PDA

View Full Version : B.O. really likes this guy...



j2k4
09-02-2009, 08:43 PM
...his new Green Jobs Czar, Van Jones.

Seems like an amiable fellow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yt66eWnjoTo

bigboab
09-02-2009, 09:14 PM
You are needing to relax Kev. Trolling for for type of sh*t all the time can't be doing your blood pressure any good. I could send you some blood pressure pills. Save you paying for them. We get them for free* under the umbrella of the horrible NHS you have been told about.

*We actually pay for them during our working years. We also pay for the NHS during our working years in the form of percentage of our wages to cover NHS, retirement pension, unemployment etc. Bit like communism you would say.:whistling

clocker
09-02-2009, 09:50 PM
...his new Green Jobs Czar, Van Jones.

Seems like an amiable fellow.


Amiable and perceptive, what's not to like?

Skiz
09-02-2009, 10:28 PM
How about his incredibly racist views just for starters? Or how about his self given appellation of "Communist"? Or his job for four years with STORM? A group "explicitly committed to revolutionary Marxist politics". And it isn't like this was 40 years ago; that would be scary enough. This was in the mid-90's FFS!

This gives just a taste of this guys startling past. How does a man with that resume end up in the White House? :blink:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP1-tGQzO_0

bigboab
09-02-2009, 10:43 PM
Right wingers are going to have to change the voting system in order to get a say. Keeping the 'first past the post' system is going to get you outvoted at every election. Immigration has meant that the majority of voters are now to the left. Wake up before it is too late. Proportional Representation is the only answer.:)

clocker
09-02-2009, 10:59 PM
How about his incredibly racist views just for starters? Or how about his self given appellation of "Communist"? Or his job for four years with STORM? A group "explicitly committed to revolutionary Marxist politics". And it isn't like this was 40 years ago; that would be scary enough. This was in the mid-90's FFS!

This gives just a taste of this guys startling past. How does a man with that resume end up in the White House? :blink:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP1-tGQzO_0
Goody.
Glen Beck doesn't like him...that makes him OK in my book.

j2k4
09-03-2009, 12:21 AM
How about his incredibly racist views just for starters? Or how about his self given appellation of "Communist"? Or his job for four years with STORM? A group "explicitly committed to revolutionary Marxist politics". And it isn't like this was 40 years ago; that would be scary enough. This was in the mid-90's FFS!

This gives just a taste of this guys startling past. How does a man with that resume end up in the White House? :blink:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP1-tGQzO_0
Goody.
Glen Beck doesn't like him...that makes him OK in my book.


So-

You're okay with the communist ideal, huh?

I see a bumper sticker that says "McCarthy never gave these poor guys a chance".

Will they sue for reparations, I wonder.

clocker
09-03-2009, 01:02 AM
So-

You're okay with the communist ideal, huh?


Compared to the Republican version of democracy...yup.

pentomato
09-03-2009, 02:21 AM
Like Barney Frank said, talking to this kind of people is like talking to a coffee table.
I can't believe that Kev and company don't give it a rest already

Skiz
09-03-2009, 02:42 AM
Goody.
Glen Beck doesn't like him...that makes him OK in my book.

Or perhaps you'd like to see the same information on a neutral site?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Jones#Early_activism

Or perhaps you prefer to listen to him say that white people are to blame for this or that....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em_B6fouTfk

Skiz
09-03-2009, 02:43 AM
I can't believe that Kev and company don't give it a rest already

That's exactly what "they" want us to do. :mellow:

pentomato
09-03-2009, 09:41 AM
I can't believe that Kev and company don't give it a rest already

That's exactly what "they" want us to do. :mellow:

Who the voices?

j2k4
09-03-2009, 09:51 AM
So-

You're okay with the communist ideal, huh?


Compared to the Republican version of democracy...yup.

So your indiscriminate hatred of republicans leads you to indiscriminately endorse communists.

Well done.


Like Barney Frank said, talking to this kind of people is like talking to a coffee table.
I can't believe that Kev and company don't give it a rest already

They're so lucky to have you on their side.

A willingness to quote a coffee table like Barney Frank is a rare trait indeed.

clocker
09-03-2009, 11:11 AM
So your indiscriminate hatred of republicans leads you to indiscriminately endorse communists.

Well done.

There's nothing "indiscriminate" about my dislike of Repubs, I've spent a lot of time/effort honing it.

