Digg

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Obama Referred To Jews As “Kikes” and Blacks as the N-Bomb

anobamanation.net — Before everyone gets upset, remember these are Obama's words-not ours! Excerpt from "Dreams of My Father"as printed in The New Yorker.

Bury

obamanation 110 days ago

58 diggs
digg it

127 Comments
Who Dugg It?
Blog It
Email It

Cheezo, on 06/23/2008, -25/+29what wonderful hope and change...
- ssn697, on 06/24/2008, -4/+9You didn't even read the article, or the book, or understand the racial tension of the time, in the area, right?
  
  Just thought you would say something? There is no hope of you changing...
  - OwdenBowden, on 06/24/2008, -2/+4This is one Kike that is not voting for Obama!
jbdobd, on 06/23/2008, -28/+12baracknophobia lives!
iching, on 06/23/2008, -27/+25Taken out of context.
- psiege, on 06/24/2008, -13/+10Only an idiot Obamabot can take those two hideous words in any form and talk about context.
  - swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -8/+12This comment is emblematic of the right-wing extremists that are destroying America. What Psiege spells out, clear as day, is that the reality of what was actually said is irrelevant... only the individual words matter, if they can be used in a political attack, not the MEANING of those words. "Meaning," "reading comprehension," what liberal, elitist ideas those are.
  - samthurston, on 06/24/2008, -4/+14So if someone were to say something like:
    
    "people were calling each other ***** and kikes"
    
    Then that would be hideous? Because that's what the passage says, if you actually can read and understand what you read beyond a 4th grade level.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -6/+3Ah, well supposedly a person with a good education wrote it, so if that is what was intended from the writing, he sure screwed up the rules of English.
- kooft, on 06/24/2008, -3/+14"Taken out of context."
  
  Indeed, and heavily cherry-picked. I'm not sure why the entire paragraph wasn't reprinted:
  
  "America's race and class problems are intertwined, whether because of New York's density or because of its scale, it was only [there] that I began to grasp the almost mathematical precision with which America's race and class problems joined; the bile that flowed freely not just out on the streets but in the stalls of Columbia's bathrooms as well, where, no matter how many times the administration tried to paint them over, the walls remained scratched with blunt correspondence between ***** and kikes."
  
  Source: Dreams from My Father, by Barack Obama, p.254 Aug 1, 1996
  
  So, he was dramatically emphasizing NY's racial problems by referring to the participants with the same labels that they used to refer to each other. This stands in stark contrast to the other presidential candidate who uttered the following nugget of enlightening wisdom:
  
  "I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live." -- John McCain
- vault, on 06/24/2008, -0/+6I would never vote for Obama, but this is silly and cheapens the impact of both slurs.
  
  He was talking about slurs he heard on the street and bigoted graffiti in the bathrooms at school. He wasn't actually calling either group of people by either term.
  
  I won't even get into how absurd the idea that Barack Obama hates black people is. First he's not black enough, then he's a black supremacist, and now he hates black people?
LinkGCN4, on 06/23/2008, -27/+22Barack Obama. What a ***** joke.
- KJeffV, on 06/24/2008, -6/+6I dig where you're comin' from, but there's nuttin' funny about him.
psiege, on 06/24/2008, -23/+25I couldn't have said it better myself. Hope and change for whom? Obama's a *****, and so are the sheep that so blindly follow him.
- samthurston, on 06/24/2008, -10/+3Lesser of three evils man.
  - KJeffV, on 06/24/2008, -3/+5"least"
radiofrequency, on 06/24/2008, -4/+13And here's the original new yorker article: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/05/31/040531 ...
tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -13/+17Here's the "context":

"He went to Columbia University, and liked New York, but he found the city’s racial tension inescapable. It “flowed freely,” he wrote in his memoir—“not just out on the streets but in the stalls of Columbia’s bathrooms as well, where, no matter how many times the administration tried to paint them over, the walls remained scratched with blunt correspondence between ***** and kikes. It was as if all middle ground had collapsed.”

