It becomes clearer and clearer by the day that many in the anti-Obama bandwagon don't really know what they are talking about, many have no concrete idea what his policies are, many couch their inherent racism by pretending Obama has a foreign policy plan that is dangerous to America.

Watch Kevin James make a fool of himself.

[flash=448,361]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YK0d8ENS__c&hl=en[/flash]

Dumbass Bushman man a silly comment today. Rather than focusing on Israel's 60th anniversary he went their to bash Obama. Stupid man.

What puts America in these difficult times is collective and passive ignorance spewed by  likes of Bush and Kevin James. Folks who have relationships with Bin Ladens are not being  asked any questions. This guy is a reminder of  that guy who criticized Obama for not wearing a flag pin even though he did not have one. Teaching  a  radio host what appeasement means. I bet you this guy has a lot of followers and listeners. Massive ignorance ruins a  nation.

After watching the interview, i felt so sorry for Kevin. Initially, i thought he was only going to shoot himself on the foot, but he ended blowing his brains up. If i were his wife, i will sue for divorce immediately.
This is an embarrassment to whoever paid his school fees

Another point for people to keep loving Obama.

Stupid ignorant right wing nut. sean hannity, rush limbaugh, bill o'riely and all those conservertive right wing talk radio nuts surely deserve to be next, stupid ignorant bastards that knows nothing but to spew bigotary and ignorance on the air waves and pollute the minds of the so called blue white working class Reagan democrats.

Egnorance: The Egotistical Combination of Ignorance and Arrogance typified by a slowpoke-in-chief

Bloody idiot. All these anti-Obamites, I notice that they don't have any real case against him. They say this and say that to hide their inherent racism. Bloody idiot.

Its instructive to note that many right wing whites who listen to these "radio talk show hosts" wont even bother to critically consider their opinions. Kevin James virulently thinks Obama's policies are dangerous to America, the problem is he cant even articulate which policies and why.

Kevin James doesnt explain why Obama, a US presidential candidate, should be speaking at the Knesset. Should Mccain also go speak in Iraq? He perpetuates the myth that Robert Malley, a former foreign policy adviser for Obama, had links with Hamas . . . what he ignorantly or maliciously fails to tell us is that Robert Malley met Hamas as part of his duties working for the International Crisis Group in the Middle East.

Sadly it seems Americans are too willing to listen to armchair racists who think screaming is synonymous with knowing what they are talking about.

4 Him:



Sadly it seems Americans are too willing to listen to armchair racists who think screaming is synonymous with knowing what they are talking about.

I could'nt have said it better.

A windbag named Kevin kept dissing
but his knowledge of history was missing
On appeasement all bluster
He soon lost his lustre
That ombliferous Chris was dismissing


Grabbed from a forum somewhere. . .

Although i'm not an Obama fan, I cant recall meeting anyone arrogantly displaying his lack of intelligence as much as this yeye Kevin james guy.

Anyone with a little intelligence would have stylishly backed out of being made such a fool of after realising he didn't have the right information.

WHAT DID CHAMBERLAIN DO WRONG

he he he

Damn that was so funny! The guy was already in a hole and just kept digging with so much vigour. He was obviously out of his depth and should just have humbled himself. He would have retained some respect that way. You could see the hate for Obama from the contours on his face when he was talking. He was given the humiliation he deserved.

The saying goes, ' The empty drum makes the loudest noise'

Kevin James is living prove of that. Next time when he wants to go on

air and criticise Obama he sure will do a little browsing of his

history book before making a spectacle of himself on national tv.

Mehn! Ignorance no good Ooh!

4Him
Is this Kevin James on indo(igbo) or what?

classic!!

The guy reminds of orji kalu on hardtalk.

What a jackass he is.
Talking hugwash.
No knowledge of history, yet he is suppossed to be a polital pundit.
Any way, he's American.
I forgive him because of that.

;d ;d ;d ;d lmao!

Frizy:

4Him
Is this Kevin James on indo(igbo) or what?

Sorry man.

@ Savannah

Frizy was talking about Marijuana and not the Igbo tribe. And yeah, that was the first thing that came to my mind even before Kevin went on to make a dumbass out of himself. The manner in which he lunged into the debate got me thinking weather he was high on something.

@ 4HIM
That was hilarious, thanks bro!!!!