You and Skiz should take care...don't want you all tuckered out before you can start working for the Cheney/Palin ticket in 2012.

j2k4
09-03-2009, 11:30 AM
As you know, Skiz and I are inexhaustable.

In 2012 we will support a candidate who can win, and victory shouldn't be much of a reach.

If I were you, I'd worry about next year, and never mind the republicans - watch out for the conservatives.

BTW-

Glad to have you finally acknowledge your commie-hood; it allows a certain shorthand in posting.

pentomato
09-03-2009, 11:34 AM
As you know, Skiz and I are inexhaustable.

In 2012 we will support a candidate who can win, and victory shouldn't be much of a reach.

If I were you, I'd worry about next year.

BTW-

Glad to have you finally acknowledge your commie-hood; it allows a certain shorthand in posting.

A very republican thing to say, if you don't like republicans you are a commie, hey let the buzz go, sooner or later they will find you, maybe in a bathroom, maybe in another country, that's they way your side likes it.:frusty:

pentomato
09-03-2009, 11:37 AM
Compared to the Republican version of democracy...yup.

So your indiscriminate hatred of republicans leads you to indiscriminately endorse communists.

Well done.


Like Barney Frank said, talking to this kind of people is like talking to a coffee table.
I can't believe that Kev and company don't give it a rest already

They're so lucky to have you on their side.

A willingness to quote a coffee table like Barney Frank is a rare trait indeed.

Who sould I quote? Maybe any looser in the GOP? don't worry KEV, you guys won't have the great white hope any time soon.:fst:

clocker
09-03-2009, 11:45 AM
If I were you, I'd worry about next year, and never mind the republicans - watch out for the conservatives.


Sorry, not going to "worry" about politics anymore.

On a side note...what's the difference between a republican and a conservative?

Skiz
09-03-2009, 06:25 PM
Without going and picking through better articulated definitions than I can usually muster, and in my own experiences, there is quite a bit of difference.

In the past few years I don't even call myself a Republican, but a conservative (who more closely relates to the Republican party than the Democratic).

I don't believe in any organized religion. I'm an evolutionist. In my mind it's been clearly proven. That belief separates me from much of the core foundation and constituency of the Republican party. They also speak of conservatism with regard to spending and laws but have done a poor job at demonstrating it.

For example, the recent "stimulus" bill had the eyes of the country on it. It was a bill that was the largest ever passed by not only our country, but of any country ever, and it went through without being fully read by a single member of Congress. That bill should have been a no-brainer for Republicans. It was the first big bill by Obama and the Dems, it was nothing but a spending bill through and through which was riddled with earmarks. If ever there was an obvious bill for Republicans to take a stance on and demonstrate their "conservative" beliefs, this was it. They should have all voted against it. It was the perfect opportunity to separate themselves from the Dems in the spotlight of the country. It was their chance to put their foot down and reestablish the parties beliefs and better emphasis the excessive spending of the Dems.

But they didn't.

That is the difference in Repubs and conservatives.

If you need a living example, look no further than my own Governor.

lamuller
09-03-2009, 06:56 PM
Without going and picking through better articulated definitions than I can usually muster, and in my own experiences, there is quite a bit of difference.

In the past few years I don't even call myself a Republican, but a conservative (who more closely relates to the Republican party than the Democratic).

I don't believe in any organized religion. I'm an evolutionist. In my mind it's been clearly proven. That belief separates me from much of the core foundation and constituency of the Republican party. They also speak of conservatism with regard to spending and laws but have done a poor job at demonstrating it.

For example, the recent "stimulus" bill had the eyes of the country on it. It was a bill that was the largest ever passed by not only our country, but of any country ever, and it went through without being fully read by a single member of Congress. That bill should have been a no-brainer for Republicans. It was the first big bill by Obama and the Dems, it was nothing but a spending bill through and through which was riddled with earmarks. If ever there was an obvious bill for Republicans to take a stance on and demonstrate their "conservative" beliefs, this was it. They should have all voted against it. It was the perfect opportunity to separate themselves from the Dems in the spotlight of the country. It was their chance to put their foot down and reestablish the parties beliefs and better emphasis the excessive spending of the Dems.

But they didn't.

That is the difference in Repubs and conservatives.

If you need a living example, look no further than my own Governor.

