All anyone needs to know in November

[mraynrand]

Obama at least has been a success at every level of his life. An achiever.

He was the best community organizer Chicago ever saw. Except according to those who worked with him. He was also a great success as U.S. Senator. All the things he accomplished! He was a great success getting monies for his terrorist buddies. And he was a success prizing monies out of his multiple-felon buddy Tony Reszko. Barak Obama: A success at ever level.

Spin away, dipshit. Who ever said.."best." It is just hilarious to watch you repeatedly twist and spin.

BTW, hard to be the best at something when you are 26 or so with no experience in that area.

Let's review:

1. Graduateded from an IVY..got in on merit.
2. Worked at BIC, etc. in NYC....no family connections.
3. Community Organizer/Director. Hmm, success:

a: Staff grew from 1 to 13
b: budget increased around 600 percent

4. Attended Harvard Law
5. Editor of Law Review as freshmen....pretty much the top position you can have while attending law school as freshmen.
6. Prez of Law Review.
7. Graduated Magna cum laude....please tell me that isn't success.
8. Book contract based on his election as Prez...hmm, they must know something that you don't.
9. U of Chitown recruited him to be on faculty. Yep, those prestigious schools surely like losers. Progressed in his career there from lecturer to senior lecturer.
10. Voter reg drive meets goal...leading Crains to put him as 40 under 40 powers. Yep, that wasn't a success.
11. Worked several years for private law firm...not fired or had it go under...contrary to current prez.
12. member of board of directors of several orgs.
13. Elected and reelected as state senator...yep, people always reelect.
14. Keynote address at Dem Convention...yep, got that by being unsuccessful.
15. In senate..junior member..still sponsored some bills and was on committees. But, what would you expect of a junior senator...please give me someone who was there for 2 years that was better...

16. Won his parties nomination from widely considered unbeatable and presumptive nominee.

I, and most of america, would call that being a success. Guess it pales in comparison to your life, but...don't we all.

I didn't deny his success. I just filled in the details that a radical lefty like yourself wouldn't mention - or would actively obfuscate. I actually don't have any problems with his positive accomplishments - just with his radical leftists ideology and his current attempts to confuse the electorate as a policy chameleon.

BTW, you're slipping - 'Dipshit?' Such reparte! You're obviously a skilled linguist!

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Obama at least has been a success at every level of his life. An achiever.

He was the best community organizer Chicago ever saw. Except according to those who worked with him. He was also a great success as U.S. Senator. All the things he accomplished! He was a great success getting monies for his terrorist buddies. And he was a success prizing monies out of his multiple-felon buddy Tony Reszko. Barak Obama: A success at ever level.

Spin away, dipshit. Who ever said.."best." It is just hilarious to watch you repeatedly twist and spin.

BTW, hard to be the best at something when you are 26 or so with no experience in that area.

Let's review:

1. Graduateded from an IVY..got in on merit.
2. Worked at BIC, etc. in NYC....no family connections.
3. Community Organizer/Director. Hmm, success:

a: Staff grew from 1 to 13
b: budget increased around 600 percent

4. Attended Harvard Law
5. Editor of Law Review as freshmen....pretty much the top position you can have while attending law school as freshmen.
6. Prez of Law Review.
7. Graduated Magna cum laude....please tell me that isn't success.
8. Book contract based on his election as Prez...hmm, they must know something that you don't.
9. U of Chitown recruited him to be on faculty. Yep, those prestigious schools surely like losers. Progressed in his career there from lecturer to senior lecturer.
10. Voter reg drive meets goal...leading Crains to put him as 40 under 40 powers. Yep, that wasn't a success.
11. Worked several years for private law firm...not fired or had it go under...contrary to current prez.
12. member of board of directors of several orgs.
13. Elected and reelected as state senator...yep, people always reelect.
14. Keynote address at Dem Convention...yep, got that by being unsuccessful.
15. In senate..junior member..still sponsored some bills and was on committees. But, what would you expect of a junior senator...please give me someone who was there for 2 years that was better...