Yeah, context really helped him. /sarchasm
- swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -8/+14So the context is that he was caricaturing bathroom graffitti to make a point about racial division? Yeah, that's real ***** offensive /sarchasm [sic]
  - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -6/+8Don Imus got fired for less.
    - samthurston, on 06/24/2008, -5/+7Imus got fired for slurring a small group of hard-working academic athletes, who had just won a major tournament. These two events don't even register in the same zip code. Context really does escape you, doesn't it?
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -5/+4Yeah, I'm sure the hard work of the students at the prestigious Columbia University would probably differ on that opinion.
    - kooft, on 06/24/2008, -3/+3tkstock, Obama was recalling that the two groups (or tribes as he called them), Jews and Blacks, were referring to each other as 'kikes' and '*****' in graffiti in the bathroom stalls at Columbia. He only referred to them in the same manner that they referred to themselves.
      
      I expect you'll fully support McCain being tossed out of the presidential race for saying:
      
      "I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live." -- John McCain
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -3/+5Did I ever say they should toss him out of the race?
      
      So, you're implying that Obama was referencing what was written on the wall rather than who was writing it? So why didn't he say that instead of "...the walls remained scratched with blunt correspondence between ***** and kikes."
      
      He's well-educated, he should know the rules of English. If you're referencing someone else's written word, you put quotes around it. He didn't. Ergo, he was referencing the people, not the words they wrote.
      
      If he was referencing the writing, he would've said something like
      
      ...the walls remains scratched with blunt correspondence between "*****" and "kikes".
      
      Or if he wants to reference the people, he could say blacks and Jews.
      
      The fact is he had plenty of time to think about it (it was a book, after all) and he still made the wrong choice. Another example of his fine judgment.
    - swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -3/+3So now you're an English Lit proffessor, tkstock? What a ***** joke. I originally thought you were just putting on a show of manufactured outrage to score political points, but the fact that you are actually trying to argue it reveals that you might just be stupid enough to believe what you are typing.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -1/+4An English Lit professor? What does being a professor of English Literature have to do with this discussion?
      
      I can't say that what I feel towards it approaches any level of outrage, I'm just merely surprised.
      
      But, the surprises are getting less and less surprising.
  - samthurston, on 06/24/2008, -3/+5Careful now, use small words or they'll think you're a terr'ist
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -6/+4Or your friends might not understand you.
ericjohnson0, on 06/24/2008, -15/+12It was for shock value. Somehow I don't find it very 'presidential.'
mrpetey, on 06/24/2008, -18/+16Not that surprising as it is B. Hussein O. that keeps on tossing the race card out there. I haven't heard anyone on the Right say much about race - but this bubble head has a lot to say about it and try and blame it on the other side.

The "Obamanation" is nothing more then citizens I would call lemmings.
- samthurston, on 06/24/2008, -4/+14I don't suppose that emphasizing his middle name is racially motivated in any way. That would just be too islamic... err i mean ironic for me to handle.
  
  I bet you wrote that B. Hussein O. line all on your own and weren't just BLINDLY FOLLOWING anyone's example.
  - goforbroke, on 06/24/2008, -1/+3Is it or is it not his name? I actually prefer Barack Quisling Obama.
    - Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -1/+4And has anyone ever referred to Mr McCain as J Sidney M?
    - goforbroke, on 06/24/2008, -0/+3But Sidney would be a smear..Honestly this is the first time I actually knew McCain's middle name!
- ssn697, on 06/24/2008, -1/+2Keeps tossing the race card? This is from a book. It isn't like he just said it.
  
  What does Sidney have to say on the subject?
  
