago
Oprah will Support Obama because shes a fucking globalist
narutocaprirequest2 10 months ago
@narutocaprirequest2 Being a globalist is a good thing.
CynthiaSwallows 10 months ago
@CynthiaSwallows
what planet are you from, if i may ask ?
narutocaprirequest2 10 months ago
Find anti-OBAMA T-Shirts & Gear @ controversyandchaosDOTcom
controversyandchaos 10 months ago
I'm a guy, and the O network is fucking awesome!
Hellogoodbye90gm 10 months ago
to me, watching Oprah or Ellen, is like watching a Jason Statham movie [The Transporter, Crank, etc]. It just doesn't make sense to me.
charms71 10 months ago
Who really gives a crap which way Oprah will vote. How is this story news worthy?
spentfromnz 10 months ago
Funny how all the "Hope Change" supporters are no longer bragging with fury of their Messiah any longer. What happened guys?
AiresQX4 10 months ago
@AiresQX4 Who in the world thought of Obama as a messiah? I voted for Obama and I'm disappointed, but never did I think of him as a messah. That's crazy talk.
quidproquo2004 10 months ago
@quidproquo2004 Maybe you don't consider him a Messiah but many of his die hard supporters do. I am however willing to bet you defended him vigorously from those who knew he was just another puppet and wasn't going to "Change" anything at least not for the good.
AiresQX4 10 months ago
@AiresQX4 No one considers him to be a Messiah, except for right-wingers.
VictimOfBoredom 10 months ago
@VictimOfBoredom What's wrong? Did I hit a nerve?
AiresQX4 10 months ago
@AiresQX4 Yes, my BS-sensory nerve.
VictimOfBoredom 10 months ago
@VictimOfBoredom Maybe it was the feeling of complete embarrassment how you chanted "Change" "Hope" "Yes we can" to everyone you know. Or going door to door preaching the gospel of "Change we can believe in" Don't get down on yourself I would feel like a complete ass too.. Hey maybe next time you shouldn't listen to the Mainstream media as they try to convince you the next candidate they catapult into the Presidency isn't really working for the people. I doubt you'll learn though.
AiresQX4 10 months ago
@AiresQX4 I hated the slogans and wanted to smack Obama supporters who uttered them.
VictimOfBoredom 10 months ago
@GJNCA "Actually Obama enjoys a pretty good approval rating .."
Where's the survey?
allgoo19 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@allgoo19 "Actually Obama enjoys a pretty good approval rating .."
No reply?
If I told you that W. Bush had the highest approval rating among all the presidents, do you believe me?
allgoo19 10 months ago
Hey TYT we hate that guy.Where's Cenk anyway?Just don't put this ass in the future next time.
olie171 10 months ago
I can hardly imagine anybody will endorse Obama in 2012.
Conservatives don't like him because of what he is.
Majority of population don't like him because of what he does.
allgoo19 10 months ago
WTF? that guys not turkish. I came here to see young beautiful turkish people talk about oprah and instead theres that dude?
icef1sh 10 months ago
Okay, let's get this straight. Oprah isn't a great broadcaster. The only people who like her are middle-aged women in their 40s. That's it.
CupboardNinja 10 months ago
Maybe I should have not voted for President Obama simply because Oprah supported him. The crazy shit she promotes sometimes is questionable.
JJPHILLYLG 10 months ago
Team Chicago rub elbows with each other. Of course she will.
ccricers 10 months ago
Obama is no better than Bush as Obama has completely failed in carrying out his promises I really dont see why he is worth it. It seems that Ralph Nader would be a better choice.
yourcamden 10 months ago
@yourcamden
Ralph Nader is not a good choice either.
vote libertarian or constitution party.
jmjfanss 10 months ago
@jmjfanss Meh, Beck says he's a libertarian. Voting for a "party" is never a good idea. I listen to what they are saying and pick whose pile of bullshit smells the best. Ron Paul ftw
DoctorCataclysm 10 months ago
@DoctorCataclysm
Got that right.
jmjfanss 10 months ago
Very disappointing comment section. Getting too old for this shit.
andid 10 months ago
did he say "really smart broad"? fucking sexist fuck
yourmajezty 10 months ago
@yourmajezty haha yeah I heard that too. He caught himself for a sec, but a bit too late
justin48228 10 months ago
@yourmajezty
Lol yeah that was awesome.
BigBaldAndBadass 10 months ago
@BigBaldAndBadass hahahaha. yeah. he said "really smart broad" @ 54 seconds. he says it fast. sexist. lol
yourmajezty 10 months ago 6
@yourmajezty You have to remember that he's broadcasting to a broad audience of broads!
deeppurple28 5 months ago 2
@yourmajezty I would have preferred if he called Oprah a sea cow. What moron would support a candidate that supported the Patriot Act.
professorfoxtrot 1 month ago
@MsIhatespics The last time I checked I wasn't michelle obama. Not really a decent question, I was say it was actually a red herring fallacy :). I guess it wouldn't be racial for a klansman/woman/creature like yourself to climb out from under your rock to spew your racial prejudices.
faeryfirefly 10 months ago
Oprah lost ratting because she didn't back Hillary, not because she backed Obama
rollofnickles 10 months ago 2
@rollofnickles GOD DAMN lesbos
Tsugua21 10 months ago
@Tsugua21 idiot
rollofnickles 10 months ago
lol @ Oprah is a smart business woman. C'mon... she ran a show and it was a hit. YOU REALLY think she is the one investing her own money? When you get that rich people you HIRE invest your money. Shes a show-woman not a businesswoman.
