Ooops! Yahoo News Posts Article Calling Kenya The Land of Obama’s Birth

Yahoo! News raised the ire of liberals with a June 21 article that seems to have accidentally stated that Kenya was the “the country of Obama’s birth.”

The article was quickly changed, of course, but not before people noticed and not before Twitter became filled with outrage.

The piece, written by Rachel Rose Hartman, was headlined “White House doesn’t have ‘figure on costs’ of Africa trip,” and noted in the first paragraph that Obama was visiting Africa. “But he won’t be stopping in the country of his birth,” the paragraph ended.


Screenshot of article in its original form

Obama’s African trip has him visiting South Africa, Senegal, and Tanzania. But he won’t be visiting Kenya. Naturally with that opening line, many assumed that writer Hartman was talking about Kenya, the long rumored land of the President’s birth.

The outrage rose quickly at the intimation that Obama was born in Africa, of course. The Twitter mob was soon calling for Hartman’s job.

Needless to say, the Yahoo! article was soon changed. The first paragraph now ends saying, “but he won’t be stopping in his ancestral homeland.”

To Yahoo!’s credit a disclaimer leads the article now. “Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly identified the president’s birthplace,” it reads.

It was likely just a bad turn of phrase. After all, the same writer wrote an anti-birther piece in 2011 that essentially calls birthers racists.

Regardless, it is an amusing muff up, isn’t it?

Senator Corker: 11 Million 'Citizens' Are 'in the Shadows' Today
Teachers Unions Do NOT Care About Kids
  • jim_m

    This wouldn’t be a problem if his first book wasn’t sold as being by the successful black politician born in Kenya.

    But let’s take it as a given that the US is his country of birth. I’d be very happy if he would not be stopping here anymore.

    • Hawk_TX

      It would be easier to take it as a given that the U.S. is his birth country if he would actually provide any authentic documentation proving it.

  • Hank_M

    ” The Twitter mob was soon calling for Hartman’s job.”

    Tolerant bunch these liberals.

  • Brucehenry

    On the day the Supreme Court guts the VRA we get this piece from Warner.

    • jim_m

      And they were quite justified in doing so. To claim that the conditions which existed in the ’60’s are still operative today is partisan and racialist bullshit and the court points that out in its decision.

      Today the VRA is used to stop states from cleaning up the voter roles. In counties where the number of registered voters exceeds the number of voting age adults the dems have used the VRA to keep the rolls from being purged allowing the black vote to be nullified. It’s the VRA and the left that are racist demanding that they have the right to keep fraudulent voters on the rolls.

      And so what if this issue comes up today? What’s the problem Bruce? You can only focus on one topic at a time? Are we stretching you intellectually by making you think of more than one thing at a time? Or is your statement just a bullshit accusation of racism? (yeah, we know it is but your race card is overdrawn)

      • Brucehenry

        LOL Ok, Jim. I was just snarking a little. I’m glad I gave you the opportunity, though, to get your “liberals-are-the-real-racists” on.

        • jim_m

          It has the virtue of being true.

        • Rdmurphy42

          Bruce, please explain why criterion and data from the 1960’s should be used today to determine the propriety of extraordinary interference by the Federal Government in a states electoral process?

      • Commander_Chico

        Nothing would match what Katherine Harris did in 2000. She hired a private company which purged the rolls of all Tyrone Jacksons and Lakeisha Washingtons if there was one Tyrone or Lakeisha who was a felon, while being extremely selective with “white” and Hispanic names.

        That’s really how they stole the 2000 election.

        • jim_m

          You should hook up with that LaRouchie guy. Your ideas are even more as stupid than his.

        • Retired military

          Give us a break chuckles. You mean when the left leaning news media called Florida before the polls were even closed. Or when you had the hag saying “I’ll go to jail if I have to”

          Stop giving us the stole the 2000 election line. It’s old, it’s stale and it isnt even worth arguing anymore.

          The libs have stolen a whole host of elections since trying to steal that one.

        • Jwb10001

          Now that you’ve solved that mystery can you please find Jimmy Hoffa and please also explain how Al Franken became a senator.

        • Vagabond661

          How’s it hanging Chad? Didn’t the Supreme Court make that decision?

    • warnertoddhuston

      Of course, this WAS written YESTERDAY and only posted today!

      • As if facts could sway the opinions of that scat…

      • Commander_Chico

        Yeah but you’re still not touching the NSA.