  BTW, as soon as you do the Hussein thing, you become instantly irrelevant. You can't show how imbecilic you are any faster. I am sure there are other, more tasteless words to describe you, and you know what they are. You can't fix stupid. Talk about a lemming...
swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -17/+12I thought the radical right HATED political correctness? Why are you pretending to be outraged over some ethnic slurs that you use every day in casual conversation?
- tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -5/+8If I was on the radical right, you may have a point. But, I think 0.0001% of those people in the digg community are considered the "radical right". And those three of them are not welcome in a decent conversation.
- dayal911, on 06/24/2008, -3/+3It's called payback.
  - Ridgeliner7, on 06/24/2008, -1/+1Payback? How in the world do you reconcile saying things like that, in light of this statement:
    
    "We can no longer afford to build ourselves up by tearing someone else down. We can no longer afford to traffic in lies or fear or hate. It is the poison that we must purge!" -- Barack Obama
    
    Is there some twisted logic that I am missing that allows someone to claim to support Barack, yet disregard his repeated statements saying the above?
- KJeffV, on 06/24/2008, -3/+6"radical left"
  
  "reactionary right"
  
  I'm always amused by the claimed wisdom of sheepskin holders.
- InRussetShadows, on 06/25/2008, -0/+2Why am I pretending to be...? I'm not. I am actually offended. Why do I use those words in casual conversation? I don't. How do you get off on presuming to know what I say and what I think? What is this, the Digg version of calling people you don't know gay? This has got to be one of most insanely ignorant posts that I've ever read on Digg.
elleigh2, on 06/24/2008, -16/+13Who is racist? The only one bringing race up is Obama! And it is an in "your face" kind of racism! The Democrats are the ones that have always pitted groups against each other. Obama is applying for the highest office in the land and it is his policies that are under scrutiny, NOT the color of his skin! I think he is trying to divert the conversation away from his policy stances and flip flops and inexperience by claiming racism whenever he is challenged.
wishninja, on 06/24/2008, -8/+23Is it pretty clear he was emphasizing that those were the words other people were using when they wrote on the walls? He wrote it like that to help illustrate the type of exchanges that were happening on the wall of a bathroom. It would be like someone trying to paint this poster as a raciest for using the words in the title of his post. Just saying the words is not enough. You can dig me down in your little world you have created down here at the bottom of digg but when this "breaking" discovery isn't covered in the news, or on fox do not be surprised.
- tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -8/+5I would expect a president to use better language, regardless of the context. That being said, it doesn't surprise me all that much.
  - samthurston, on 06/24/2008, -2/+8Really, you would?
    
    Cheney told someone to go ***** themselves on the senate floor.
    Bush said of osama bin laden he wanted to "screw him in the ass"
    Bill Clinton was recently quoted saying "I don't think I should take any ***** from anyone on that."
    Nixon was well known for his colorful use of language.
    
    The idea of presidents being noble creatures of poise is a fairy tale. Wake up.
    
    This isn't profanity for profanity's sake, it's a political statement about race relations... look at the words again and this time remember, Obama's black!
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -6/+3It's one thing to curse, it's another to use intentionally demeaning language such as racial and ethnic slurs.
      
      I don't think Cheney's dropping the F-Bomb was at all presidential either, now that you bring it up. And I'll give Obama a pass if he chooses to say he'd screw bin Laden in the ass. But it's different than using racial or ethnic slurs.
      
      I don't think it diminishes his ability to be president (his policies do that nicely), but it takes away from the respect the office should inherently have.
    - samthurston, on 06/24/2008, -2/+6@tkstock:
      
      So you're pro-homosexual-rape-fantasy? Good to know.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -5/+31) Who said it would be a man? (or even a person)
      2) Who said it would be rape? (I don't know Osama's proclivities - do you?)
      3) I don't care what Obama or anyone else wants to do to him or what they decide to call it - as long as Osama ends up on the end of a stick encrusted in boiling hot grease and shards of broken glass with 10,000 volts running through it.
      
      Sorry, didn't mean to use large words - don't want you to think I'm a terrorist...
  - Cuchanu, on 06/24/2008, -1/+2Thinking a president doesn't use bad language is fairy-tale stuff. First of all using the words AGAINST somebody is different than REPEATING them.
    
    And in this case he was essentially just repeating the words that the "kikes and *****" used to describe each other on the wall.
- radiofrequency, on 06/24/2008, -10/+5"Is it pretty clear he was emphasizing that those were the words other people were using when they wrote on the walls?"
  