And the conservatives are the one's that are pro family and take trips to Argentina to cheat on their wives, and the one's that are anti gay and go to public bathrooms looking for gay lovers? Ok, Ok now I know the difference.
The definition of conservatives is total hipocresy.

Skiz
09-03-2009, 10:21 PM
Get real. You can bash anyone for a number of things.

I could sit here and say Democrats leave injured women after car crashes and let them drown, or cite one of the many examples of a Democrat being unfaithful. I'm fairly certain Democrats don't stand for those things but I wouldn't say "Democrats are hypocrites" due to the transgressions of a few.

But that's different, right?

clocker
09-03-2009, 11:31 PM
Goody.
Glen Beck doesn't like him...that makes him OK in my book.

Or perhaps you'd like to see the same information on a neutral site?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Jones#Early_activism

OK, I read the wiki ...still don't see what the big deal is.
Surely, Beck's discovery of communist art in Rockefeller Plaza trumps this.
Oh and did you know...our tax dollars are going to a UNESCO program that tells kids that masturbation won't make them blind.
Holy crap! Bring on the outrage!

j2k4
09-04-2009, 09:52 AM
And the conservatives are the one's that are pro family and take trips to Argentina to cheat on their wives, and the one's that are anti gay and go to public bathrooms looking for gay lovers? Ok, Ok now I know the difference.
The definition of conservatives is total hipocresy.

No the definition of conservative is aspiration, a word with which you have no acquaintance, nodding or otherwise.

We get our own sorted sooner or later - we don't habitually excuse poor behavior, as you have done for years (and years) with the like of Barney Frank, you see.

clocker
09-04-2009, 12:29 PM
So, conservatives occupy the moral high ground, eh?
"Don't habitually excuse poor behavior"?

Seems to me that conservatives will excuse any sort of behavior if it appears to forward their agenda.
Clearly, out and out lying doesn't bother conservatives...see: "Death Panels" and "Birthers" for two recent examples.

Or, let's take the egregious politicization of even the most mundane...say, Obama's upcoming speech to schoolchildren.
The President prepares to urge kids to apply themselves and take advantage of whatever educational opportunities still exist and the right goes nuts.
When Reagan did the very same thing (and used the occasion to push his low tax agenda), apparently that was fine.

Seems to me that the current definition of conservative is "against anything Obama is for", regardless of the consequence.

j2k4
09-04-2009, 05:30 PM
So, conservatives occupy the moral high ground, eh?
"Don't habitually excuse poor behavior"?

Seems to me that conservatives will excuse any sort of behavior if it appears to forward their agenda.

Then your perception is misleading you.

Conservatives condemn poor behavior, but hypocrisy is a human trait, one liberals only abide in other liberals.

As a conservative, I (for example) condemn Mark Sanford, and call for his ouster.

As a liberal, you sanction Barney Frank's gay basement brothel, and defend him to the death.

As a liberal, you excuse Charles Rangel's financial shenanigans, and likewise Nancy Pelosi's overlooking of the facts.

As a liberal, you don't mind Chris Dodd, et.al., receiving sweetheart deals on loans.

I could go on, but I have yet to witness your denunciation of any liberal trespass, as you prefer to reserve your outrage for "hypocritical" republicans.

Your "standards" (insofar as you can be said to possess any) are only selectively applied, you see?

I thought liberals were for fairness and equality.




Clearly, out and out lying doesn't bother conservatives...see: "Death Panels" and "Birthers" for two recent examples.

"Death panels"?

"Birthers"?

Are those like "Truthers"?

clocker
09-04-2009, 07:01 PM
Then your perception is misleading you.

Conservatives condemn poor behavior, but hypocrisy is a human trait, one liberals only abide in other liberals.

As a conservative, I (for example) condemn Mark Sanford, and call for his ouster.
That's odd.
Among all the Fox News drivel you post I have yet to see you "condemn" Sanford.
Maybe you were whispering.


As a liberal, you sanction Barney Frank's gay basement brothel, and defend him to the death.
Again, very odd.
Perhaps you can repost the thread where I defended Barney Frank (and my subsequent death, apparently).


As a liberal, you excuse Charles Rangel's financial shenanigans, and likewise Nancy Pelosi's overlooking of the facts.

As a liberal, you don't mind Chris Dodd, et.al., receiving sweetheart deals on loans.