        Understandable, because they are reading all of your emails.

        • warnertoddhuston

          Dick Cheney and Donny Rumsfeld told me not to write about it.

    • Commander_Chico

      I don’t think one group of states should be treated differently than other states at this point.

      First, it only increases a sense of grievance in the old Confederacy. Both Reconstruction and Restoration should be over. It’s one of those things that ends up being counterproductive.

      Second, any discriminatory provisions in voting laws can still be stopped by a trip to a courthouse and an injunction.

      • Brucehenry

        If the Bubba and Paula Deens of the Old Confederacy feel a sense of grievance fuck ’em.

        The VRA has been used many times — recently — to stop shenanigans in Alabama and other bumfuck states. The trips to the courthouse included citation of the VRA.

        • LiberalNightmare

          Robert Byrd must be spinning in his grave.

        • jim_m

          [citation needed]

          Sorry, Bruce. Your delusion that the south is the same as it was 50 years ago is just that, a delusion. Despite your desire to cast conservatives as racists, the fact is that democrats were and still are the racists. Dems were and still are the people most likely to be committing voter fraud and suppression. Dems were and still are the people who want to prevent the vote from being one person, one vote and they are against ensuring that only eligible voters cast ballots.

          Remember that the big bogey men of the left, Bull Connor and George Wallace, were on the left.

          You are siding with those who are opposed to democracy. Not that your doing so surprises anyone in the least,.

          • Brucehenry

            Again you are too stupid or dishonest, or both, to acknowledge that 50 years ago “Democrat” and “conservative” weren’t mutually exclusive terms, as they pretty much are today.

            You and your ilk (purposely?) conflate the two terms to support your laughable assertions that guys like George Wallace and Bull Connors were “on the left” because they were Democrats.

            You’re a guy who is sooo certain that the South is different than it was 50 years ago — a guy who doesn’t live in the South btw, have you ever lived down here? But you’re equally certain that the Democratic party has NOT changed in 50 years. What a buffoon.

          • jim_m

            The dems are still focused on race as being the defining feature of an individual.

            Nothing has changed with the left. We are given fresh proof of that every day. Biden described obama as an exception because he was a black man who was also “clean and articulate”. The dems are still the racist and racialist people they have always been.

            So yes the South has changed It is less racist because there are fewer dems.

            The reason the left has not changed is because it is a way of thinking. Lots of things change, but when a group is defined by ideology that doesn’t change much. WHen people started thinking different about religion we got the reformation. Those who thought differently were no longer called Catholics because they thought differently and identified differently.

            A person can change. Ideological groups don’t usually change and when they do it is a very slow process.

          • Brucehenry

            And those who call themselves Catholic today think exactly the same about religion as those who called themselves Catholic before the Reformation? Or even 50 years ago?

            Anyway, who cares how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? My point was your dishonesty in conflating the terms “Democrat” and “the left” as if there had never been such an animal as a conservative Democrat. There used to be lots of ’em. In the South and elsewhere. ESPECIALLY 50 years ago.

            Then folks started calling some of them “Reagan Democrats.” Gradually they became Republicans. Now it’s rare to find a conservative Democrat, but there are lots of “third-way” DLC types trying to have it both ways.

            But I agree ideological groups can be slow to change. Like the racist white power structure in the South, 50 years hasn’t been long enough.

          • jim_m

            The Roman Catholic Church still bases its theology on the teachings of Augustine and Aquinas. In terms of official doctrine, precious little has changed in the last 1000 years.

            As for how many angels can dance on a pin head, I would think that you would take a personal interest in that answer.

          • Brucehenry

            Gud wun

          • Rdmurphy42

            Hey Bruce – to you, what criterion would be sufficient justification to not have the Feds poking their nose in those states elections in an extra special way? I suspect I know the answer; if they regularly started voting exclusively for Democrats.

        • Retired military

          By Bubba did you mean Bill Clinton? LOL

          • Brucehenry

            Good one, but no, Paula’s brother goes by that handle.

          • Vagabond661

            Yeah I have ate at his restaurant in Savannah many times. Great food.

          • Brucehenry

            Yeah I’ve tried many of Paula’s recipes, I love greasy Southern food. Just because she’s a horrible clueless racist and her brother is a misogynist racist pig doesn’t mean she’s a bad cook.