16. Won his parties nomination from widely considered unbeatable and presumptive nominee.

I, and most of america, would call that being a success. Guess it pales in comparison to your life, but...don't we all.

I didn't deny his success. I just filled in the details that a radical lefty like yourself wouldn't mention - or would actively obfuscate. I actually don't have any problems with his positive accomplishments - just with his radical leftists ideology and his current attempts to confuse the electorate as a policy chameleon.

BTW, you're slipping - 'Dipshit?' Such reparte! You're obviously a skilled linguist!

Spin away..you didn't deny? LOL. You didn't mention, just detract and confuse by substituting "best" for success. Is that what you learned at the goebbels institute of propaganda?

Why would i mention? I didn't mention specifics...noted only that he was successful. Must be a hard concept for you to figure out.

Linguist: Not slipping, just using appropriate term for you. I guess i coulda called you a cretin..but, that would be giving you a bit more credit than you are due.

Thought you weren't responding to me after the beatdown i gave you. Can't actually believe that you woulda taken the time to bring a hastily written post to a professor. And, of course, didn't mention taking your post and having him/her analyze it. Pretty much sums up your modus operandi.

Rare feat..being both sad and pathetic.

[sheepshead]

scary

[mraynrand]

Thought you weren't responding to me after the beatdown i gave you. Can't actually believe that you woulda taken the time to bring a hastily written post to a professor. And, of course, didn't mention taking your post and having him/her analyze it. Pretty much sums up your modus operandi.

Beatdown? You basically gave me a Wikipedia report on Obama's life. I know all the details already. I didn't find the grammer school report edifying. Having a professor read it wouldn't have been anywhere as amusing as your 'essay' on Rand, which I keep around for laughs. The point is that you regard Obama's track record as one of uninterrupted success. He went to law school and became a politician. Essentially, he really never had much of a real job, outside academia and politics. But that's true of a lot of politicians, and a lot of academia - they live sheltered lives in many ways.

What concerns me is what Obama really believes, when he can be pinned down. For example, he originally did NOT understand the basic principle that raising taxes reduces tax receipts (even though a Harvard educated man should know that it worked for Kennedy, Reagan, Bush, etc.) When informed that revenues would decrease, he claimed that he would raise taxes anyway, because it was 'fair.' Of course, he doesn't understand that raising taxes on businesses will cause them to flee the country - this from a guy who pledges to keep businesses in the U.S. - and unilaterally change NAFTA at the same time (Oh, but he changd that view already - see other examples below) But that's rare - seeing a glimpse that he would willingly harm the nation because something conflicted with his Rawls-like view of fairness. In other instances, he thought the DC gun ban was constitutional - except not now. He was against faith-based initiatives - except not anymore. He was for a direct draw down of forces in Iraq - except not anymore (he'll meet with the joint chiefs first!). It will be interesting to see how long it takes before he finds a way to say he was for the surge all along. What does Obama really believe? Who will change his mind when he's in office? That's what I care about. Not whether he, like thousands of other meretricious sycophants, are able to graduate law school with honors and become societal parasites (e.g. politicians).

And what do you stand for Tyrone? What do you actually care about? Fr what cause would you take up a rifle and risk your life? Would you defend me, a fellow American, against a terrorist? Do you have an absolute definition of a terrorist? Do you have an absolute definition of anything? The answers aren't on Wikipedia. Even though I disagree heartily with guys like you, I'd still defend you against real enemies of the U.S.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Thought you weren't responding to me after the beatdown i gave you. Can't actually believe that you woulda taken the time to bring a hastily written post to a professor. And, of course, didn't mention taking your post and having him/her analyze it. Pretty much sums up your modus operandi.