I could go on, but I have yet to witness your denunciation of any liberal trespass, as you prefer to reserve your outrage for "hypocritical" republicans.
And your shots from the moral high ground aimed at Conservatives/repubs?
I recall one fairly tepid comment about Bush but only after he'd already wreaked havoc for eight years.
Seems it took you a long time to decide he wasn't a "true" conservative after all.


Your "standards" (insofar as you can be said to possess any) are only selectively applied, you see?

I thought liberals were for fairness and equality.
I'd say my standards are about on par with yours.
Whether either of us have any is debatable, of course.





Clearly, out and out lying doesn't bother conservatives...see: "Death Panels" and "Birthers" for two recent examples.

"Death panels"?

"Birthers"?

Are those like "Truthers"?
By conservative standards, apparently, yes.

j2k4
09-04-2009, 10:15 PM
That's odd.
Among all the Fox News drivel you post I have yet to see you "condemn" Sanford.
Maybe you were whispering.

I did it when I posted just then, didn't I?

Do you require reproduction of an historical document in order for it to be true?


As a liberal, you sanction Barney Frank's gay basement brothel, and defend him to the death.


Again, very odd.
Perhaps you can repost the thread where I defended Barney Frank (and my subsequent death, apparently).

I can't let you get away with that.

You have attempted on other occasions to defend Barney Frank (the Fannie/Freddie thread leaps to mind), who exercises his "I'm queer and thus protected - what's it to you" personna when "lecturing" anyone who questions him about anything at all.

This trait is somehow interpreted by liberals as evidence of incredible intelligence.

The pure fact is Mr. Frank's intelligence is unexceptional; he's just gay...and therefore beyond reproach.


As a liberal, you excuse Charles Rangel's financial shenanigans, and likewise Nancy Pelosi's overlooking of the facts.

As a liberal, you don't mind Chris Dodd, et.al., receiving sweetheart deals on loans.

I could go on, but I have yet to witness your denunciation of any liberal trespass, as you prefer to reserve your outrage for "hypocritical" republicans.

You totally miss my point, which is as follows:

You have never (never, never at all) roused yourself to criticize a democrat/liberal/progressive anywhere on the board, at any time, yet you expend all sorts of effort to roundly criticize even those who criticize liberals, all the while giving it to every republican who walks by as well.

I, on the other hand, have started and participated in several long-running threads wherein I criticized many on both sides.



And your shots from the moral high ground aimed at Conservatives/repubs?


I recall one fairly tepid comment about Bush but only after he'd already wreaked havoc for eight years.
Seems it took you a long time to decide he wasn't a "true" conservative after all.

You missed alot, didn't you?


Your "standards" (insofar as you can be said to possess any) are only selectively applied, you see?

I thought liberals were for fairness and equality.


I'd say my standards are about on par with yours.
Whether either of us have any is debatable, of course.

Correct form dictates I grant this small (tiny, really) point.



Clearly, out and out lying doesn't bother conservatives...see: "Death Panels" and "Birthers" for two recent examples.

"Death panels"?

"Birthers"?

Are those like "Truthers"?



By conservative standards, apparently, yes.

If it all really just comes down to that, you could ring down the entire thread merely by publishing the least complaint about a liberal...but then, nothing is ever quite that easy, is it.

clocker
09-05-2009, 03:05 PM
So, I'm a partisan fanboi and you- much like Fox News- are "fair and balanced".
Pardon me while I chuckle into my bourbon.

j2k4
09-05-2009, 05:53 PM
Bourbon.

You, sir, have changed the subject.

clocker
09-05-2009, 09:17 PM
I am a liberal, so it's allowed.
Same as drinking bourbon at 9 AM...it's in the U.S.S. Constitution.

Skiz
09-06-2009, 07:02 PM
One down.....

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/09/06/obama-green-jobs-adviser-van-jones-resigns-amid-controversy/

clocker
09-06-2009, 10:10 PM
Good for you Skiz...and Glen Beck too, I guess.

Let's make sure that during this time when the country is in dire straits, we don't spend any time trying to right the ship...instead, let's politicize every goddamn little thing and above all, make sure that absolutely nothing that Obama says or attempts goes unchallenged or succeeds.
Let's turn something as innocuous as a speech to schoolchildren- which was perfectly OK when Reagan and the two Bushs did exactly the same thing- into a major political showdown...a piece of stupidity which your home state seems to be the home of.