          • Vagabond661

            You base a person whole existence on something she said 27 years ago to her husband? That doesn’t sound like you, Bruce.

            I guess Alec Baldwin and Bill Maher current abusive lifestyle is ok?

          • Brucehenry

            Nope. There’s not a Southerner of that age still alive who never used that word — in anger, or under the impression they were “making a harmless joke,” or among the right peer group in the 60s, 70s, or even 80s.

            My impression of Paula comes from reports her abusive, misogynist brother used the word all the time, to refer to employees. And she knew about it, tolerated and encouraged it, and he worked for her. Plus the whole “plantation wedding” concept thing, plus the video clips of her patronizing her assistant/driver, plus the fact that her “apologies” have been self-serving I’m-the-real-victim-here typical conservative who-me-ism. There’s lots more out there about her and her clueless, casual racism over the years. I ain’t your Google.

            I have no opinion of Alec Baldwin other than the fact that his scene in “Glengarry Glen Ross” is an iconic movie moment. As for Maher, I’ve repeatedly said on these boards that he can be funny at times but often goes too far and is offensive just for the sake of being offensive, and that that ain’t funny.

          • Vagabond661

            “There’s not a Southerner of that age still alive who never used that word”

            You know how racist that statement is? You have impugned an ENTIRE region because of your narrow views. Was that word used in the 60’s? Of course. Was it used by everyone? No. Was the use of that word only used in the South? Nope again. That period of time was not our proudest moment. Desegregation cause race riots in the early 70’s at our school as the government got rid of the hometown school instead of fixing the problem of the black schools. To ride the bus to the new school across town meant kids had to get up sometimes an hour earlier.

            I have seen no evidence to what you allege to that she “tolerated and encouraged it.” I have not seen the video clips of patronizing either. *shrug*. are you saying people are not perfect? I would agree. I have seen a LOT of aberrant behavior from all sorts of people. I put that in the category of “piling on”.

            As to plantation theme weddings, again so narrow minded. If you were doing a Taj Mahal theme wedding, wouldn’t you hire people who are from India to be in it? Think about it, any wedding that has a them needs to have elements of people and things to complete that theme. On a bigger scale if you were filming a biographical movie about Mohammed Ali, would the lead character be African-American? If it was a movie about inner city gang violence do you think they may be one or two black actors?

            I am not a fan of Paula Deens. I have never been to her restaurant on my trips to Savannah. I think she plays up the “y’all’ factor waaay too much.

            Given everything, we can never move on from that period if there is not forgiveness. That is what Paula Deen asked for. Ball is in everyone else’s court.

          • Brucehenry

            LOL I guess I should have said “There’s VIRTUALLY not a Southerner still alive…” No offense meant, also LOL. But I’m pretty sure I’M the real victim here since you have called me a racist, hahaha.

            I was in the 10th grade when my school was finally integrated. The black high school was closed and the black students bussed to the two white schools in town. 10th graders went to school from 12-5 and juniors and seniors from 7-12 am. There was trouble, and some violence, but not as much as was feared.

            This was 15 YEARS after Brown v Board. If you think the white power structure was ever going to “fix the problem of the black schools” you know as little about the history of the South as you know about Deen. Desegregation was necessary and probably the best thing that ever happened in or to the South. Well, that and central air conditioning.

            Just because you are unaware of the extent of Deen’s and her brother’s racism does not mean it doesn’t exist. Google it before you deny it because you “have seen no evidence” of it.

            And I would not be planning a “Taj Mahal” themed wedding. Know why? Because it would be racist and offensive. Your movie analogy is a fail just because it’s irrelevant. Nobody was making a movie. And by the way, racial and sexual stereotypes are still rampant in movies.http://www.cracked.com/article_19549_5-old-timey-prejudices-that-still-show-up-in-every-movie.html/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=fanpage&utm_campaign=new+article&wa_ibsrc=fanpage
            http://www.cracked.com/article_20082_6-insane-stereotypes-that-movies-cant-seem-to-get-over.html

            Oh, and I bet Paula Deen IS asking for forgiveness, now that her clueless casual racism has been exposed. Her endorsements are gone, her TV show too. Insincerity much? The I’m-the-real-victim-of-PC who-me?-ism is strong with this one. Self-awareness, not so much.

