or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama's Mandate and First 100 days
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama's Mandate and First 100 days - Page 3

Poll Results: What percentage of popular vote does Obama need to claim a mandate?

 
  • 50% (9)
    50-52%
  • 16% (3)
    53-54%
  • 11% (2)
    55-56%
  • 22% (4)
    more than 56%
18 Total Votes  
post #81 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Some advice (since y'all do it every time the Dems lose)

Step one: tell the evangelicals to fuck off.
Step two: elevate the libertarian wing of the party.
Step three: cut out the wedge issues.

Oh, and clearly, move to the left.

I think they need to improve their educational standards, as well. Most f the better-educated conservatives abandoned ship for a reason: the guys at the helm didn't have a clue about most anything.

Alaska is next to Russia.

Fox said it. Palin said it. Cindy sad it. McCain said it.

'Nuff said.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #82 of 135
And trumptman thought it was enough as well, decided to vote for McCain after said Mc picked Palin.

Result, deleted all threads of his and now only lurks, afraid to explain his choice and defend the indefensible.

Yet the newredmajority continues to spew crap.
post #83 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

And trumptman thought it was enough as well, decided to vote for McCain after said Mc picked Palin.

Result, deleted all threads of his and now only lurks, afraid to explain his choice and defend the indefensible.

He and the others will be back. 100 days after Obama's inauguration.
post #84 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

He and the others will be back. 100 days after Obama's inauguration.

I think they'll find the landscape a bit changed though.

The kind of rhetoric ( smoke and mirrors ) common to their approach doesn't work so well when your favorite leader isn't in charge.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #85 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

And trumptman thought it was enough as well, decided to vote for McCain after said Mc picked Palin.

Result, deleted all threads of his and now only lurks, afraid to explain his choice and defend the indefensible.

Yet the newredmajority continues to spew crap.

Quote:
Yet the newredmajority continues to spew crap

It's possible for anyone to find a like minded safe haven.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #86 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I think they'll find the landscape a bit changed though.

The kind of rhetoric ( smoke and mirrors ) common to their approach doesn't work so well when your favorite leader isn't in charge.

I think there is a certain right wing mindset that is absolutely bullet proof, in that it long since stopped relying on external realities for evidentiary support.

Tautologies and mind games aren't really susceptible to conditions.

What is different is how well those techniques play with the electorate at large, which is not very well at all, anymore.

But people posting on PO aren't obliged to make the kind of sense that might win an election or two, so I feel pretty confident that if any of our old friends reappear they will be entirely ready to play the old songs one more time, perhaps with a few variations.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #87 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I think there is a certain right wing mindset that is absolutely bullet proof, in that it long since stopped relying on external realities for evidentiary support.

Tautologies and mind games aren't really susceptible to conditions.

What is different is how well those techniques play with the electorate at large, which is not very well at all, anymore.

But people posting on PO aren't obliged to make the kind of sense that might win an election or two, so I feel pretty confident that if any of our old friends reappear they will be entirely ready to play the old songs one more time, perhaps with a few variations.

Well in that case all you have to say to them is : " We've already tried that! "
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #88 of 135
I don't know about a mandate but here's a good indicator of what direction Obama's going to go. Bush supporters will probably be upset.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/...ion/index.html

Quote:
Obama team reviewing 'virtually every agency,' aide says

Story Highlights
Aide: Barack Obama has wanted all President Bush's executive orders reviewed

John Podesta, head of transition team, says preparation in the works since August

Rep. Rahm Emanuel brushes off criticism, stresses importance of bipartisanship

Of Cabinet picks, Podesta says, "There will be announcements forthcoming"


Quote:
I would say that as a candidate, Sen. Obama said that he wanted all the Bush executive orders reviewed and decide which ones should be kept and which ones should be repealed and which ones should be amended, and that process is going on. It's been undertaken," Podesta said Sunday on "Fox News."

Podesta pointed out that there is a lot the president can do without waiting for Congress, and voters can expect to see Obama do so to try and restore "a sense that the country is working on behalf of the common good."

I think that we're looking at -- again, in virtually every agency to see where we can move forward, whether that's on energy transformation, on improving health care, on stem cell research," he said.

Podesta, chief of staff under President Clinton, is president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank that he founded.

