"Romnesia".

[upsideguy]

I guess it comes down to whether you are a maker or a taker. and if you live in another country, Obama is certainly the best choice if you want American primacy to wane

With all due respect Turtle, you participate in a profession that is all about taking. The fact is, attorneys add almost nothing to GDP in real sense. They produce nothing. They are not makers, but rather live on the backs of those that do make.

In general, the only reason you need an attorney is to defend yourself (actively or pro-actively) against the other guy's attorney. If we lived in a less litigious society with businessman of reasonable integrity, attorneys would not be necessary (and certainly not missed). Its fundamentally a self-sustaining parasitic profession.

Sorry man, but hearing you shout from you high horse every day gets a bit tiring. A little humility, including counting your blessings, would make you a bit more credible.

 

[Glowpun]

Perhaps all those topics you wish he will address will come out on the third debate and then some...maybe? There is still plenty of time...maybe?

 

[zimmer]

That's just the excuse you use to justify the republican failure. it says something about a person who can see no other reason for a minorites success other than it being given to him in some way. :coffeepap

Are you telling us Obama made his way on merit alone?
How does an unfocused high school student whose mother scolded him for being a loafer, and who was notorious for partying all weekend get into Columbia... and then to Harvard?

It is possible that Obama benefited from Columbia’s affirmative action program, which the university had recently defended in an amicus curie brief to the Supreme Court in the celebrated Bakke case (1977). Columbia joined several other elite universities in defending the use of race as a factor in college admissions. The brief had argued that “minority status must be considered independently of economic or cultural deprivation.”

Given that 1981 turned out to be a relatively easy year to enter Columbia as a transfer student, and the fact that Obama was applying as a transfer student from a private college in California, as well as a minority student, Obama likely would have stood out among applicants, regardless of his scores and grades.

Exclusive: The Vetting - Did Obama Have Lower SAT Scores Than George W. Bush?

Choom Gang experience goes a long way I see.

 

[justabubba]

Are you telling us Obama made his way on merit alone?
How does an unfocused high school student whose mother scolded him for being a loafer, and who was notorious for partying all weekend get into Columbia... and then to Harvard?

what university seeking brilliant students would not have accepted Obama
his intellect is obvious
and a lot of smart people like to party
so what?

Choom Gang experience goes a long way I see.

don't understand your oblique reference

 

[Rokkitsci]

what university seeking brilliant students would not have accepted Obama
his intellect is obvious
and a lot of smart people like to party
so what?

don't understand your oblique reference

No - it is not obvious. In fact such a statement "Obama is brilliant" is downright mystifying.

What do you base this opinion on? Is it because his campaign has said so? Is it because the media (same as his campaign) says so? Exactly what has he said or done that causes you to accept so blindly the 'Obama is brilliant' meme?

I will grant you that Obama is highly successful as a DEM politician - he has all the right 'birthright' qualifications - he is ruthless, he looks good, he speaks well, he can only appeal to emotion (never logic), he is black, he supports the socialist fringe, he is a race-baiter, he is very generous with other people's money, and he has absolutely no compunction about lying about anything at any time.

Other than that, he has no accomplishments whatsoever that would intimate he is 'brilliant' in the real world. He MAY have good grades, but we will never know that for sure. He MAY have even gotten his academic credentials legitimately, but we will never know for sure. It is certainly not OBVIOUS he is intelligent at anything other than his success in the shady world of Chicago politics. By this standard Blogogovich was/is also "brilliant."

My opinion of his intelligence did come up a notch after the second debate. It did not equate to 'intelligence' in the sense that I use the word, but more in the sense that he can marshal a cogent thought while in a non-scripted situation. Of course everything he said confirms my opinion that he is a perfect DEM candidate given his propensity to lie and misinform at any time on any subject. But he was able to lie well.

And yes - some rich people like to party - so what?

Oh - and the oblique reference was to Obama being a self-admitted crackhead. And my apologies to you if you never referred to Bush as a crackhead.

 

[disneydude]

Romney has serious problems being honest. How anyone could trust a word that comes out of his mouth is amazing.

 

[zimmer]

what university seeking brilliant students would not have accepted Obama
his intellect is obvious
and a lot of smart people like to party
so what?

His intellect is oblivious... but he reads a mean Teleprompteur.
Airheads like to party too.

don't understand your oblique reference

He had to bring something... it certainly wasn't his grades.

 

[Fruityfact]

His intellect is oblivious... but he reads a mean Teleprompteur.
Airheads like to party too.
He had to bring something... it certainly wasn't his grades.

Teleprompter?
Well, if we recall, he torched Romney without out one this past week.

 

[zimmer]

Teleprompter?
Well, if we recall, he torched Romney without out one this past week.

LOL... only in the minds of Leftists who were happy to see he didn't get his pants pulled down and his ass spanked like a little boy.

The polls... they tell a different story.
Obama told us nothing about his plan for America.
Obama has no defense for his tragic management of America.

Americans saw that... not just the 20% of hard-core dead enders... Americans saw Romney dissect Obama and lay his failures at his feet.