          • Vagabond661

            It’s interesting that a Taj Mahal themed wedding is racist to you.

            http://www.thebridelink.com/blog/2013/03/28/unique-wedding-themes/

            See #4 in the link. You are too PC and again narrow minded but it’s a free country. There is a reason there are stereotypes. Or for profiling. Exceptions are for every rule. Halloween must be real racist if we dress up like an American Indian or Eskimo or a sheik.

            I disagree that desegregation helped the race issue. If it did, we wouldn’t be talking about race any more. Schools by the way are STILL failing so it didn’t fix that either.

            The best thing in the last 30 years to fix race relations was the Cosby Show IMHO. The government did nothing to improve it. Or at least “I have seen no evidence of it”.

          • Brucehenry

            Nothing racist about a wedding incorporating a love for Indian culture. A “Taj Mahal” theme invoked pictures in my mind of the Gunga Din-type epics of 20th century British and Hollywood cinema. Maybe I AM a little too PC sometimes, LOL. But yes, one can be offensive if one doesn’t watch out dressing up as an Eskimo or a sheikh. Would it be OK to come to a Halloween party in blackface?

            If you were in school in the South during desegregation you not only have seen evidence it helped, you lived it. I bet you made friends and acquaintances you would never even have met without it, among other benefits. For me, it was also the first time I knew black adults I had to call Mr and Mrs and not by their first names.

            Sorry you can’t see it. Forest for the trees, I guess. Your Cosby show analogy is like saying the best thing that ever happened for gay rights was “Will and Grace.”

            But thanks for disagreeing without being disagreeable. I hope I wasn’t too much of a butthead either.

          • jim_m

            A “Taj Mahal” theme invoked pictures in my mind of the Gunga Din-type epics of 20th century British and Hollywood cinema.

            If a conservative said that he would be called a racist. By left wing standards you just confessed to being a racist. You cannot think of Indian culture without immediately assuming a racist stereotype. OR perhaps equally worse, you cannot conceive of anyone else thinking about Indian people in non racist terms.

            As someone recently said, “Sorry you can’t see it. Forest for the trees, I guess.”

          • Brucehenry

            I won’t dignify your imaginary “gotcha” by addressing it, but I will point out that “equally worse” is an oxymoron, genius.

          • jim_m

            Equally worse than being a normal non-racist ass.

            Excuse me for not specifying the 3rd item to which I was comparing the two offensive kinds of reactions that explain your behavior. I didn’t realize that I was dealing with a such a simpleton as could not figure it out.

          • Brucehenry

            Your excuses are all accepted, Jim. Bless your heart.

          • Scratch a racist and a progtard yelps…

          • Vagabond661

            I graduated in 1972. We desegregated the year before, maybe two. My most vivid memory of desegregation was watching my bus driver getting beat to a pulp by a gang of blacks. We tried to get in to help him but were pushed away by a ring of blacks surrounding the ones who were doing the beating. I imagine the boys on the football team learned to get along better with each other than we did.

            Where I really learned about races and I mean all races and not blacks only was in the military. There was no color on a submarine. We were all Navy Blue. THAT is where I had friends who were other than “cracker”. Which by the way is just as racist term as the n-word. Speaking of that I have memories of my grandmother using the n-word many times but to her it wasn’t derogatory. “Yankee” was a lot more derogatory!

            I never watched “Will & Grace”. It seems shows that I have seen that depicted gays were in themselves stereotypical of gays. The thing about the Cosby Show is that is showed blacks didn’t have to be butlers (hello Benson) but could be professional, successful and well off.

            I don’t always pull off being cordial but it was a pleasure in discussing this with you. Hope that didn’t sound too gay. 🙂

          • Brucehenry

            Also class of ’72. Mainland High School, Daytona Beach, FL. Never served in the military, it wasn’t cool in my peer group of stoners and layabouts. (Misspent youth, had its drawbacks but a lot of good times I can still vaguely remember.) If I had it to do over I would make different choices, I hope, but going to a non-integrated school wouldn’t be one of them.

            You’ve got a point about the Cosby Show and also about “Will and Grace” and its ilk. Cosby DID do the country a world of good with his show, but it doesn’t negate the necessity of Brown v Board. And it probably wouldn’t have been on the air at all, in my opinion, had it not been for Brown and the Civil Rights struggle that preceded it. Much of the battle had been fought and largely won by 1985. “All in the Family” had as much to do with it as Cosby, I suggest.

