Monday, March 21, 2011

Barack Obama. Marlow Stanfield. What's The Difference?

"The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation." Barack Obama, Presidential Candidate, December 20, 2007

14 comments:

Richmond Muhammad said...

One is a fictional character and the other is a fictional president.

JH said...

He was correct when he said that and he'd tell you that he still believes it.
However, Obama would challenge the impied hyprcrisy because he didn't authorize the attack under the Constitution, but participated in it as part of a UN resolution.
I'm against the attack....but those are the facts. We can use moral authority to refute the attack's rightousness or logic to dispute its wisdom....but harder scrutiny of the post's statement and this week's activity leaves him an out on the "unconstitutional" front.

nicki nicki tembo said...

No real difference - both are characters playing out scripts. Unlike the fictional character Marlow, lives have actually been lost under ya boy B.O.

Yaron said...

Farakhan has had enough too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLrLgOVHT8E

Constructive Feedback said...

[quote]One is a fictional character and the other is a fictional president.[/quote]

With all due respect - Obama is not the reason for notions of "hope & change" that have been hoisted upon him. At most we can only call him an opportunist.

The actual blame for this condition must go to the scores of people who "played through" on the trick play.

We are shown people's character and intent NOT BY how much they claim to be doing for "Black people" but instead by how CONSISTENT they are willing to be when a plan that was promoted by them and accepted by the Black community goes awry and we notate THEIR WILLINGNESS to admit the truth and retain their interests in advancing our "Permanent Interests" and not merely their political and ideological interests.

cadeveo said...

Barack Obama has more blood on his hands, there's your difference. You can call him a puppet or claim he's not ultimately responsible all you want, but I'll put it to you this way. Let's say you go to an audition for an acting gig, win the part and supposing you were unaware of this beforehand, are told by the producers and the directors that your role is to draw people's attention, energy and time while they go about the business of looting, murdering, and raping--physically, psychologically and financially everyone in your neighborhood, including women, children and the elderly and that, further, you're supposed to get all those folks in the audience to love, hate, respect or belittle you, no matter, just so long as they feel it intensely enough to continue to pay for ticket after ticket to "see the show." For your trouble, you'll get to live in a great place, get private security protection and get to hobknob with other producers, directors and financiers long after you've exited the stage. Would you take the job?
Obama took the job. That tells me all I ever needed to know about this guy--same for Bush, Clinton, Reagan, "Spooky" Bush the CIA man, Carter, Ford, Nixon, and Johnson.

The other possibility is that Obama has been so well-groomed for this position all his life (in the way that pedophiles groom the kids they lust after), that he can't even see all of the carnage he is enabling--or somehow believes that it is worthwhile and that he is really, really, somehow, "helping the people."

Kissinger won the Nobel Peace prize, too. That ALSO says a lot...

makheru bradley said...

The other possibility is that Obama has been so well-groomed for this position all his life (in the way that pedophiles groom the kids they lust after), that he can't even see all of the carnage he is enabling--or somehow believes that it is worthwhile and that he is really, really, somehow, "helping the people." -- Cadeveo

Cadeveo—as Kwame Ture was fond of saying: “speak the truth and shame the devil.”

The Real Slim Shady is a true hypocrite, and a master of deception.

[It was Oscar Wilde who once said that "the true hypocrite is the one who ceases to perceive his deception, the one who lies with sincerity." I think that politicians learn, some easier than others, to live their lives like this. And, as I have said before, the only way they can be successful in sharing their delusions with the rest of us is that the majority do not have the contextual knowledge to analyze and make accurate judgments on their utterances. The successful hypocrite and his or her ignorant audience go hand in hand.]--Lawrence Davidson

Richmond Muhammad said...

Another difference is that Marlowe is honest and upfront with how he gets down whereas Obama tries to put a noble spin on it. You notice after Nam all these conflicts have cool and noble names. Operation urgent fury, operation just cause, operation restore hope, operation northern watch, operation enduring freedom, operation acid gambit, etc.

Cash Rulz said...

Plenty of difference.

But people are stupid, violent, and selfish and to honestly believe that they're made that way by the government is navie and just a way to justify your own bullshit.

Denmark Vesey said...

"Plenty of difference."

Name 2.

1) ___________ ?

2) ___________ ?

Cash Rulz said...

1. Marlo got into power thru violence.

2. Marlo makes the sole decisions for his organization. Obama is just the spokesperson.

Quid pro quo.

How do you think the average citizen of Egypt and Libya feel about these uprisings?

Denmark Vesey said...

"How do you think the average citizen of Egypt and Libya feel about these uprisings?" CR



I suspect they are as poorly informed about these "uprisings" as is your average American.

Cash Rulz said...

I would assume Gaddahfi is painting his canvas as bright as the US's is dismal.

sakredkow said...

I wonder if the citizens of Libya who have actually been shot are better informed than average Americans now.