So... what's Obama's answer??? Big Bird... Romnesia...
This ain't 2007... Obama has a record and we've lived through 4-years of Hope & Change (you can believe in)... and Yes We can.

As the Finns say... when the S**t is in the pants... it's too late. For Obama... it's too late.
Thank God.

 

[Aberration]

Romney has serious problems being honest. How anyone could trust a word that comes out of his mouth is amazing.

Hope and Change.

Now that is something you can believe.

 

[Amigo]

Romney has serious problems being honest. How anyone could trust a word that comes out of his mouth is amazing.

Oh my, I can't imagine! :doh

 

[Fruityfact]

LOL... only in the minds of Leftists who were happy to see he didn't get his pants pulled down and his ass spanked like a little boy.

The polls... they tell a different story.
Obama told us nothing about his plan for America.
Obama has no defense for his tragic management of America.

Americans saw that... not just the 20% of hard-core dead enders... Americans saw Romney dissect Obama and lay his failures at his feet.

So... what's Obama's answer??? Big Bird... Romnesia...
This ain't 2007... Obama has a record and we've lived through 4-years of Hope & Change (you can believe in)... and Yes We can.

As the Finns say... when the S**t is in the pants... it's too late. For Obama... it's too late.
Thank God.

Romney's answer for what he was going to cut was big bird...he has no answer to cover the shortfall he will create with the tax cuts and increased military spending
Nvm...i won't get through the antithinking cap upon your head.

 

[Aberration]

Romney's answer for what he was going to cut was big bird...he has no answer to cover the shortfall he will create with the tax cuts and increased military spending
Nvm...i won't get through the antithinking cap upon your head.

This never seems to be a problem when spending. No one's ever cared about covering it until now.

 

[Rokkitsci]

Romney's answer for what he was going to cut was big bird...he has no answer to cover the shortfall he will create with the tax cuts and increased military spending
Nvm...i won't get through the antithinking cap upon your head.

hmmm - what kind of cap are you wearing = Alco maybe??

Romney said that he would examine every program we spend money on and apply a standard to whether that program should continue receiving the amount of funding it has enjoyed in the past. That standard is = "Is the benefit from this program worth borrowing the money from China to fund it?"

Now that is a very clear standard - you can argue about whether you think that standard may put at risk some of your sacred cows, but there is not fuzz on that statement.

You vote for Romney or against him based on how you think he will apply that standard - i.e. do his standards align with yours to the extent that you would want him in charge of applying them? if so - vote for him.

We know what standards Obama applies to expenditures. He consults political polls, not the measurables of a situation. He is quite content to dole out money to those who will kick back a portion of it to his campaign coffers (think 'green' corporations.) He will lavish money on voting blocs who are dependent on more 'free obamafones' for their daily sustenance. He will violate the written law to protect his donor base (unions getting favored treatment while shafting the non-union workers in the GM bankruptcy.)

If you agree with Obama's 'standards' (more accurately 'lack of integrity') then vote for Obama.

If you cannot understand - or don't care one way or another - vote Obama. Put Nov. 7th on your calendar and set your alarm for 8pm.

eta: the 'big bird' comment was a personal gig of Leher - an attempt at humor, not a definition of policy.

btw - has Obama ever been totally specific about all the programs he will protect? OR - are generalities that everyone understands completely OK - even praiseworthy as being 'highly intelligent' - when Obama does it (or doesn't do it - never mind, move on. )

FORWARD!!!!! <== Now there is a DETAILED plan that we can HOPE to BELIEVE in.

 

[justabubba]

No - it is not obvious. In fact such a statement "Obama is brilliant" is downright mystifying.

What do you base this opinion on? Is it because his campaign has said so? Is it because the media (same as his campaign) says so? Exactly what has he said or done that causes you to accept so blindly the 'Obama is brilliant' meme?

I will grant you that Obama is highly successful as a DEM politician - he has all the right 'birthright' qualifications - he is ruthless, he looks good, he speaks well, he can only appeal to emotion (never logic), he is black, he supports the socialist fringe, he is a race-baiter, he is very generous with other people's money, and he has absolutely no compunction about lying about anything at any time.

Other than that, he has no accomplishments whatsoever that would intimate he is 'brilliant' in the real world. He MAY have good grades, but we will never know that for sure. He MAY have even gotten his academic credentials legitimately, but we will never know for sure. It is certainly not OBVIOUS he is intelligent at anything other than his success in the shady world of Chicago politics. By this standard Blogogovich was/is also "brilliant."

My opinion of his intelligence did come up a notch after the second debate. It did not equate to 'intelligence' in the sense that I use the word, but more in the sense that he can marshal a cogent thought while in a non-scripted situation. Of course everything he said confirms my opinion that he is a perfect DEM candidate given his propensity to lie and misinform at any time on any subject. But he was able to lie well.

And yes - some rich people like to party - so what?

Oh - and the oblique reference was to Obama being a self-admitted crackhead. And my apologies to you if you never referred to Bush as a crackhead.

apology accepted

 

[Verax]

You have to admit he bitch slapped Romney with this. I laughed my ass off.