  No, learn to read. Obama called the correspondents writing on the bathroom walls "***** and kikes".
  - samthurston, on 06/24/2008, -4/+8Because every word written is meant to be interpreted literally, right? You have to be kidding.
    
    Note that Obama is black.
    
    But.. but... "those people" use that word a lot right?
    
    Exactly where is the racism dwelling here?
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -6/+4So you're saying he was being metaphorical?
      
      I don't want him metaphorically referring to blacks and Jews that way either.
- swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -6/+9You don't get it, understanding the "meaning" behind words is for liberals and communists. You're just another leftist elitist trying to tell us what to think!
- kleenex1, on 06/24/2008, -3/+6Funny you refer Right away to fox news. I'd be surprised if I didn't see this "breaking discovery" covered there if it it were true. As much as they like to bash and slander Obama, they know they need some actual tangible proof of this happening. Just one trusted source. Both your sources are not "the most reliable" source of information. This post is rediculous
  - Cheezo, on 06/24/2008, -5/+7one source... the obamamessiah's own book is the source...
    - Coven, on 06/24/2008, -3/+7a source which was taken completely out of context.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -7/+4The source was HIS BOOK. How could he be possibly taken out of context?
      
      I love how every time a candidate says something bad, it was automagically "taken out of context".
    - Coven, on 06/24/2008, -2/+7Here's how:
      
      Obama was referencing graffiti written on bathroom walls at his school, people who called each other "*****" and "kikes". I'm sure you've seen similar graffiti in public restrooms. It looks like a message board. One person writes one message which is responded to over time in various different handwritings.
      
      Obamanation took that, ignored that Obama was referencing that graffiti, and said "Look! Omigod! Obama said "*****" and "kikes"! He's a racist!", completely ignoring the context that the original quote was written in.
      
      Obamanation has a bad habit of posting this kind of
      drivel in his blog. He has no shame and he knows it.The fact that you continue to ignore the context as well speaks a lot about your own character and agenda.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -6/+4So, you're implying that Obama was referencing what was written on the wall rather than who was writing it? So why didn't he say that instead of "...the walls remained scratched with blunt correspondence between ***** and kikes."
      
      He's well-educated, he should know the rules of English. If you're referencing someone else's written word, you put quotes around it. He didn't. Ergo, he was referencing the people, not the words they wrote.
      
      If he was referencing the writing, he would've said something like
      
      ...the walls remains scratched with blunt correspondence between "*****" and "kikes".
      
      Or if he wants to reference the people, he could say blacks and Jews.
      
      The fact is he had plenty of time to think about it (it was a book, after all) and he still made the wrong choice. Another example of his fine judgment.
      
      BTW, attacking the messenger doesn't change the facts the messenger was delivering.
    - Coven, on 06/24/2008, -3/+7You have a pre-existing bias against Obama and will continue to see anything you can in a negative light. It is obvious what he was trying to communicate in his memoirs. He didn't need to write it literally. Read the book. One line like that would be out of place and against the message of the rest of the book. He used those terms as examples of what people called each other. I know you know that, but you have your agenda and will continue to express that using any ammunition you come across. I know it shouldn't, but your dishonesty astonishes me.
      
      BTW, when the messenger does nothing but sling mud and lie to his readers, he opens himself up to attack. There are no "facts" to his message. In this particular case, he used facts (the quote), in a dishonest manner (by pretending the context was not there) to express a false message (that somehow, Obama, despite what the rest of the book conveys, is a racist anti-semite).
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -6/+3You have a pre-existing bias for Obama and will continue to ignore the negative aspects of him, so what of it?
      
      How am I being dishonest? Either he mangled a simple English rule or he inadvertently said something he shouldn't have. It's really simple.
      