Boy howdy, way to go.

Let's be careful to make sure that none of our real problems get addressed while we throw up misinformation and outright lies and try to scare the electorate into reelecting the same set of fucktards who drove us into the ground in the first place.

Yeah, that sounds like a real goal.

Glad to see you have a plan Skiz, moronic as it may be.

USA, FUCK YEAH!

devilsadvocate
09-06-2009, 10:59 PM
Let's turn something as innocuous as a speech to schoolchildren- which was perfectly OK when Reagan and the two Bushs did exactly the same thing- into a major political showdown...a piece of stupidity which your home state seems to be the home of.



I'm actually taken aback by the level of crazy we've seen of late. I thought that I had seen it all. The objections to the president addressing students took it to a new level.

Skiz
09-06-2009, 11:26 PM
Good for you Skiz...and Glen Beck too, I guess.

Let's make sure that during this time when the country is in dire straits, we don't spend any time trying to right the ship...instead, let's politicize every goddamn little thing and above all, make sure that absolutely nothing that Obama says or attempts goes unchallenged or succeeds.
Let's turn something as innocuous as a speech to schoolchildren- which was perfectly OK when Reagan and the two Bushs did exactly the same thing- into a major political showdown...a piece of stupidity which your home state seems to be the home of.

Boy howdy, way to go.

Let's be careful to make sure that none of our real problems get addressed while we throw up misinformation and outright lies and try to scare the electorate into reelecting the same set of fucktards who drove us into the ground in the first place.

Yeah, that sounds like a real goal.

Glad to see you have a plan Skiz, moronic as it may be.

USA, FUCK YEAH!

:glag:

You're wound up as fuck. There was all sorts of reaching going on there.

"Let's make sure that during this time when the country is in dire straits, we don't spend any time trying to right the ship...instead, let's politicize every goddamn little thing and above all, make sure that absolutely nothing that Obama says or attempts goes unchallenged or succeeds."

We're politicizing everything because we're talking about politics. And yes, I will continue to scrutinize every anti-American deed Obama attempts to put forth in an effort to ensure he doesn't succeed in righting a ship many of us feel isn't off course.

Skiz
09-06-2009, 11:28 PM
Let's turn something as innocuous as a speech to schoolchildren- which was perfectly OK when Reagan and the two Bushs did exactly the same thing- into a major political showdown...a piece of stupidity which your home state seems to be the home of.



I'm actually taken aback by the level of crazy we've seen of late. I thought that I had seen it all. The objections to the president addressing students took it to a new level.

I think those were few and far between. I didn't object to it. I've actually only seen one single mention of the story on any network/newspaper/magazine/conversation or otherwise.

clocker
09-07-2009, 12:01 AM
Good for you Skiz...and Glen Beck too, I guess.

Let's make sure that during this time when the country is in dire straits, we don't spend any time trying to right the ship...instead, let's politicize every goddamn little thing and above all, make sure that absolutely nothing that Obama says or attempts goes unchallenged or succeeds.
Let's turn something as innocuous as a speech to schoolchildren- which was perfectly OK when Reagan and the two Bushs did exactly the same thing- into a major political showdown...a piece of stupidity which your home state seems to be the home of.

Boy howdy, way to go.

Let's be careful to make sure that none of our real problems get addressed while we throw up misinformation and outright lies and try to scare the electorate into reelecting the same set of fucktards who drove us into the ground in the first place.

Yeah, that sounds like a real goal.

Glad to see you have a plan Skiz, moronic as it may be.

USA, FUCK YEAH!

:glag:

You're wound up as fuck. There was all sorts of reaching going on there.


We're politicizing everything because we're talking about politics. And yes, I will continue to scrutinize every anti-American deed Obama attempts to put forth in an effort to ensure he doesn't succeed in righting a ship many of us feel isn't off course.
Oh, I see.
Everything was hunky dory till the Dems squashed you in the last election, eh?
And what "anti-American" deeds are you referring to?

Actually, nevermind.
After sitting complacently while Bush/Cheney shredded the Constitution for eight years, I doubt you're competent to recognize "anti-American" when it arises.

devilsadvocate
09-07-2009, 12:06 AM
I think those were few and far between. I didn't object to it. I've actually only seen one single mention of the story on any network/newspaper/magazine/conversation or otherwise.