That guy does not know Jackshit about what he was talking about. Simple question "Wetin Chamberlain do for 38/39 prior to the world war". The guy just kept on rambling and the more he did that the more it was obvious that he DID NOT KNOW I was like You gotta be kidding me. He really does not know!!!!!!

I wonder what level of enlightment his listeners (mostly blue collared white americans) would have 

Uche2nna:

@ Savannah

Frizy was talking about Marijuana and not the Igbo tribe. And yeah, that was the first thing that came to my mind even before Kevin went on to make a dumbass out of himself. The manner in which he lunged into the debate got me thinking weather he was high on something.

That has been the hallmark of many anti-obama campaigners. Plenty of emotion very little substance.  Makes you see their opposition for what it really is . . . racism cloaked in "oh he aint wearing a lapel pin so he's not patriotic . . ."

Uche2nna:

I wonder what level of enlightment his listeners (mostly blue collared white americans) would have 

They wont bother to find out, all they want is an excuse not to vote for Obama so they can say "see i'm not a racist, this guy is an appeaser".

Carter "appeased" by making Israel sign a peace treaty with her sworn enemies Egypt and Jordan . . . funny how Kevin James ignores all that. Bush has been forced to talk to North Korea, an effort that is already yielding fruit . . . yet Mr. Kevin ignores all that.

I agree with not talking to Hamas UNTIL they show they are ready to compromise and accept Israel's right to exist (which is Obama's policy anyway) but i doubt Kevin is talking out of love for Israel . . . perhaps we shld ask him where Jerusalem is on the map of the middle east.

4 Him:

I agree with not talking to Hamas UNTIL they show they are ready to compromise and accept Israel's right to exist (which is Obama's policy anyway) but i doubt Kevin is talking out of love for Israel . . . perhaps we shld ask him where Jerusalem is on the map of the middle east.

Or where Europe is on the map of the world.

There are plenty of ignorant Obama supporters too.In that very clip,Chris Mathews asked,"Wasn't the U.S.S. Cole [attacked ] under Bush?"

C Mathews has more in common with K.James than he will admit.

Even Obama himself has made whopping historical gaffes.
@4 Him

Reagan made Israel sign a peace treaty with Jordan and Egypt? Are you mistaking him for Carter?

4 Play:

There are plenty of ignorant Obama supporters too.In that very clip,Chris Mathews asked,"Wasn't the US.S. Cole [attacked ] under Bush?"

C Mathews has more in common with K.James than he will admit.

No one says Matthews is any better, he's just another mouthpiece for MSNBC who will say whatever his paymasters tell him to say. Kevin James and his ilk have every right to oppose Obama but pls tell them to do so with some FACTS.
Clinton vowed to obliterate Iran, i havent heard any of them complaining yet.

4 Play:

Even Obama himself has made whopping historical gaffes.

he didnt come on MSNBC making a fool of himself.

4 Play:

@4 Him

Reagan made Israel sign a peace treaty with Jordan and Egypt? Are you mistaking him for Carter?

Sorry i meant Dhimmi Carter.

4 Him:

I agree with not talking to Hamas UNTIL they show they are ready to compromise and accept Israel's right to exist (which is Obama's policy anyway)

Tell me one major difference between Haniyeh and Ahmedinejad? Why would you prefer to talk to the latter but not the former? Does the latter also accept Israel's right to exist-The distinction between the 2 by Obama is based on warped logic and pseudo-intellectualism.

The reasons why he won't talk to Hamas also apply in the case of Iran.

Haniyeh is the spokesman for a terrorist group masquerading as a government . . . Ahmedinejad is president of an oil producing nation with considerable leverage in the middle east. It is no secret that Iran is the puppet master behind Syria and Lebanon (harbouring hezbollah) . . . and is critical to the survival and stability of Iraq.

If Bush could talk to North Korea (whom he once labelled as the axis of evil) then there is no reason why America should not attempt getting through to Ahmedinejad.

Calling Syria Iran's puppet is ridiculous.Neither is Lebanon Iran's puppet.Hezbollah is but Hezbollah is in opposition to the Lebanese Govt which is pro-US.Hezbollah barely garners 30% of the votes in Lebanon.

Before you and I were even born,Ahmedinejad has held certain absolutist views on religion which he still holds.How is Obama going to manage to talk the Iranian Mullahs out of their beliefs about the Middle-East?