Akhotnik 10 months ago
@MsIhatespics why spread your racial hate?
faeryfirefly 10 months ago
Well unless she denounces Obama publicly she'll never get back that goofy conservative crowd she lost. I guess for Oprah it is "all about the money." Another African American role model exposed as a fraud.
TheUSMetalhead 10 months ago
If Oprah gets any fatter we can start calling her "Orca" again...
SirWinstoneChurchill 10 months ago
or just throw Obama under the bus Oprah! after all, thats what he has done to the left.
KangaKucha 10 months ago
2:15 It's not smart. It's greedy and selfish.
The money, oh the money...
playgrrrr 10 months ago
Obama has not delivered even one quarter of what he's promised in his progressive promises in his campaign. Whatever the reason it is, Oprah made a good choice not backing Obama, seriously.
SinisterSkip 10 months ago
shes NOT a great broadcaster fuck her shes a puppet
23Saladin 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Who gives a shit?
shes an overweight racist bitch who hates cripples.
evilmamaluigi 10 months ago 19
@evilmamaluigi ...and African Americans. Isn't that the definition of irony? SHE IS RACIST AGAINST AFRICAN AMERICANS! What. The. Fuck.
RaybornButtercups 10 months ago
@evilmamaluigi
I didn't know Oprah hated cripples! what a bitch!
AmandaPizza 10 months ago
@evilmamaluigi and youre not racist? with a racist mommy and daddy?
yourmajezty 10 months ago
@yourmajezty Excuse me?
evilmamaluigi 10 months ago
@evilmamaluigi how is she racist?
Pull0utBoy 10 months ago
@evilmamaluigi
Oprah is racist? based on what? All the gifts she gives to white people? LOL
Shaggice 10 months ago
@evilmamaluigi cripples?
TheFunkyDomination 10 months ago
I think that she will support Obama. As for her loss in ratings, people kind of knew what to expect from her show. When Ellen began her show, it was hip, cool and something different. Oprah will always be the Queen of Talk but she couldn't stay on top forever. You can't really blame her endorsement of Obama for her slip in the ratings solely on that.
EmeraldOodie 10 months ago
Hurry up and do a story on Trump going bankrupt thousands of times always paying the bondholders but firing employees and never paying small businesses.
PostBush 10 months ago
obama is a disaster. god help us for the second term when he won't be worrying about getting re-elected.
thegreenseven 10 months ago
oh give her some time and she will come out in support Obama. She is just backing off because her base is not interested
MTVVH1sucks 10 months ago
she cried when he won the presidency because it saved her money, pun intended...
Minan3 10 months ago
George Allan should ask her what position she plays.
BumfuzzledZeb 10 months ago
Who the fuck will support this piece of shit? HE IS WORSE THAN BUSH!!!!!
maradona2 10 months ago
@maradona2 are you serious. you know, just because you support the other party it doesn't mean logic and reason should be thrown out of the window just to prove a point.
rza1m 10 months ago
@rza1m ...He isn't worse than Bush?? Ok let's see.... he didn't close Guantanamo, authorized THE KILLINGS OF AMERICANS!!!, HE IS FUCKING UP THE ECONOMY EVEN MORE, HE CONTINUED BUSH'S WAR.... THE ONLY THING HE DID DIFFERENT IS TO SOCIALIZED HEALTHCARE... WHICH HAS FUCKED US UP EVEN MORE BECAUSE EVERYONES' PREMIUM HAS GONE UP. YOU STILL THINK OBAMA ISN'T WORSE THAN BUSH?? WAKE THE FUCK UP SUNSHINE, BOTH DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN FUCKING US UP.
maradona2 10 months ago
@maradona2 can you tell this to my racist dad, he tries to hide it but he still talks about skin color. and talking on youtube is talking to strangers, overly protective. He supports obama, and I don't support anything for the governement as we lead ourselves to oblivion by following this governement...