            And LOL I rarely pull off cordiality either. Thanks again.

          • Vagabond661

            At the risk of blowing all this quan, I don’t disagree with the Brown vs the Board ruling, however forcing the schools to desegregate before the communities themselves did was wrong. There were black families who didn’t like the idea of bussing their kids to schools across town, too.

            We now live in communities where white, Hispanic, white Hispanic, Asian, black and other races (have I missed any?) are next door neighbors. No one turns a head any more when a mixed race couple walks by. NOW the community school would have a racial mixed not forced by some government.

            There will always be pockets of communities which are predominately one race or another. The problems happen when the government tries to get everyone to play nice.

          • Brucehenry

            Dude, those communities were only made possible by the Fair Housing Act, federal fairness-in-lending legislation, etc.

            Come on. People in the South only came around to shopping at the same stores, living in the same neighborhoods, etc AS A RESULT OF government action. Where’ve you been?

          • Vagabond661

            Well yeah. The government has made everyone broke and we all shop at Walmart now.

          • Brucehenry

            Wal-Mart, which got its start in benighted Arkansas, would never have been successful if the South hadn’t emerged from the Jim Crow era as a result of Brown v Board, the CRA, the VRA, etc.

            The South would still be a Third World pukehole if not for government action.

          • Vagabond661

            Yeah the South would be like Detroit…and California….

          • Brucehenry

            I won’t link to it, but The Rude Pundit has an entry today that is fairly close to my thinking about the Deen thingie.

        • Commander_Chico

          Most of the VRA is still there.

          The decision just removed the requirement that Confederate states get federal pre-approval for changes.

          If any proposed change is discriminatory, there is still the ability for the DOJ or private groups to go to court.

          • Brucehenry

            Right, and that requirement was the heart of the Act. It acted as a brake on the worst proposals. Now those proposals will have to actually go into effect to be challenged. Voting rights advocates won’t be able to litigate them all.

            Conservatives who constantly whine about unelected judges thwarting the will of Congress are fine with this decision, hahaha. The VRA was most recently renewed in 2006 in a GOP-controlled Congress with wide bipartisan support.

            In NC and Texas, to name only two examples, so-called “Voter ID” laws previously found to be illegal under the VRA are now moving forward. Republicans will waste no time suppressing as many black and Hispanic (read “Democratic”) votes as possible.

          • jim_m

            Were those found illegal by the FEC or by a court? The FEC is loaded with leftist federal bureaucrats and it routinely rules against common sense ideas to make elections fair.

            The only reason Texas and NC would have to run such laws past the FEC is because of the VRA. SO what you are really claiming is that you believe that some people should be held to different standards than other people. What you are really saying is that you don’t believe in the constitutional principle of equal treatment under the law.

            Voter ID laws have withstood court challenges in nearly every state that has passed such laws. requiring people to present a photo ID to verify that they are the registered voter they claim to be is not racist. The suggestion that it is is idiotic. Only someone looking at the world through racist colored glasses would ever think such a thing.

            The only reason to oppose voter ID is to make way for vote fraud.

          • Heaven forbid the dead should be prevented from voting early, often, and Democratic…

          • Brucehenry

            Ah yes the rampant problem of “vote fraud.”

            http://editors.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/05/this_is_important_give_it_a_read.php

            http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

            Go ahead and tell yourself that “Voter ID” laws aren’t attempts to disenfranchise minority, elderly, and low-income voters. You know, Democrats. Go ahead and pontificate some more about the South, where you don’t live and, I assume, never have lived. Just don’t try to blow your smoke up THIS ol’ Southern boy’s ass.

            I’m pretty sure “literacy tests” will be next, probably using “English only” laws as an excuse. And you “patriots” will be loudly claiming it’s only common sense.

          • jim_m

            No. Just low information voters, ie democrats

            There won’t be any other tests coming. Now you’re the one being paranoid.

          • Rdmurphy42

            Bruce, Why don’t you want to answer the question?

          • Brucehenry

            Sorry, which one is your favorite and the one you insist I answer?

          • Rdmurphy42

            There are actually three now …

            A: Hey Bruce, care to guess what state has the worst black registration and participation rates?

            B: Hey Bruce – to you, what criterion would be sufficient justification to not have the Feds poking their nose in those states elections in an extra special way? I suspect I know the answer; if they regularly started voting exclusively for Democrats.