Podesta said Sunday that preparations for Obama's transition have been in the works since early August.

Asked what members of the team have learned from past administrations, Podesta said they knew they had to act quickly.

"I think one of the most critical things ... that we focused on was it was important to name a White House chief of staff early and build a White House staff right from the beginning to go along with the Cabinet's [selection] process," he said.

Seems like a sensible start to me.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #89 of 135
Thread Starter 
Maybe he should review Clinton's while he's at it?
post #90 of 135
Plenty of Bush stuff to deal with.

The list is pretty thorough and the world will be a better place for it. Wonder how Bush feels going to this week's meeting?

Uh, er, uh,,, duh, em.

At least he can't see Russia from his house. Palin, and by extension, McCain and his entire Camp (they chose her and kept her), really helped make Bush not look as dumb as he used to.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #91 of 135
For a moment think about this...

I went to the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts today to see an exhibit, but this painting, though I have seen it many times, stopped me in my tracks...



Not it's sheer immensity (96 x 60 in), but it's current significance. George Washington bought the Mount Vernon estate with 18 slaves, At the time of his death, in 1799, more than 300 slaves resided at Mount Vernon.

The clarity of the significance of what this country did electing Barack Obama, an African American for president, hit me.

What a time we live in, what a time to come...
post #92 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Of course you did.

Yes. It does.

Right, because I'm always wrong. Liberal AI Forums Talking Point #1.





Quote:



And that is where you go off the rails and don't seem to see what the rest of us do about this election. "Nailing" Obama is the Lee Atwater/Karl Rove strategy of the utter destruction of the opponent by any means necessary. Obama's campaign hinged on the repudiation of those tactics. Why do you think he ran a campaign about "hope," for God's sake?

Uh, pardon me but you're kidding, right? Obama was supposed to run that kind of campaign. He most certainly did not. He practiced the "old politics" to a tee, all while denouncing them. And McCain? McCain repudiated any slight towards Obama, even the using of his actual given middle name. He didn't take advantage of Obama's radical associations until the last debate. Those were legitimate issues.

Quote:



No. It would have completely destroyed his campaign. Think about what you're saying: threatening to not debate looked bad, but REALLY not debating would have worked? Aree you serious? It made him look erratic and inconsistent. It made him look like he panics.

Yes, quite serious. By saying he may not debate and then going through with it, it looked like he folded. If he said "I'm staying to work on the bailout" and then did so, it likely would have been better.

Quote:

We had weeks and months of ALL THREE of those and none of them stuck. They didn't stick for the following reasons:

1) It's more of the "destroy the opposition," which, as I said before, is a strategy that has worked for the GOP for 40 years and that, I hope, has just been resoundingly repudiated.

Right, because the Obama's campaign and the media (one and the same, I suppose) didn't attack McCain and Palin relentlessly.

Quote:

2) No one cares about Ayers except the core of the GOP.

I agree, but the question is...why? First, the media at large barely touched the issue. They ignored the fact that Ayers and Obama had much more than a passing knowledge of each other. And McCain didn't use the Wright issue until the very end. This was another perfectly legit issue...a longstanding close relationship between Wright and Obama.

Quote:

3) You can't make an argument for inexperience and not make an argument for "more of the same." It also doesn't help that at the same time people were making the tortured argument that Palin was super-experienced that it was abundantly clear that she was stunningly ill equipped.

1. Why? Obama is inexperienced and McCain does not equal George Bush.
2. Palin has more experience than Obama. The media was desperate to portray her as a bimbo from day 1. Meanwhile, Obama could say pretty much anything and still be considered intelligent.

Quote:

This is the problem, SDW, that adda and I pointed out earlier when we were laughing at Redstate. The GOP doesn't need to rethink strategy. It needs to rethink itself, its coalition, and how it campaigns.

Some advice (since y'all do it every time the Dems lose)

Step one: tell the evangelicals to fuck off.
Step two: elevate the libertarian wing of the party.
Step three: cut out the wedge issues.

Oh, and clearly, move to the left.

I suppose I can't disagree with those steps. None of them means "we" have to become more liberal.
Republicans really just need to get back to fiscal conservatism, limited government, energy independence, etc.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #93 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Right, because I'm always wrong. Liberal AI Forums Talking Point #1.