As someone pointed in the UK Times,he won't be surprised if Obama supporters believe Obama can heal the sick or walk on water.What is Obama going to offer to Iran that hasn't been offered them by various US Adminitrations?

4 Play:

Calling Syria Iran's puppet is ridiculous.Neither is Lebanon Iran's puppet.Hezbollah is but Hezbollah is in opposition to the Lebanese Govt which is pro-US.Hezbollah barely garners 30% of the votes in Lebanon.

Ridiculous? We'll see . . .
Referring to Lebanon as a state is what is indeed ridiculous. That is nothing but a fiefdorm being trampled upon by the stooges of Iran and Syria. Do we have a Lebanese "goverment"? A government that had to practically beg for its survival when a militia group took over half its capital? They've not been able to elect a president since Nov last yr.

lol at hezbollah barely garners 30% of the Lebanese vote . . . the fact that a terrorist group funded by Iran is even garnering any votes at all is cause for alarm. It was barely a few yrs ago that Hamas could barely garner 30% of the vote too.

If Lebanon is not a state then it can't be a puppet of Iran for there is no state to control.The Syrians,though cooperative with Iran and N.Korea,are no puppets

You still haven't explained what it is Obama will do for Ahmedinejad that will change things.The US already talks with Iran.The Clinton Administration also talked to Iran,so also did Bush 1 and Reagan.

How will Obama "change" Iran for the better? Obama himself has never claimed that the Bush Administration doesn't talk to Iran,claiming that will amount to a barefaced lie.Where Obama claims to offer a policy difference is that he will maintain presidential talks with Iran without pre-conditions.

I don't know about you,but I don't think the Iranian Mullahs are like a spurned girlfriend whose main gripe is that Uncle Sam won't talk to them.Their ideology is deeply rooted and cannot be negotiated away.It is the height of naivety to suggest that talking to them "without pre-conditions" is the elixir for their intransigence.

I'm glad you noted that it was Carter(any surprise that he loves Obama?) whose 'wonderful' idea of talking your enemy into submission that corralled Israel and not Reagan.Today,Carter's NSA,Brzezinski,is an Obama adviser.

I think we need to look into this misconception that Obama is willing to just go talk to Iran without preconditions . . . i suppose his policy thrust is to talk to them ONLY when they are willing to come to the roundtable.
Bush has "talked" to Iran by flexing his muscles . . .

I believe strongly that this is not merely a battle of wills but one of deep-seated religious and political ideology that cannot be undone just by a few rounds of talks. At the end of the day Iran and the US will never be friends . . . Obama has not ruled out the use of the military when it comes to Iran, perhaps many of us will rather see some effort on the part of the US to do something more than just shipping tanks and troops to Tehran.

4 Him:

I think we need to look into this misconception that Obama is willing to just go talk to Iran without preconditions . . . i suppose his policy thrust is to talk to them ONLY when they are willing to come to the roundtable.
Bush has "talked" to Iran by flexing his muscles . . .

Obviously,unless one has a few loose screws in the head,you can only talk to Iran if they are willing to talk,otherwise you will be engaging in a monologue.I don't think Obama has reached that extent.

The question is;if and when Iran indicates interest in talking,should the US talk to them without preconditions? While you are busy talking,Iran's nuclear enrichment carries on regardless.Have you forgotten that an Iranian official noted that his country wants to drag out talks over its nuclear programme until the programme is completed?

Anybody with knowledge of history,has seen this happen before.A country bent on going nuclear carries on its programme while simultaneously "sitting at the roundtable" discussing how it should stop it.N.Korea did it to the last Democrat we had in the White House.

Here is an excerpt from the NYT on Obama's plans:

Making clear that he planned to talk to Iran without preconditions, Mr. Obama emphasized further that “changes in behavior” by Iran could possibly be rewarded with membership in the World Trade Organization, other economic benefits and security guarantees.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/02/us/politics/02obama.html

Here is an excerpt from Obama's website:

Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/

I certainly do not agree to talking to Iran without preconditions, i might support Obama but i wont swallow wholesale the idea that we have sane individuals in Tehran who are interested in peace rather than a global isl'amic caliphate complete with nuclear weapons.

I prefer Israel's approach, once there is evidence of a nuclear enrichment programme then bomb it. You can always talk later.