It is currently 04/04/20 6:45 pm
WELCOME to Voices or Choices!
If you have no posts, please register for a new account.
If you are a former member rejoining VoC and wish to be reunited with your existing posts,
please email your username to

All times are UTC - 6 hours

  Page 1 of 1   [ 11 posts ] New Topic Add Reply
Author Message
PostPosted: 12/28/10 1:44 pm • # 1 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 07/03/10
Posts: 1848

Shocker: Obama to give America back to Indians
A secret U.N. plot revealed: First, they'll take Manhattan                     Image
By Alex Pareene

Congratulations, 2010, for fitting in one more completely insane made-up right-wing scandal: Barack Obama is going to give Manhattan back to the Indians! Also the U.N. will help, because grrrr, the U.N.!

Earlier this month, Obama said the U.S. would support the U.N.'s "Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People," a non-legally binding promise to finally treat indigenous peoples with some small amount of decency after hundreds of years of the government murdering them and expelling them from their homes and forcibly relocating them to barren desert ghettos and now just letting them live in conditions of appalling, abject poverty. Bush refused to sign on to this, because, I dunno, it was from the U.N., and it might lead to frivolous lawsuits, or something? It's a non-binding Declaration that basically says "we will be nice to indigenous people," there's no good reason not to support it.

But because hysterical right-wingers are hysterical right-wingers, they are seizing on this document as yet more proof that Obama wants to forcibly redistribute all the wealth, from productive hard-working Real Americans to swarthy welfare leeches. Take it away, World Net Daily!

    President Obama is voicing support for a U.N. resolution that could accomplish something as radical as relinquishing some U.S. sovereignty and opening a path for the return of ancient tribal lands to American Indians, including even parts of Manhattan.

    The issue is causing alarm among legal experts.

Oh, I bet it is. WND-founder Joseph Farah has a little column where he repeats this insane story, and he keeps writing the phrase "Carter-era" instead of "late-1970s," but then he quotes some egg-head professor who says that all the tribes want is some "open lands/spaces for repurchase," which doesn't really sound like "giving back" Manhattan to the Native Americans.

I say if you're gonna do it, do it right and actually give New York back to the Delaware Indians! I'd rather be ruled by them than by Bloomberg and Albany.

(Also why don't Scalia-style Constitutional originalists ever insist that America honor its various broken treaties with all the Indians whose lands we stole as we systematically removed and massacred them? I know that would entail giving them back the entirety of Oklahoma, among lots of other amusing things, but the supremacy of treaties is in the damn Constitution! Although I guess Article Six, with its federal supremacy clause and its no religious test talk, has always been the article that right-wingers are not particularly enthusiastic about.)

PostPosted: 12/28/10 2:19 pm • # 2 
Do you mean that Obama is really going to give this Country back to them after all we went through trying to kill all of the Indians off while we were at war with them... We went looking for them and then we sent them anywhere we wanted to and the Indians had to go in most cases, since they had no choice...

PostPosted: 12/29/10 4:14 am • # 3 
User avatar

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42104
LOL, pic ~ I read about this somewhere in the last couple of days ~ I suspected at first that it must be from The Onion ~ but the fabricated uproar is apparently real ~ I'm beginning to wonder if the far-right can exist without some ridiculous new pretend-horror each week ~


PostPosted: 12/29/10 4:42 am • # 4 
Why did he choose Cleveland?  Because he likes Dennis Kucinich?

PostPosted: 12/29/10 4:51 am • # 5 
gopqed wrote:
Why did he choose Cleveland?  Because he likes Dennis Kucinich?

But no comment on dumbass righties.

PostPosted: 12/29/10 5:13 am • # 6 
I didn't comment on you, either.  Image 

PostPosted: 12/29/10 5:14 am • # 7 
I hadn't said anything.

PostPosted: 12/29/10 5:26 am • # 8 
My initial comment was poking fun at the "controversy" and, by extension, those who jabber on about it.  Perhaps subtlety and abstract thought isn't your thing.

PostPosted: 12/29/10 5:35 am • # 9 
But your failure to be critical and/or poke fun at righties while constantly having a go at the other side is well known.

PostPosted: 12/29/10 5:51 am • # 10 

You tend to only see what you want to see.  I bring some sorely lacking variety in viewpoints here.  I have better things to do than to sit around back-slapping and nodding my head.

PostPosted: 12/29/10 6:23 am • # 11 
You obviously don't read all the threads. There has been some fairly scathing criticisms of the Obama administration and sundry Dems.
But I guess you prefer the National Enquirer environment at CEII.

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

  Page 1 of 1   [ 11 posts ] New Topic Add Reply

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group