      The fact that Obama belonged to the church he did and for whatever reason was endorsed by anti-Semites like Farrakhan and Hezbollah raises the question of his beliefs, so you have to scrutinize his past beliefs and writings.
    - ozydingo, on 06/24/2008, -1/+4It is honestly difficult to believe that Obama would in fact be using the terms to refer to the people and not the terms used in graffiti. It doesn't make sense--given what he was trying to say and the medium with which he was saying it. Do you sincerely believe he would use such terms as his own in his book, or do you admit that there is perhaps something else to his choice of words than the desire to use derogatory terminology?
      
      There are negative aspects of Obama, but this is simply not one of them. And if you really want to get picky about your dichotomy that "[e]ither he mangled a simple English rule or he inadvertently said something he shouldn't have," as it appears you do, we can quote the reference you cite below ( http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_q ... ) :
      
      "Indirect quotations are not exact words but rather rephrasings or summaries of another person's words. Do not use quotation marks for indirect quotations."
      
      It seems reasonable to assume that he was not reading the graffiti as he was writing, so he was indeed providing a summary of other people's words based on his memory, and thus correctly did not use quotes.
      
      But correct English or not (Obama is not infallible, by the way), it seems rather evident what was meant. To suggest that he most certainly meant to use those terms as his own choice of derogatory language seems a measure of desperate irrationality.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -3/+3Ozydingo,
      
      I very well thought out response.
      
      As I have not read his book, I will have to give you the benefit of the doubt as to it's content as a whole.
      
      As to the English part of this, if it was an indirect quote then he should have used the non-derogatory terminology to refer to the people. They are either HIS words or someone else's.
  - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -7/+3The link to the actual article was provided.
    
    Oh, and it was covered on Fox News.
    - Coven, on 06/24/2008, -3/+3Ah, FOX News. A bastion of integrity and quality journalism.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -3/+2Hey, I was just following up with kleenex1 - he indicated Fox was a trusted source, "...they know they need some actual tangible proof of this happening."
      
      So, I guess they have and they did. The article was in the New Yorker, not the bastion of conservatism.
    - Coven, on 06/24/2008, -2/+5The New Yorker article was biographical and was not out to paint Obama in a negative light. Jews Against Obama, Fox News, and Obamanation all ignore the first sentence in the quote they used "He went to Columbia University, and liked New York, but he found the city’s racial tension inescapable." Read the last part of that sentence again. It sets the tone for the rest of the quote. He was referencing the racism found in New York City at the time. He was not calling people "*****" and "kikes", but was merely referencing what they were calling each other.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -4/+3I'm sure they weren't out to paint Obama in a negative light.
      
      So, you're saying he just got the rules of English wrong? My bad, I thought he was well-educated.
      
      I guess you can look at his past and determine that he's not always properly quoting who he's referencing, so what you say makes some sense.
      
      Hillary said it pretty good: "Change you can Xerox!"
    - Coven, on 06/24/2008, -2/+5What rules of English has he broken? Please cite them.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -4/+3Here, I've done your homework for you.
      
      http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_q ...
      
      You can find the part that is pertinent to this discussion - the reading will do you good.
    - Coven, on 06/24/2008, -3/+4Consider it poetic license then. You're so well versed in English, I'm sure you can understand that term. You are still ignoring the context WITHIN the quote being used.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -5/+2OK. Well, I hope he isn't taking "poetic license" with some of our laws...
    - Coven, on 06/24/2008, -2/+7Way to change the subject to something completely unrelated. The man is a constitutional scholar. He TAUGHT constitutional law. I'm not worried at all about how he handles our laws.
    - tkstock, on 06/24/2008, -5/+3Ah, yes. The constitutional scholar who praises the SCOTUS for trodding all over it (re: recent ruling on detainees)
      
      If you aren't worried, you should be.
      
      http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/02/obamas ...
      
      I changed the subject because you returned to your original line of argument that we've already been through.
dayal911, on 06/24/2008, -10/+11If a conservative had done this, it wouldn't matter what the context was, he would be slandered.