Uh, pardon me but you're kidding, right? Obama was supposed to run that kind of campaign. He most certainly did not. He practiced the "old politics" to a tee, all while denouncing them. And McCain? McCain repudiated any slight towards Obama, even the using of his actual given middle name. He didn't take advantage of Obama's radical associations until the last debate. Those were legitimate issues.

Yes, quite serious. By saying he may not debate and then going through with it, it looked like he folded. If he said "I'm staying to work on the bailout" and then did so, it likely would have been better.

Right, because the Obama's campaign and the media (one and the same, I suppose) didn't attack McCain and Palin relentlessly.

I agree, but the question is...why? First, the media at large barely touched the issue. They ignored the fact that Ayers and Obama had much more than a passing knowledge of each other. And McCain didn't use the Wright issue until the very end. This was another perfectly legit issue...a longstanding close relationship between Wright and Obama.

1. Why? Obama is inexperienced and McCain does not equal George Bush.
2. Palin has more experience than Obama. The media was desperate to portray her as a bimbo from day 1. Meanwhile, Obama could say pretty much anything and still be considered intelligent.

I suppose I can't disagree with those steps. None of them means "we" have to become more liberal.
Republicans really just need to get back to fiscal conservatism, limited government, energy independence, etc.

Ahem. As I was saying in another thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I think there is a certain right wing mindset that is absolutely bullet proof, in that it long since stopped relying on external realities for evidentiary support.

Tautologies and mind games aren't really susceptible to conditions.

What is different is how well those techniques play with the electorate at large, which is not very well at all, anymore.

But people posting on PO aren't obliged to make the kind of sense that might win an election or two, so I feel pretty confident that if any of our old friends reappear they will be entirely ready to play the old songs one more time, perhaps with a few variations.

Goes for those that have stuck around, as well.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #94 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Palin has more experience than Obama. The media was desperate to portray her as a bimbo from day 1. Meanwhile, Obama could say pretty much anything and still be considered intelligent.

I don't know how you can say these things with a straight face.

The Secret Service are blaming Palin for the sudden spike in Obama death threats.

Quote:
The Obama campaign was provided with reports from the Secret Service showing a sharp and disturbing increase in threats to Obama in September and early October, at the same time that many crowds at Palin rallies became more frenzied. Michelle Obama was shaken by the vituperative crowds and the hot rhetoric from the GOP candidates. "Why would they try to make people hate us?" Michelle asked a top campaign aide.

...

Quote:
Details of the spike in threats to Mr Obama come as a report last week by security and intelligence analysts Stratfor, warned that he is a high risk target for racist gunmen. It concluded: "Two plots to assassinate Obama were broken up during the campaign season, and several more remain under investigation. We would expect federal authorities to uncover many more plots to attack the president that have been hatched by white supremacist ideologues." Irate John McCain aides, who blame Mrs Palin for losing the election, claim Mrs Palin took it upon herself to question Mr Obama's patriotism, before the line of attack had been cleared by Mr McCain.

Real classy.

Obama and the War on Brains

Quote:
Barack Obamas election is a milestone in more than his pigmentation. The second most remarkable thing about his election is that American voters have just picked a president who is an open, out-of-the-closet, practicing intellectual.

Maybe, just maybe, the result will be a step away from the anti-intellectualism that has long been a strain in American life. Smart and educated leadership is no panacea, but weve seen recently that the converse a White House that scorns expertise and shrugs at nuance doesnt get very far either.

We cant solve our educational challenges when, according to polls, Americans are approximately as likely to believe in flying saucers as in evolution, and when one-fifth of Americans believe that the sun orbits the Earth.

Almost half of young Americans said in a 2006 poll that it was not necessary to know the locations of countries where important news was made. That must be a relief to Sarah Palin, who, according to Fox News, didnt realize that Africa was a continent rather than a country.

post #95 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
Palin has more experience than Obama. The media was desperate to portray her as a bimbo from day 1. Meanwhile, Obama could say pretty much anything and still be considered intelligent.

Desperate?
I'd say she made it easy.

Meanwhile, Obama is intelligent and pretty much anything he says is way above Palin's limited understanding of anything.

I'm not surprised she got the adoration of so many along with that plumber idiot.