            C: Bruce, please explain why criterion and data from the 1960’s should be used today to determine the propriety of extraordinary interference by the Federal Government in a states electoral process?

          • Brucehenry

            A. No, just tell me. I’m sure it proves something to you or you wouldn’t be so gleefully asking it twice. Enjoy.

            B. Whatever criteria the Congress used in 2006 is fine with me. I just hate when unelected judges thwart the will of Congress, don’t you? Especially a Republican-majority Congress.

            C. See B.

          • Rdmurphy42

            So are you equally upset when unelected judges thwart the will of California’s voters?

          • Brucehenry

            I’m pointing out the hypocrisy here, Murphy, you humorlesss schmuck. “Strict constructionists” like Scalia decry judicial activism in, say, the DOMA case, while PRACTICING it the day before in the VRA case.

          • Rdmurphy42

            Hey Bruce: Define what you consider activism, other than “Any decision that happens to not fall in a liberal direction”?

          • Brucehenry

            You don’t really “get” sarcasm, do you?

          • Rdmurphy42

            Nice attempt to dodge answering.

            Why do you not want to provide a definition of what you, Bruce Henry, would consider to define ‘Activism’?

            Incidentally, while I think the DOMA case was bad law … I wouldn’t call it activism either.

          • Brucehenry

            OK, Murph. I don’t fear what conservatives call “judicial activism.” The judiciary is a co-equal branch of government and I don’t see it as having over-reached, much.

            What I have done here is point out the irony of “strict constructionists” crying the blues about judicial activism when it comes to DOMA but mum’s the freaking word about it on the VRA case. There are countless similar examples, but the most glaring one is Bush v Gore, when conservatives were thrilled that the Supreme Court stopped the normal political process and declared Bush the winner.

          • Rdmurphy42

            You called THAT a normal process? The activists were the Florida supreme court, who stepped in and altered Florida’s normal political process. Repeatedly. Repeatedly told Florida it had to change the rules in the middle of the game. Again and Again and Again. Using the standard Democratic playbook of Recount, recount, recount, until the democrat is ahead and then immediately stop all recounts.

          • Brucehenry

            Where in the Constitution does it say the Supreme Court calls a disputed election? I believe the House of Representatives has that role.

            Anyway, sorry I brought up Bush v Gore. My point was “judicial activism” is only a bad thing to conservatives when they’re on the losing side.

          • Hawk_TX

            The supreme court did not call the election. They merely enforced Florida’s law which stated december 12 as the deadline for recounts. It was the Florida supreme court who tried to push the recount in defiance of Florida law. That was blatant judicial activism on their part

            Ultimately it didn’t matter since the media continued the recount on their own and determined that Bush’s lead would have only grown had the recount continued.

        • Rdmurphy42

          Hey Bruce, care to guess what state has the worst black registration and participation rates?

          • Brucehenry

            I’m sure you can’t wait to tell me.

        • Jwb10001

          And there is no discrimination in the north? As the left is fond of telling us there are racist everywhere (well at least everywhere there are conservatives.)

      • jim_m

        Not only does it keep alive a grievance with the former confederacy but it keeps alive false grievance with blacks. The presumption is of active discrimination and there is no requirement to show that any is taking place. It is guilty with no allowance for being proven innocent. Idiots like Bruce are in favor of that seemingly.

      • Retired military

        Of course picture ID to prove who you are would help but chuckles wont go there.

  • Par4Course

    Whether imported or home-grown, Obama is an incompetent mess.

  • Today’s “Pot calls Kettle blackie” moment brought to you by a progtard otherwise deserving of no notice:

    Again you are too stupid or dishonest, or both…

  • Brucehenry

    Ad hominems from the “moderator.” Awesome.

  • When is quoting one’s own words against them (and without attribution) ad-hominem? Only in a progtards mind.

  • Brucehenry

    The word “progtard’ is an ad hominem, genius.

  • Brucehenry

    Can someone explain to me what our soi-disant “moderator” is talking about?

  • I doubt anyone is willing to spend the time and effort to explain things to a self acknowledged progtard.

  • Make no mistake about it, to quote BHO. He was born in Kenya, which says volumes – BHO is a total Fraud! Phony BC, Phony social security card, nothing but a PHONY from the getgo! One thing about it, BO’s no Phony Muslim, that he is, 100%.