I love how the liberals will skew anything to fit their agenda.
- Coven, on 06/24/2008, -4/+6Liberals aren't skewing anything here.
  - KJeffV, on 06/24/2008, -5/+4...said a lib.
    - Coven, on 06/24/2008, -3/+6Obamanation and Jews Against Obama are skewing a quote from Obama's book by ignoring context WITHIN the quote they used. The attacks against Obama are getting more and more desperate the further he gets ahead of McCain.
    - KJeffV, on 06/24/2008, -6/+2"Obamanation & Jews Against Obama are skewing a quote fr/Obama's book by ignoring context WITHIN the quote they used."
      
      I read the book; I read the art; I read the comments. We disagree—but merely completely & profoundly.
      
      "The attacks against Obama are getting more & more desperate the further he gets ahead of McCain."
      
      You say "too-mah-toe"; I say "Huh-vah-ee."
    - Cuchanu, on 06/24/2008, -1/+4It seems obvious that he was referring to the words being used on the wall.
    - b0gus2008, on 06/24/2008, -1/+3Jesus, Coven. You are one determined son of a bitch! It is clear that this particular discussion is filled with braying jackasses, yet you, against all odds, persevere. Word of advice, leave these crazies and let this thread die its slow and inevitable death...
    - KJeffV, on 06/24/2008, -2/+2And yet . . . here we all are.
- Cuchanu, on 06/24/2008, -3/+4It's funny that you say liberals will skew anything to fit their agenda:
  
  THIS POST IS A CONSERVATIVE TRYING TO SKEW LITERATURE TO FIT THEIR AGENDA.
MadKennyP, on 06/24/2008, -6/+6Obamanation: A Digger who prefers to see WANTED CRIMINALS remain free from arrest or prosecution in the United States. http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Bloggers_Get_Oba ...
DerangedPenguin, on 06/24/2008, -2/+12OK I am no Barack Hussein Obama fan, I think his Presidency would be a disaster for this country, our personal freedoms, the myth of rugged individualism, our economy and with it the worlds. HOWEVER, he was not personally calling Jew's "kikes" he was writing about the graffiti posted in a place where peaceful open minded liberals can let their true ***** hang out. If there is something for conservative bloggers to write about it is the drivel that infests the bathroom stalls in one of the most liberal universities in the United States.
DuggDowner, on 06/24/2008, -10/+6Talk about taken out of context. The funny thing is that Republicans use the words everyday and they mean them.
- KJeffV, on 06/24/2008, -5/+5Generalize much?
- Ridgeliner7, on 06/24/2008, -1/+1"We can no longer afford to build ourselves up by tearing someone else down. We can no longer afford to traffic in lies or fear or hate. It is the poison that we must purge!" -- Barack Obama
- InRussetShadows, on 06/25/2008, -1/+1You can't prove what you say, but only smear others with your ad hominem defecations. Grow up.
swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -7/+8Breaking news! Digg User "Obamanation" Referred to Jews as "Kikes" and Blacks as the N-Bomb!!! Run him out of town on a rail!
ozymandias2012, on 06/24/2008, -10/+7 I understand the context, it's still offensive but so are a lot of books. Key things are he's biracial, not a Republican, and he's been elevated to icon levels. Even the most die hard "I want to kill every Republican I see" liberal has to admit that Barack is a media darling. He can say almost anything at this point and it will most likely be excused by the media and his party. Conservatives shouldn't bother trying to attack him like this, it won't work.
- swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -2/+12How is paraphrasing bathroom graffitti to make a point about racial division offensive?
  - ozymandias2012, on 06/24/2008, -5/+4The words are offensive, if you don't believe me go outside and start yelling them, see what happens. You just can't bring yourself to admit that had a conservative written those words, and he was running for President, he would be labelled a racist. It's that simple.
    - swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -3/+7I take it you are equally offended by Digg user "Obamanation's" use of those words in the title of this Digg submission, because it is the exact same thing.
    - ozymandias2012, on 06/24/2008, -4/+4Absolutely....you notice he couldn't even bring himself to type the "n-word"...it's that offensive.
    - swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -4/+6...that's why you dugg this article, right? Because you found it offensive?
      
