Wingnuts

A contact of mine in Flickr posted this pic of a defaced Obama sign, I commented sympathetically, and one of the people in the comment thread wound up sending me this Flickr Mail message:

:: OBAMA

HE WENT TO CHURCH FOR 25 YEARS WITH PREACHER WRONG. HE SAID
HE WAS ONE OF HIS TOP ADDVISERS. WRONG 5PREACHED HATE
AGAINST WHITE MEN AND OBAMA ACCTED LIKE HE NEVER SAW
ANYTHING BULLSHIT. HE FINALLY THREW  WRONG UNDER THE BUS
WHEN HE SEEN HOW PEOPLE WERE TURNING ON HIM.  BILL AYERS
AND HIM ARE LIKE BROTHERS AND THE MAN IS A TERROIST. HE
SAID HE WILL MEET WITH ALL THE ROGUE COUNTRIES LIKE IRAN
WITH OUT PRE-CONDITIONS HELL THAT CRAZY. HE USE TO BE HEAD
OF SIGNING PEOPLE UP TO VOTE WHEN THEY DIDN’T HAVE
ADDRESSES. HE HAS FLIP FLOPED ON EVERTHIG HE HAS SAID IT IS
JUST WHAT CROWD HE IS PLAYING. HE WANTS TO RAISE TAXES WHEN
THE IN A RECEASION. HE IS THE MOST LIBERAL PERSON IN THE
SENATE.  HES FRIENDS WITH LUIS FARAKKAN. HE WILL NOT PUT
HIS HAND OVER HIS HEART WHEN THE PLEGE OF ALLEGANCE IS
SAID. HE  WILL NOT WEAR A AMERICAN FLAG PIN. WHAT DAM MORE
DO YOU WANT THE SON OF A BITCH SHOULD BE RUN OUT OF THE
COUNTRY. IF DON’T SEE IT YOU NEED A SHRINK. BUT IF HE DOES
WIN IT WOULDN’T SURPRISE ME IS SOMEONE DIDN’T TAKE THE
BLACK BASTARD OUT BEFORE HE GETS TO THE WHITE HOUSE. ONE
MORE HOLIDAY. THANKS     PS IRAN NUKE THE BASTARDS. HAVE A
NCE DAY

Now, my initial response is two words: Snopes.com.  But this guy is pretty clearly immune to rational argument. Actually, I’m a bit disappointed that he missed the late-breaking news that Obama is actually the illegitimate son of Malcolm X.

What is it with the all-caps crowd, anyway?  I used to say it was the equivalent of shouting all the time, but I think it’s more like shouting all the time and spraying spittle in the process.

I don’t guess the Secret Service would consider this guy’s message an actual death threat against Obama, but I do hope that security is tight.  How do Republicans who actually have two neurons to rub together feel about the supporters they’re courting?  Bill Buckley must be spinning in his grave.

10 Responses to “Wingnuts”

  1. stephanie says:

    It’s not surprising to see this message. People are the US are entrenched in ideologies from religion to political parties. People don’t think so much as they simply repeat and push out the ideology being supported. This happens on both sides, republican and democrat — christian and atheism. It’s hard to have a real argument where people use their personal logic to tell what they think instead of repeating what they read on the internet or listened to on NPR.

    If we are going to move beyond this circus and mad state of back-and-forthing then we will need to evaluate the system and look at some alternatives. Third party candidates made a lot of sense this election by speaking independently and not subscribing to an ideology. Yet, they didn’t even get a chance to debate publicly. The debates are managed by a corporation, and they wouldn’t let third parties participate.

    We have to start thinking independently instead of blindly supporting political ideologies and religions. easier said than done, but if we blindly support religion and government and let it do everything for us then we really can’t say much when disaster hits home.

    Bush is not the only person responsible for the war in Iraq. Democrats voted for the war! They also supported the bailouts. The answer to the problem is not to get the Democrats to take over. It’s to get the people more involved in creating alternatives and putting pressure on the states to make change.

  2. Allen says:

    I have to disagree about the value of third parties. In a parliamentary system, third parties provide a valuable diversity of approaches in government. In a system such as ours that is essentially “winner-take-all”, only two parties can really be viable at a time. Third parties in our system simply weaken whichever major party is ideologically closest to their adherents.

  3. Cabell says:

    Daniel often remarks that if third parties seriously wanted change, they’d stop running candidates and put all their efforts and money into pushing instant run-off voting.

  4. Reno says:

    I think if third parties seriously want change they will spend their time and resources at the local level. Why isn’t the Green Party in Reno working to get curbside recycling for apartments? Why aren’t they working to get green candidates onto the city council? Why do they vanish for 3.5 years and resurface only for presidential elections?

  5. stephanie says:

    Hey Allen – third party politics is responsible for a lot of change within the US. Enjoy the weekend? it’s because union workers rioted against their bosses. enjoy civil rights? that was done by the people!

  6. stephanie says:

    Hey Reno – you make a good point! but i would argue that many people that are involved in third party politics — are involved locally in their communities and trying to get local positions. There were 3 libertarians on the ballot for local positions in missouri.

    We are trying everywhere. But oh my god, wouldn’t the world be a better place if the people stood up and refused to support a two party system — and instead cast the ballot for the person that supported the best issues?

    Or maybe a direct democracy would be better, instead of this republic of corporations.

  7. stephanie says:

    Cabell – in my opinion they are doing both! But i think you bring up a good point. we can’t give up after the election takes place. we’ve got to keep moving on and making this a better world. maybe you would join us, instead of reaping the benefits of hard working people? or maybe you are already joined and I didn’t realize it.

  8. K says:

    He says “He’s the most liberal person in the Senate” like that’s a bad thing!
    (OK, I really shouldn’t joke about this.)

    I have to say I don’t really see the British parliamentary system as anything but a winner-takes-all approach, either. Which has been essentially two-party for a long time. It bothers me that it is inconceivable that the party for which I vote will attain a majority, but I just can’t vote Labour. And I definitely can’t vote Conservative.

    Of course, the Scottish devolved government is a coalition led by the Scottish National Party – so it’s clearly not a two-party system any more, or if it is, the Conservatives are no longer one of the two parties. But Westminster is still the main show.

  9. Allen says:

    K — That’s all true. I think at least that parliamentary systems allow for the possibility of meaningful coalition governments, which don’t happen under our system. The only times that third parties have really wielded any power in our system have been times when one of the major two was collapsing — e.g. the beginning of our civil war.

  10. Deb in Carson says:

    Why Trolls post in caps; leaves one hand free to jerk off.

Leave a Reply