Minan3 10 months ago
@maradona2 he didnt close Guantanamo? he didn't open it.... what Americans killings has he authorized? He did not fuck up the economy, it was handed to him fucked up. It was obvious when there was 8 years of economic downturn an noone said anything. Premiums going up has nothing to do with Obama and everything to do with the insurance companies. repubs and democrats are both ruining the economy but lets not forget who put the economy in the toilet first, ok sunshine.
rza1m 10 months ago
@rza1m See this is the problem with you Dems and Rep, you're saying "Well your party is worse than mine" Didn't he say he was going to close Guantanamo?? Wasn't that the"CHANGE"? He didn't start the economy collapse... BUT HE WORSENED IT!!!!!! AND YES RON PAUL WAS TALKING ABOUT THE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE SINCE 1978!!!! BUT SPECIALLY IN THE EARLY 2000's. AND EVEN THE YOUNGTURKS DID A WHOLE SECTMENT ON OBAMA AUTHORIZING THE ASSASINATION OF AMERICANS!!! HOW OLD ARE YOU?? 12?
maradona2 10 months ago
@maradona2 im not a dem or a rep. i dont say any party is better im just a realist. it seems people don't look at actual fact, what the problem is and how to fix it, rather who to blame for things that go wrong. 'people like you turn politics into blame games. link to obama assassination video?
rza1m 10 months ago
@maradona2 BTW the 1978 recession was almost 30 years ago. it has nothing to do with this recession. check your facts boi
rza1m 10 months ago
@maradona2
engage in hyperbole much?
Saucypants1000 10 months ago
@maradona2 Is today Opposite day?
snowbaordguru 10 months ago
@snowbaordguru Lol it's people like you who put their party in front of ideology.... STOP DEFENDING THIS PUPPET!!!! NAME ON THING, BESIDES HEALTHCARE REFORM, THAT HE HAS DONE DIFFERENTLY FROM BUSH. HE IS JUST AS OR EVEN WORSE THAN BUSH!!!
maradona2 10 months ago
@maradona2 1.) Foreign policy. 2.) Started draw down of Iraq war. 3.)Pushed for a an international policy of nuclear non proliferation. 4.) Actually started reducing our nuclear arsenal, which was mirrored by Russia.
Should I continue?
P.S. Do you see how easy it is to convey a message without using all capital letters?
snowbaordguru 10 months ago
@snowbaordguru Lol Foreign policy??????? Once again, how old are you kid? And no what he did is just shift troops around, more troops in Afghanistan. And now we are fighting Libya??? THAT'S THE SAME FUCKING FOREIGN POLICY. Reply once you stop sucking Obama's dick and realize he is just as bad of a president as Bush was.
maradona2 10 months ago
@maradona2 I'm 28, what difference does that make? You call me a kid, yet the context clues in your grammar elude to you not having made it out of 8th grade, educate yourself, then try to debate people.
Right, less troops in Iraq is a draw down, moron. Take a course in Intl Poly Sci if you want to understand grown folks business. Until then you look like an idiot.
snowbaordguru 10 months ago
@snowbaordguru No dumbass. Fine call it "draw down".... if it makes you feel like Obama is just a little bit better than Bush because he shifted around troops in the middle east, then yes I guess he is a lot different from Bush..... SAME FOREIGN POLICY!!!, moron!
maradona2 10 months ago
@maradona2 You actually fail for a third time. Bush refused to work with the U.N. towards a resolution (Iraq was not approved by the U.N. while Afghanistan was). Obama seeks to not alienate the entire Intl. community by working with the U.N. as opposed to going at the situation unilaterally. This has massive ramifications for foreign policy, but of course, you're the genius right?
snowbaordguru 10 months ago
wrong. the gulf war ended with a treaty that said if iraq did not comply with the agreement, that a war was allowed.
hint0122 10 months ago
@snowbaordguru
*allude
mistacramer 10 months ago
Just wondering what Obama's campaign promise is going to be? "I will finally grow a pair?"
rybpo7 10 months ago
@ninetysevenecho shut the fuck up
gzarza 10 months ago
Why would any black person ever vote for any republican? Makes no sense.
(tbh I don't undestand why any white person would vote for a republican either)
Koba82 10 months ago
Yes, only because he's black.
DerrenBrown100 10 months ago
@DerrenBrown100 Shut the fuck up
gzarza 10 months ago
I'm praying Aliens come and blow the human race up in 2012
tonkaaaaa 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Will Oprah Support Obama in 2012?
oOfcaurse. She is black
mamum1 10 months ago 10
@mamum1 Do you vote based on race? No? Then why would you expect Oprah to? Oh of coooourse, because she's black. That explains everything! Great point, compelling and rich.
WigglyMalmsteam 10 months ago
@WigglyMalmsteam Read the comment below yours. Although the statistic I've seen floating about is between 94-96%.
OneLinerLarry 10 months ago 3
@OneLinerLarry - Every Democrats since JFK has gotten 75-95% of the black vote. It has little to do with race for most black voters since most would still have voted for Obama even if he had been a white man named "Barry O'Malley".
If you want to talk about statistics why has no black candidate before Obama ever gotten most than 1% of the white vote?
A86 10 months ago
Comment removed
KaiLuck 10 months ago
@mamum1 Doesn't mean she has to support him. She could just not support anyone because the American political system is broken.
Zefurion1988 10 months ago
@mamum1 So says a stupid fuck and the stupid fucks that gave your comment thumbs up you are the word moron defined.
harr77 10 months ago