 

[Jonsa]

hmmm - what kind of cap are you wearing = Alco maybe??

Romney said that he would examine every program we spend money on and apply a standard to whether that program should continue receiving the amount of funding it has enjoyed in the past. That standard is = "Is the benefit from this program worth borrowing the money from China to fund it?"

Now that is a very clear standard - you can argue about whether you think that standard may put at risk some of your sacred cows, but there is not fuzz on that statement.

that is not what he says in his 80 page plan. In fact on day one he is going to table legislation for an immediate across the board nonsecurity discretionary spending cut of 5%. Not that that isn't bullcrap as well unless he has a crystal ball on sequestration resolution in the lame duck.
Its also a tad disengenous, since the money owed to china is for all the goods that America has bought on the ol' credit card so to speak - tnotes.
China only holds 8% of total debt. The saudis own more in addition to owning about 10% of the american economy.

You vote for Romney or against him based on how you think he will apply that standard - i.e. do his standards align with yours to the extent that you would want him in charge of applying them? if so - vote for him.

Those are his standards today. If we don't like them He'll have more tomorrow. that's the way he's been running his campaign.

We know what standards Obama applies to expenditures. He consults political polls, not the measurables of a situation. He is quite content to dole out money to those who will kick back a portion of it to his campaign coffers (think 'green' corporations.) He will lavish money on voting blocs who are dependent on more 'free obamafones' for their daily sustenance. He will violate the written law to protect his donor base (unions getting favored treatment while shafting the non-union workers in the GM bankruptcy.)

If you agree with Obama's 'standards' (more accurately 'lack of integrity') then vote for Obama.

Yeah right.

If you cannot understand - or don't care one way or another - vote Obama. Put Nov. 7th on your calendar and set your alarm for 8pm.

eta: the 'big bird' comment was a personal gig of Leher - an attempt at humor, not a definition of policy.

so when he said he would cut funding to NPR and PBS he was only joking? even tho he has said it both before and after? do you have some special "tell" to determine if he actually means what he says at any point? In which case I guess women should not worry about cutting funding to planned parenthood because he was only joking or.... was he?

btw - has Obama ever been totally specific about all the programs he will protect? OR - are generalities that everyone understands completely OK - even praiseworthy as being 'highly intelligent' - when Obama does it (or doesn't do it - never mind, move on. )

FORWARD!!!!! <== Now there is a DETAILED plan that we can HOPE to BELIEVE in.

I agree, Obama certainly has been short on detail, merely describing policy details and results in his speeches and such, and on his website, he deals strictly in generalities and broad comparisons.

 

[Boo Radley]

Are you telling us Obama made his way on merit alone?
How does an unfocused high school student whose mother scolded him for being a loafer, and who was notorious for partying all weekend get into Columbia... and then to Harvard?



Choom Gang experience goes a long way I see.

Are saying those under AA don't make it on their merit? If so, you completely lack knowledge of AA. And once in, he had to meet the same standards as everyone else. No one passes because of race. And by law, schools can't admit based solely on race; in fact, it can't even be a deciding factor. So, yes, he made it on his own merit.

BTW, Bush being a "C" student, what merit did he make it on? Just asking. :coffeepap

 

[zimmer]

Are saying those under AA don't make it on their merit? If so, you completely lack knowledge of AA. And once in, he had to meet the same standards as everyone else. No one passes because of race. And by law, schools can't admit based solely on race; in fact, it can't even be a deciding factor. So, yes, he made it on his own merit.

BTW, Bush being a "C" student, what merit did he make it on? Just asking. :coffeepap

Readd and listen to what Sowell has studied.
The links are there.
Just do it.

 

[AdamT]

Readd and listen to what Sowell has studied.
The links are there.
Just do it.

So is it safe to say that you think Clarence Thomas is not qualified to be a Supreme Court justice?

 

[zimmer]

So is it safe to say that you think Clarence Thomas is not qualified to be a Supreme Court justice?

You must feel really, really clever... now...

...I said it before and will say it again... go read the links provided by what Thomas Sowell has researched.
Just do it.
Enlighten yourself.
Then come back to me.

 

[Boo Radley]

You must feel really, really clever... now...

...I said it before and will say it again... go read the links provided by what Thomas Sowell has researched.
Just do it.
Enlighten yourself.
Then come back to me.

Thomas Sowell? Get serious.

 

[zimmer]

Thomas Sowell? Get serious.

Sum peeple yu jus caint reech...

...they are closed minded.
I was once a Commi Lib just like you. Just like you. The difference is I kept an open mind.

 

[Boo Radley]

Sum peeple yu jus caint reech...

...they are closed minded.
I was once a Commi Lib just like you. Just like you. The difference is I kept an open mind.

No, but I need more than a political entertainer. I understand AA. And I know what is and isn't done under it. Sheep need a talking head to tell them. Just saying. . . .

 

[Mason66]

I find it childish for Obama to resort to name calling like this.

I expect this from a 5th grader, not from the President Of The United States.