      What an unbelievably childish point of view. In the adult world, people use offensive language to convey messages, and it is the content of the message that is considered offensive or not, rather than the language. Since Obama was writing a book for adults rather than children, there would be no need for him to pretty up the words that he read on a bathroom stall - he had the freedom to repeat what he read on the wall without censoring it, since he assumed, maybe incorrectly, that rational, literate adults would be able to understand what he was saying. I guess he didn't anticipate immature right-wingers manufacturing outrage based on their own lack of reading comprehension and hypocritical standards of political correctness.
    - ozymandias2012, on 06/24/2008, -6/+5Again...had a conservative written this it wouldn't matter what context it was in, they wouldn't be running for President.
    - swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -3/+6Repeating a lie doesn't make it true.
    - ozymandias2012, on 06/24/2008, -2/+6If I'm so childish and stupid than why are you getting so upset, just move on. You've obviously decided Obama is your man. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. I think those words are offensive and we'd be better off if no one used them, ever. You can make your point without being such a dick.
    - swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -3/+4You claim to be a conservative and yet you are calling for words to be banned? What a joke.
    - ozymandias2012, on 06/24/2008, -2/+5As I've been reminded many times by my liberal friends, even freedom of speech has its limits.
    - swrostmore, on 06/24/2008, -3/+5Yeah, like those liberals who got flag burning outlawed.
- Cuchanu, on 06/24/2008, -3/+2I agree with you even though I want to kill every Republican I see.
  
  I don't really think what he was saying was offensive but I agree that for some people the words are hard to hear regardless of context.
  
  As far as media darling goes I think it depends. Fox "news" calling a fist bump a "terrorist fist jab", saying "Obama's Baby Momma", among other ridiculous things wouldn't fall into the media darling category.
  
  MSNBC for sure. I think the difference is that some of the little nitpicky stories that some people think are newsworthy just aren't to most people. But if you think Obama get's a free pass do you remember a little thing called "Rev. Wright"?
Cuchanu, on 06/24/2008, -10/+7Despite what people that dislike Obama would love to have everybody believe, Obama is the most forward thinking candidate we've ever had for president (when it comes to racial issues).

Other candidates had never really acknowledged that their are issues and so they didn't have any words that could that could get misunderstood.

Speaking from experience (I'm white but have bi-racial friends and family members) I think mixed race people (specifically white and black) have an understanding of race relations that other races can't understand.
- InRussetShadows, on 06/25/2008, -1/+6Obama is not forward thinking. He attended a racist hate-whitey church for twenty years; he clearly has no love of his white brothers, nor his bi-racial brothers; after all, his church put authentic blackness at the top of their goals. In such a set-up, biracial people are just as ostracized as whites. Is that forward-thinking?
  
  Obama hangs around with NOI folks and has them on his payroll. The Nation of Islam is another epitome of tolerance and understanding, slandering whites and Jews day-in, day-out for years.
  
  Obama is not forward-thinking, again. Obama is a representative of hateful racism and it's best that we all throw him under the bus as soon as possible. What we don't need is another bigot along the lines of Jackson, Sharpton, and the rest blackmailing and guilt-tripping people for things they've never done.
  
  Mortify yourself if you like that sort of thing, but leave me out of it.
  - Cuchanu, on 06/25/2008, -5/+1Care to give examples of the "racist hate-whitey" things you have heard? The only things I have heard come from his church are not anti-white, but rather anti-oppression by the government. Who happens to be run by white men. But not even once did I hear anything that put down white people specifically. If I missed something will you reply and quote it? Thanks.
    
    The connections to the Nation of Islam are so thin that it is apparent people are trying to scare "whitey" into not voting for Obama by making that claim. A photographer he hired used to be a bodyguard to Farrakhan? wow. And a former Senate campaign Treasurer was (according to an anonymous source) a NOI "activist". And a "director of constituency services" in Chicago who is a member of the NOI (according to the same anonymous source) in a community with a large NOI constituency? So should he vet everybody that has ever worked for him and then discriminate against them because of their memberships?
    