The uninformed played a part in this, but like the article Artman posted, which I had read earlier, there are a lot of truly stupid people out there.
post #96 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

2. Palin has more experience than Obama. The media was desperate to portray her as a bimbo from day 1. Meanwhile, Obama could say pretty much anything and still be considered intelligent.

More experience on what exactly? Surely you're not comparing that idiot to Obama?

Portray as a bimbo since day 1? That's BS and you know it. From that speech at the convention, the media was desperate to make her a star. It wasn't until it became clear that unless she had rehearsed her talking points and lines she sounded like a complete ignoramus that people became suspicious of her and people's confidence started going down sharply. Right wing politicians, writers, pundits saw it and said it from the beginning as well and you know it.

Even in her latest "interviews" from Alaska she sounds like a bimbo. Her blame the media game is so ridiculous it only works with a few.


Quote:
just need to get back to fiscal conservatism, limited government, energy independence, etc.

Right. A little too late for that.

Energy independence? From the party who sold its soul to the oil companies and whose leaders are buddy buddies with the arabs? O...K
post #97 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Ahem. As I was saying in another thread:



Goes for those that have stuck around, as well.

No kidding. Jesus. I don't even know where to begin with a response, although I suspect it is helpful to note that ABC news broke the Jeremiah Wright story in fucking MARCH and it dominated the news cycle for weeks, ending with Obama's repudiation of him and ceasing his membership in Wright's church.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #98 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

No kidding. Jesus. I don't even know where to begin with a response, although I suspect it is helpful to note that ABC news broke the Jeremiah Wright story in fucking MARCH and it dominated the news cycle for weeks, ending with Obama's repudiation of him and ceasing his membership in Wright's church.

Was it my imagination, or was SDW also claiming that McCain ran an honorable and decent campaign and it was Obama that was relentlessly negative?

Is there such a thing as cross dimensional posting?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #99 of 135
Even the master of negativity himself, Rove, said that McCain was pushing the limits of lowness.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #100 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Right, because I'm always wrong. Liberal AI Forums Talking Point #1.







Uh, pardon me but you're kidding, right? Obama was supposed to run that kind of campaign. He most certainly did not. He practiced the "old politics" to a tee, all while denouncing them. And McCain? McCain repudiated any slight towards Obama, even the using of his actual given middle name. He didn't take advantage of Obama's radical associations until the last debate. Those were legitimate issues.



Yes, quite serious. By saying he may not debate and then going through with it, it looked like he folded. If he said "I'm staying to work on the bailout" and then did so, it likely would have been better.



Right, because the Obama's campaign and the media (one and the same, I suppose) didn't attack McCain and Palin relentlessly.



I agree, but the question is...why? First, the media at large barely touched the issue. They ignored the fact that Ayers and Obama had much more than a passing knowledge of each other. And McCain didn't use the Wright issue until the very end. This was another perfectly legit issue...a longstanding close relationship between Wright and Obama.



1. Why? Obama is inexperienced and McCain does not equal George Bush.
2. Palin has more experience than Obama. The media was desperate to portray her as a bimbo from day 1. Meanwhile, Obama could say pretty much anything and still be considered intelligent.



I suppose I can't disagree with those steps. None of them means "we" have to become more liberal.
Republicans really just need to get back to fiscal conservatism, limited government, energy independence, etc.

Quote:
Right, because I'm always wrong.

That's your doing! We can't help that!

Ps. Palin was nothing more than a plan to get into the Whitehouse and it backfired. No way does she have any more experience than Obama. Geez!

After she opened her mouth I was wondering if she had more experience than a gas station attendant.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #101 of 135
From a foreigner point of vue, Mac Cain seemed to be a good candidate. But Palin wasn't. I just could not imagine that one day she could be the president of the united state.
Palin was a casting error. At first she was popular and the polls became better for Mac Cain. But the she started to speech, and people discovered that she was not OK at all for the job.
Palin is one of the two key to understand mac cain defeat. The other key is the economical crisis.
post #102 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Was it my imagination, or was SDW also claiming that McCain ran an honorable and decent campaign and it was Obama that was relentlessly negative?

Is there such a thing as cross dimensional posting?

Yeah. It sort of puts the futility of "debate" in sharp relief when you can't even agree, at the most basic level, on the most simple events under discussion.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #103 of 135
post #104 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

pic

That shit is just funny Artman.
post #105 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilsch View Post

That shit is just funny Artman.