Beatdown? You basically gave me a Wikipedia report on Obama's life. I know all the details already. I didn't find the grammer school report edifying. Having a professor read it wouldn't have been anywhere as amusing as your 'essay' on Rand, which I keep around for laughs. The point is that you regard Obama's track record as one of uninterrupted success. He went to law school and became a politician. Essentially, he really never had much of a real job, outside academia and politics. But that's true of a lot of politicians, and a lot of academia - they live sheltered lives in many ways.

What concerns me is what Obama really believes, when he can be pinned down. For example, he originally did NOT understand the basic principle that raising taxes reduces tax receipts (even though a Harvard educated man should know that it worked for Kennedy, Reagan, Bush, etc.) When informed that revenues would decrease, he claimed that he would raise taxes anyway, because it was 'fair.' Of course, he doesn't understand that raising taxes on businesses will cause them to flee the country - this from a guy who pledges to keep businesses in the U.S. - and unilaterally change NAFTA at the same time (Oh, but he changd that view already - see other examples below) But that's rare - seeing a glimpse that he would willingly harm the nation because something conflicted with his Rawls-like view of fairness. In other instances, he thought the DC gun ban was constitutional - except not now. He was against faith-based initiatives - except not anymore. He was for a direct draw down of forces in Iraq - except not anymore (he'll meet with the joint chiefs first!). It will be interesting to see how long it takes before he finds a way to say he was for the surge all along. What does Obama really believe? Who will change his mind when he's in office? That's what I care about. Not whether he, like thousands of other meretricious sycophants, are able to graduate law school with honors and become societal parasites (e.g. politicians).

And what do you stand for Tyrone? What do you actually care about? Fr what cause would you take up a rifle and risk your life? Would you defend me, a fellow American, against a terrorist? Do you have an absolute definition of a terrorist? Do you have an absolute definition of anything? The answers aren't on Wikipedia. Even though I disagree heartily with guys like you, I'd still defend you against real enemies of the U.S.

Yes, i give you beatdowns everytime you post.

I find it sad and pathetic that you would call my post an essay and then bring it to a prof. I also find it..well, typicall that you wouldn't show him your response. LOL

obama: Again, that is success by any standard. For you to imply anything else is hilarious.

His views: Should i contrast them with McCain's flip flops? Ooops. If we wanna discuss econ...obama may not know much, but infinitely more than McCain. As for troop withdrawls..um, the situation has changed since he made his pronouncement. Should he not reevaluate?

And, what is the point of discussing things when you just spin. Obama wasnt' against faith based.

Me: Why do you care? As for what you would do...i could care less..and more importanly, you aren't doing it..so, it is all talk.

[texaspackerbacker]

I'm fairly confident that Obama will self-destruct to such a degree that even the leftist mainstream media won't be able to save him in the eyes of the electorate.

What troubles me is what Tarlam--ordinarily a sane and rational poster wrote about European and possibly other foreign views of America. My first reaction, of course, is the hell with them. Who gives a shit what they think anyway. Realistically, though, although America doesn't NEED the support of foreigners, harmony with the relatively civilized portion of the world--those generally practicing freedom, representative democracy, and capitalism--is better than the absence of it.

Tarlam, as with virtually every other perceived problem of America, the media--the sinister leftist mainstream media--is primarily to blame. European perceptions of America are shaped by OUR media, both in a direct sense and in an indirect sense through foreign medias parrotting the crap spewed by our own left-saturated media assholes.

The substance of this discussion was handled pretty well by retailguy--America, in fact, DOES have the moral high ground, and both is and has been for the better part of a century, responsible for saving the world from falling into a new dark age of tyranny, depravity, poverty, and ignorance. I, of course, refer to Nazism, Communism, and now radical Islam.

Over and above that, however, I see a distinct trend in Europe toward the light--toward support for America and effective responsible national policies. Sarkozy in France and Merkel in Germany both got elected touting a pro-American, even pro-Bush stance. Denmark and most of the former Soviet bloc countries are staunchly pro-American--people, not merely government. Do you disagree with the accuracy of that, Tarlam? I know first hand that the Philippines and several other countries in that part of the world are solidly in our corner. Latin America seems pretty well adjusted too--minus 2 or 3 countries that Chavez has managed to contaminate.