    "NATION OF ISLAM ACTIVISTS ON OBAMA CAMP PAYROLL" makes people think the NOI is influencing Obama's policy.
    This is like saying a McCain senate staffer gets caught with child porn on his computer and the headline is "MCCAIN HAS CONNECTIONS TO THE CHILD PORN INDUSTRY"
    
    And where is the tape of this famous "whitey" speech Michelle Obama supposedly gave?
    - Cuchanu, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Typical with you people: I get dugg down but nobody will respond with any real "anti-white" quotes from Wright. Every time somebody says Obama went to an anti-white church I ask for the same thing: anti-white quotes; but what do I get? Silence.
VCubed, on 06/24/2008, -3/+7Since, unlike the fool who posted this, I read the entire book, I know that Obama was referring to all the name-calling done against people for their color or ethnicity and of course condemning it. This is such a lame smear-attempt! I almost want to say "thanks", it makes me feel we'll be laughing at the impotent smear machine for four months.
- KJeffV, on 06/24/2008, -1/+3I'd be interested to know exactly how you determined O`nation did NOT read "Dreams of My Father." I, too, read the book—Tho it pains me to throw good money after bad, there's really no substitute if one desires to stay ahead of the pack in grasping the big picture—and I disagree completely w/your analysis. See Tom Stock's comments on correct English punctuation above f/a revealing exposition on BHO's mistakes. Pub'g houses pay copy editors well to avoid these very kinds of situations since there are a boatload of readers out there who still insist upon adherence to the rules of the language, knowing that veering off the path in this manner is hardly poetic license.
VCubed, on 06/24/2008, -4/+7This is pure slander and a lame smear-attempt. Anyone who can read knows he used those words as examples of all the name-calling people do against one another. Is that the best the neo-cons have?
MCBowelmovement, on 06/24/2008, -4/+4It's hilarious that I always find stuff with this kind of staggering stupidity, in both the main story and the comments, waaaaaay back in the "upcoming" section of digg. Slumming it, internet style. Stay mediocre, brainiacs!
- InRussetShadows, on 06/25/2008, -1/+2This coming from a guy with poop in his name. Amazing.
zephyear, on 06/24/2008, -3/+2he was referring to the words written on the walls

jesus christ, taken out of context much
- InRussetShadows, on 06/25/2008, -0/+2Reported for profanity. Here's hoping Digg yanks your account!
Kashabear, on 06/24/2008, -2/+1From the New Yorker:
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/05/31/040531 ...

" He went to Columbia University, and liked New York, but he found the city’s racial tension inescapable. It “flowed freely,” he wrote in his memoir—“not just out on the streets but in the stalls of Columbia’s bathrooms as well, where, no matter how many times the administration tried to paint them over, the walls remained scratched with blunt correspondence between ***** and kikes. It was as if all middle ground had collapsed.” "

it is quite OBVIOUS in this quote that Obama was using the words, the EXACT terminology, he saw written on the walls of the bathrooms at Columbia University. These are NOT his words, they are the words left behind by those people who wrote them on the bathroom walls.

Anyone who does not have his/her mind closed to Barack Obama would clearly see this. For all the others - what we write here will not make a difference; sadly you have shown that to be TRUE.
InRussetShadows, on 06/25/2008, -1/+3I love how the oh-so-intelligent left will find the one article that is sensationalistic and then congratulate themselves for being so intelligent on seeing through it all. Don't hurt yourself there guys. I have a feeling the next article by Coulter, Feder, Krauthammer, Kristol, Colson, Thomas, Sowell, or Elder might just blow you into next week at the rate you're going.
SydBloom, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Frau Hilldigard is jealous that the Obamanation is the one getting a chance to start up the ovens again and to take out Israel. No one wanted to kill Jews more than the Frau except maybe the Islamofacists of the democrat party (Al-Qaeda, The Mid-East offices of the American Democrat Party).
DashaNet, on 09/19/2008, -0/+0http://last-worlds-news.com/show.php?id=Obama/aac3 ...
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Obama Referred To Jews As “Kikes” and Blacks as the N-Bomb

Login or register to add a comment