A couple of people need a heimlich maneuver performed on them in this forum, I won't mention who...
post #106 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Yeah. It sort of puts the futility of "debate" in sharp relief when you can't even agree, at the most basic level, on the most simple events under discussion.

Here's the conservative Kathleen Parker (you know, one of the apostate traitors that the right wing blogosphere has declared jihad on) in Slate:

Quote:
Palin covered her inadequacies with folksy charm and by drumming up a class war, turning her audiences not just against elites but against the party's own educated members. The movement created by that superelite, but never elitist, William F. Buckley Jr. was handed over to Joe Six-Pack. Know-nothingness was no longer a stigma, but a badge of honor.
The Republican Party's Baghdad Bobism with regard to Palin, a denial so pernicious that party operatives were willing to let her sit a heartbeat away from the presidency in a time of war and financial collapse, revealed what really ails the party. The "P Factor" isn't a single person but a sickness that will have to be acknowledged and curedRepublicans will be reciting their newly tailored principles only to themselves.

It may be that 9/11 was the worst thing to happen to the American right in a generation, because it allowed them to become addicted to lying, and, worse, it allowed them to come to believe their own lies. The particulars don't seem to matter, the fundamental truth is a self-aggrandizing myth of right wing patriotism and virtue. "Patriots" will always be right, because they have the well being of the country at heart, just as "traitors" will always be wrong, since they (inexplicably) carry some kind of animosity towards "America."

The trouble with an ideology based on such a reflexive world view, backed by baldly asserted falsehoods, is that it cannot, or rather has no motivation to, adapt to circumstances-- because "circumstances" never had anything to do with it.

At this point, it's up to "America" to be worthy of the right, not the other way around.

Good luck with that.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #107 of 135
But, Adda, what kinds of principles will the GOP adhere to if it can no longer stand for standing for "fiscal conservatism, limited government, energy independence, etc."??
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #108 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Right, because the Obama's campaign and the media (one and the same, I suppose) didn't attack McCain and Palin relentlessly.

This is why folks don't take some conservatives seriously.

Quote:
I agree, but the question is...why? First, the media at large barely touched the issue. They ignored the fact that Ayers and Obama had much more than a passing knowledge of each other. And McCain didn't use the Wright issue until the very end. This was another perfectly legit issue...a longstanding close relationship between Wright and Obama.

Because Ayers is freaking gray haired professor at Chicago. The media ignored it because it was a non-story if you dug into it.

Quote:
1. Why? Obama is inexperienced and McCain does not equal George Bush.
2. Palin has more experience than Obama. The media was desperate to portray her as a bimbo from day 1. Meanwhile, Obama could say pretty much anything and still be considered intelligent.

Because she is a bimbo and no, they didn't TRY to protray her as a bimbo but it was her answers that were bimboish.

Obama sounds intelligent because he IS intelligent. Not that intelligence always leads to good leadership but the guy IS smart and unabashedly so. I say good. We don't need stupid people as president.

Quote:
Republicans really just need to get back to fiscal conservatism, limited government, energy independence, etc.

How about step 1: getting rid of the stupid people in our party instead of getting rid of the smart people? Does that make me sound elitist? Good.
post #109 of 135
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Because Ayers is freaking gray haired professor at Chicago. The media ignored it because it was a non-story if you dug into it.

Ayers is at UIC, University of Illinois Chicago not University of Chicago. There was more to the story than Obama wanted to tell people. He obviously left it out of his book for reason. Obama strikes me as the type of person to get connected with the "right" people at the time to get what he needs and then if in the future it's an albatross around his neck he cuts them loose. The media gives him a pass on this. Had McCain or Palin been in connected with an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber and murderer turned university processor the left and media would have gone ballistic over it.

So be it. He won.
post #110 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Ayers is at UIC, University of Illinois Chicago not University of Chicago. There was more to the story than Obama wanted to tell people. He obviously left it out of his book for reason. Obama strikes me as the type of person to get connected with the "right" people at the time to get what he needs and then if in the future it's an albatross around his neck he cuts them loose. The media gives him a pass on this. Had McCain or Palin been in connected with an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber and murderer turned university processor the left and media would have gone ballistic over it.