I see the whole perceived anti-American outlook as just another in a long line of bogus demagogic crap put out by our own sick America-hating media.

[Harlan Huckleby]

years from a state in which the gov has very little power. Sorry, i don't see it. And, a failure at everything he did prior. Plus a drunk and a drug user.

I'm not going to defend how Bush turned out. But he was chief executive of the third largest state, I think for 5 years. That's serious management experience.

Obama at least has been a success at every level of his life. An achiever.

So has Oprah.

Experience: Ike was in the military. that ain't exactly someone who had far reaching compromise, policy making, etc.

Oh come on, he managed the War in Europe. That ain't exactly running a Dairy Queen. Generals can have good management preparation, and the military is very political. He served in a political role.

Washington...um, where was the experience.

Good Lord! Don't you think his efforts to fanangle a seperation from Britian involved a little leadership and political skill? This one is ridiculous.

Lincoln was a state senator..

On paper, this comparison presents your strongest case. But Lincoln was a freak. Those Lincoln-Douglass debates were 4 years before his presidential run. He was already a mature and brilliant thinker at that point.
I watched Obama in the debates. He got better throughout the primaries, but he is shallow. Very glib. Don't talk to me about Lincoln.

I'm with Andrew Sullivan...Obama represents the greatest rebranding of our country since RR.

Ya, I see this as a potential advantage of an OBama presidency. He is admired around the world because he is black, charismatic, sends the signal that the U.S. is an evil force in Iraq and he aims to extract the evil, and he has a cute smile. What's not for a foreigner to like?

[Tarlam!]

Tex,

I think you nailed it with commending Retailguy for his most delicate handling of my posts - thanks RG, you showed me a hell of a lot of respect!

Tex, you ask me if I think you've got your facts wrong. No, I don't think you have. In fact, the one thing I admire most about you is your fact based posting.

I want to go on record as being an arch conservative. ARCH. I have noticed that liberal in America is a dirty word for conservatives. That's kinda interesting, because in Australia, The Liberal Party are the conservatives and in Germany they are, too. Albeit in Germany, they struggle to be the 3rd largest Party.

I would really hate to be misunderstood here. My position is pretty simple, but probably offensive and I'm sorry for that.

The USA provides the Leader of the Free World. I and many many other, live in the Free World. We simply have no say in Our Leader. You Americans do. Choose wisely, for all of us.

[mraynrand]

I'm with Andrew Sullivan...Obama represents the greatest rebranding of our country since RR.

Ya, I see this as a potential advantage of an OBama presidency. He is admired around the world because he is black, charismatic, sends the signal that the U.S. is an evil force in Iraq and he aims to extract the evil, and he has a cute smile. What's not for a foreigner to like?

I agree with Andrew Sullivan as well. Reagan rebranded the US as a moral force - reminding the world what the US stood for - Reagan was direct and succinct: the Soviet Union was evil. Barak stands with the World's left, that says the US is the evil in the world. The US is the immoral force that invades and occupies countries, solely for oil and corporate wealth, slaughtering civilians indiscriminantly as we go. Funded and supported by the most rabid of US lefties - most significantly MoveOn.org - who repeatedly support the notion that the US under Bush is the world's greatest evil - it really matters not so much what Barak himself thinks (because of his changes in almost every core position, we have no idea what he personally stands for) - we have to look at his support base. Barak represents the far-left, anti-Reagan in the country - the United States is evil, the influence and power of the US must be diminished , and the socialist left in the world are to be emulated. That others don't recognize this, and see him as various manifestations of a savior, is a testament to his skill (success, you can argue) as a politician.