So be it. He won.

You mean like they went ballistic over McCain's ongoing association with G. Gordon Liddy, unrepentant felon and assassination enthusiast? Who once explained to his radio listeners that the way to take out a federal agent was with a head shot, since they wear body armor?

At any rate, if there's "more to the story" of Obama's relationship to Ayers beyond idle speculation, why not enlighten us?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #111 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

But, Adda, what kinds of principles will the GOP adhere to if it can no longer stand for standing for "fiscal conservatism, limited government, energy independence, etc."??

I believe that they must stand for standing for standing for limited government, etc.

The American people will understand that before the principle comes the photo op, and that before the photo op comes the PR campaign, and that before the PR campaign comes story of the making of the PR campaign.

The party's new motto: "It's Turtles All The Way Down."
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #112 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Ayers is at UIC, University of Illinois Chicago not University of Chicago. There was more to the story than Obama wanted to tell people. He obviously left it out of his book for reason.

He said Chicago, he did not say University of Chicago. D'oh!

Please tell us more, with an objective link or 666.

He left exactly what out of his book? Who's he/his? Ayers? Be specific. Names, places, dates, etceteras.

There are some people here who clearly show their ......... nonstop 247.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #113 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

You mean like they went ballistic over McCain's ongoing association with G. Gordon Liddy, unrepentant felon and assassination enthusiast? Who once explained to his radio listeners that the way to take out a federal agent was with a head shot, since they wear body armor?

Ding, ding, ding. You were saying FloorJack?

Quote:
At any rate, if there's "more to the story" of Obama's relationship to Ayers beyond idle speculation, why not enlighten us?

I for one, can't wait to hear this one. Please don't keep us waiting too long FloorJack!
post #114 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

So be it. He won.

So be it. He spoke...

Quote:
Obama's rivals and enemies thought they saw an opportunity to deepen a dishonest perception that he is somehow un-American, alien, linked to radical ideas, a closet terrorist who sympathizes with extremism – and they pounced.

On March 13, Senator John McCain, apparently in an attempt to reassure the "base," sat down for an interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News. McCain was not yet aware of the narrative Hannity had been spinning for months, and so Hannity filled him in: Ayers is an unrepentant "terrorist," he explained.

"On 9/11, of all days, he had an article where he bragged about bombing our Pentagon, bombing the Capitol and bombing New York City police headquarters. ... He said, `I regret not doing more.'"

McCain couldn't believe it.

Neither could I.

On the campaign trail, McCain immediately got on message. I became a prop, a cartoon character created to be pummelled.

When Alaska Governor Sarah Palin got hold of it, the attack went viral. At a now-famous Oct. 4 rally, she said Obama was "pallin' around with terrorists." (I pictured us sharing a milkshake with two straws.)

The crowd began chanting, "Kill him! Kill him!" It was downhill from there.

It's amazing how Mr. Ayers image was misconstrued in such a distasteful way.

Quote:
"In this time of new beginnings and rising expectations, it is even more urgent that we figure out how to become the people we have been waiting to be"

such powerful words.

...

Quote:
One night, Ayers recalled, he and Dohrn were watching Bill O’Reilly, who was going on about “discovering” Ayers’s 1974 manifesto, “Prairie Fire.” “I had to laugh,” Ayers said. “No one read it when it was first issued!” He said that he laughed, too, when he listened to Sarah Palin’s descriptions of Obama “palling around with terrorists.” In fact, Ayers said that he knew Obama only slightly: “I think my relationship with Obama was probably like that of thousands of others in Chicago and, like millions and millions of others, I wished I knew him better.”

Man, what a guy. If only all terrorists could be as cool as him.

And just as Joe the Plumber, that's all I'll go with Ayers.

EDIT: Oop, I'm not trying to compare the two, polars apart, just the media's attention of both.
post #115 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

So be it. He spoke...



It's amazing how Mr. Ayers image was misconstrued in such a distasteful way.



such powerful words.

...



Man, what a guy. If only all terrorists could be as cool as him.

And just as Joe the Plumber, that's all I'll go with Ayers.

EDIT: Oop, I'm not trying to compare the two, polars apart, just the media's attention of both.

Quote:
This guy is lieing

Dumb fucks from Bumfuck USA. Typical rightwingextremenutjobs. Go figure. Unfortunately we still have a few of them here on these boards. Some are only capable of occasional drive by insults.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #116 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Was it my imagination, or was SDW also claiming that McCain ran an honorable and decent campaign and it was Obama that was relentlessly negative?

Is there such a thing as cross dimensional posting?



Remember some here are from Bizzaro World!

Where black is white. Up is down. And Bush just nice man who want to help!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #117 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

He said Chicago, he did not say University of Chicago. D'oh!

True, but the way I wrote it was wrong. It was actually a typo...I meant IN Chicago not AT Chicago which does mean I got it wrong because AT Chicago does imply University of Chicago. And the reason I meant to say IN Chicago was I didn't actually remember which college he taught at other than it wasn't University of Chicago...and I was too lazy to google.

Thanks for the defense though.

But who cares? The link is very tenuous. As weak as the link to Liddy for McCain...meaning virtually none at all other than moving in the same general political circles.

Wright is more legitimate beef but it even there its not like the mainstream media ignored it. Wasn't it ABC that found the excepts that generated the controversy?

That there are black and white pastors who preach stupidity is no surprise. Wright is the same as Hagee, Falwell and Robertson. Even then, he is more temperate than they are in meaning if not speech. Where they teach hatred he taught introspection on 9/11.

Here's the sound bite:

"We've bombed Hiroshima, we've bombed Nagasaki, we've nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye. . . . We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant. Because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back into our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."

Now read the whole sermon and tell me it's not taken out of context to convey something ugly?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...54,print.story

You know, the only real exception I take to his "God damn America" sermon is that in reality I could find passages where God's word tolerates slavery in some forms. It provides regulations and guidance on the treatment of slaves. It severely moderates the slavery present in the ancient world but doesn't quite come out to condemn it.

Folks with different perspectives will spin that different ways. Still, that's a nit pick. God is far more unchanging than nations even when you factor in the fickleness of the church(es) that represents His interests.

And yes, God is less than pleased with America when America does wrong...which we have done many times in the past and will do many times in the future. Pointing that out does not make one Un-American. But we also do a lot right...which angry people...even righteously angry people...tend to forget.
post #118 of 135
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

He said Chicago, he did not say University of Chicago. D'oh!

Please tell us more, with an objective link or 666.

He left exactly what out of his book? Who's he/his? Ayers? Be specific. Names, places, dates, etceteras.

There are some people here who clearly show their ......... nonstop 247.

University of Chicago bands itself as "Chicago". They are trying to slum it and be like "Harvard". I thought everyone knew that.
post #119 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Ayers is at UIC, University of Illinois Chicago not University of Chicago. There was more to the story than Obama wanted to tell people. He obviously left it out of his book for reason. Obama strikes me as the type of person to get connected with the "right" people at the time to get what he needs and then if in the future it's an albatross around his neck he cuts them loose. The media gives him a pass on this. Had McCain or Palin been in connected with an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber and murderer turned university processor the left and media would have gone ballistic over it.

So be it. He won.

Quote:
Ayers is at UIC, University of Illinois Chicago not University of Chicago. There was more to the story than Obama wanted to tell people. He obviously left it out of his book for reason. Obama strikes me as the type of person to get connected with the "right" people at the time to get what he needs and then if in the future it's an albatross around his neck he cuts them loose.


Oh do tell! Do tell!

God what a bunch of crap! This is a nonstory nothing to see. Move on before you take root.
The whole notion of the Ayers thing is so stupid it's not even funny. Like the fact that Obama was a little boy at the time Ayers was a Weatherman. And yet some still try to draw this farfetched connection.

Like I said you guys can keep the trying in vain to dig something up if you want but in the end you're going to drive people further away than they are now.

And in case you haven't noticed the republican party already isn't too popular right now.

And speaking of Liddy Nixon didn't repent either and yet he never went to jail and in his memoirs said he'd do it again!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #120 of 135
Didn't Inhoffe or Coburn or someone try to hire a Cambridge don to run the etext of one of Obama's books and one of Ayers's through some program to find out if Ayers wrote Obama's book? And didn't that US politician change his mind about it when the Cambridge don said he'd publish the results whichever way they came out?

Edit: Oops! It was Oxford.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama's Mandate and First 100 days