[sheepshead]

Bigguns, While I respect your right to post away on here, it is very clear that you are ill equipped to comment on the political process and the background of candidates past or present. I have taken the time to answer your same comments on another thread to no avail. Why don't you take a little time during this process and educate yourself with a little history? The branches of government (state and federal) and their functions. This presidential election can be a could education for you. I invite you to properly delve into the process.

Best,

SheepsHead

[HowardRoark]

I have been lost in the cyber wilderness as of late. It is good to see that Mr. Town and Mr. Galt are still going at it somewhere.

[sooner6600]

Tex;

You mentioned the sinister left media.

A partial definition of the word sinister is left handed.

Therefor do two lefts make a right?


Sign me

no left turns in Ardmore!

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex;

You mentioned the sinister left media.

A partial definition of the word sinister is left handed.

Therefor do two lefts make a right?


Sign me

no left turns in Ardmore!

Very Interesting. I guess I'll have to be more careful with my double negatives.

My daughter and son-in-law just finished living in Oklahoma City for a year, so I spent a lot of time there. I didn't see much that was sinister or otherwise left in Oklahoma.

Even the Democrats seem pretty tame and halfway civilized there.

[retailguy]

I think you nailed it with commending Retailguy for his most delicate handling of my posts - thanks RG, you showed me a hell of a lot of respect!

Thank you Tarlam! for the fine heartfelt comment. I have enjoyed our discussion very much. I am very much in favor of healthy debate, I think it solves a lot.

I don't typically participate in the political discussions here, as they accomplish little. The left call the right "Christian wackos" and the right call the left "liberal athiests" and it pretty much ends there. (Yes I realize that there are many more acronymns but lets leave it at the 1st two "G" rated ones I could think of.)

I respect you and your point of view Tarlam. I want you to know that I listened to you and heard where you're coming from and I hope likewise.

The USA provides the Leader of the Free World. I and many many other, live in the Free World. We simply have no say in Our Leader. You Americans do. Choose wisely, for all of us.

I agree with this. Yes, we are the defacto world leader. I'm not sure that most of us want this role, but accept that someone needs to do it, and we believe we're pretty damn prepared to try.

That being said, we do make mistakes. In a way, we contributed to the current spat of terrorism many years ago. (My belief)

As you recall, back when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, we played a large role in providing weapons and funding and training for the Afghan's to defend themselves. Then, when it got political, we bailed on them. We bailed. My President. Our President. A President and a Congress that I voted for. We left them with more chaos than they would have had, had they been under Soviet rule. Can you imagine what it would feel like to be left with a largely bombed out country, no money, no jobs, no economy, no hope for the future? Hell, Tarlam, if I was Afghani, I'd hate us too.

Then came many years of dissarray, followed by the Taliban, and worse oppression than the Soviets could've imagined inflicting on them. This, I believe, is the main reason we cannot find Obama. People that absolutely despise us are giving him sanctuary, and see him as a leader. Can you really blame them? I can't. He rails against the same "Western Society" that abandoned them.

So, what are some of us prepared to do now? Leave the Iraqi's in the same situation. We bombed their country back to the stone age, arrested, jailed and helped execute most of their leaders, and now we're about to say "Well, go fix it yourself".

If we do this, we'll raise ANOTHER generation of people that justifiably hate America. As long as we REFUSE to learn from our mistakes we are destined to repeat them. Eventually, those mistakes will destroy us.

I don't care if you agree with the Iraq war or not, leaving will not make it "right". It'll just make us look like selfish, wimpy people who are incapable of "getting" the big picture.

My prayers continue... It'll take a power much much greater than me to fix this mess.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Bigguns, While I respect your right to post away on here, it is very clear that you are ill equipped to comment on the political process and the background of candidates past or present. I have taken the time to answer your same comments on another thread to no avail. Why don't you take a little time during this process and educate yourself with a little history? The branches of government (state and federal) and their functions. This presidential election can be a could education for you. I invite you to properly delve into the process.

Best,

SheepsHead

Oh, lord. Have you actually ever looked in the mirror.