And there was I thinking you were a foxnewser

clocker
09-07-2009, 05:41 PM
I think those were few and far between. I didn't object to it. I've actually only seen one single mention of the story on any network/newspaper/magazine/conversation or otherwise.
I'm sure the rock you live under is very comfortable.

j2k4
09-08-2009, 09:58 AM
Good for you Skiz...and Glen Beck too, I guess.

Let's make sure that during this time when the country is in dire straits, we don't spend any time trying to right the ship...

This is the problem, in a nutshell.

Enough of us to count believe Obama is trying to 'left' the ship.

BTW-

Only CBS took note of the Van Jones affair before the house-of-cards came tumbling down, then the Big Three nets and the NYT finally made mention of it; in the meantime, poor little old Foxnews carried the ball, all by itself.

Oh, and then there was the internet, too.

Go, Internets...before Obama pulls the plug.

clocker
09-08-2009, 10:44 AM
It finally occurred to me what's really going on.
All of this nonsense from the Right..."socialism", "death panels", "government takeover of heath care", etc. has absolutely nothing to do with policy and everything to do with fear.

You guys are afraid that if Obama is allowed to get anything he wants, the American people will like it and realize how badly they've been fucked by conservative rule.

Don't want your kids to realize that a President isn't necessarily a drooling idiot who can barely string together a coherent sentence?
Claim some bullshit excuse and pull them from school on the day the guy will address them.

Worried that single payer health insurance might actually benefit millions?
Claim it's socialism and the government can't run anything properly.
Naturally, as you say this you make sure that your access to Bethesda Naval Hospital is unfettered...

Basically, the right is just afraid they'll be exposed as the frauds they are.

j2k4
09-08-2009, 07:25 PM
Actually, I never said I had a problem with him addressing schoolchildren, however I will say I did object to the published version's phraseology having to do with "help your President", which, in it's context, seemed to mean 'help me, Barack Obama' without acknowledging there could be any other president who would/could need whatever help a school-child could render.

Call me touchy, but if he'd planned to say something a little less-tinged with the perception of exclusivity, I would not have had any objection.

As to the rest, right back at you; we believe you liberals do whatever you can to avoid anything you see as expository, much as you think conservatives do, so let's call that a draw, shall we, and say your motives are no purer than anyone else's.

BTW-

I have never felt any compulsion to refer to B.O. as "a drooling idiot", and frankly, I don't think you can prove George Bush is one, either...so why say it?

pentomato
09-08-2009, 08:27 PM
Actually, I never said I had a problem with him addressing schoolchildren, however I will say I did object to the published version's phraseology having to do with "help your President", which, in it's context, seemed to mean 'help me, Barack Obama' without acknowledging there could be any other president who would/could need whatever help a school-child could render.

Call me touchy, but if he'd planned to say something a little less-tinged with the perception of exclusivity, I would not have had any objection.

As to the rest, right back at you; we believe you liberals do whatever you can to avoid anything you see as expository, much as you think conservatives do, so let's call that a draw, shall we, and say your motives are no purer than anyone else's.

BTW-

I have never felt any compulsion to refer to B.O. as "a drooling idiot", and frankly, I don't think you can prove George Bush is one, either...so why say it?

If you can't prove that george Bush is an idiot, it has to be that you are one too, but then again he is an idiot.
By the way, I Remember when they told Bush about 911, he just stayed there like an idiot,reading a kids book to kids in school, and the country was been attacked, wait he is an idiot, the poor guy can't even put a sentence together.

clocker
09-08-2009, 09:07 PM
Actually, I never said I had a problem with him addressing schoolchildren, however I will say I did object to the published version's phraseology having to do with "help your President", which, in it's context, seemed to mean 'help me, Barack Obama' without acknowledging there could be any other president who would/could need whatever help a school-child could render.

Call me touchy, but if he'd planned to say something a little less-tinged with the perception of exclusivity, I would not have had any objection.
"Touchy" wouldn't be the word.
Fact is, he is their President, much like he is your President and indeed, every American's President.
You parse words- and intent- to no discernible effect and with no justification.


...
I have never felt any compulsion to refer to B.O. as "a drooling idiot", and frankly, I don't think you can prove George Bush is one, either...so why say it?

General

* "They misunderestimated me."[8] — Bentonville, Arkansas; November 6, 2000
* "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."[9] — Nashville, Tennessee; September 17, 2002
* "Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream."[10] — LaCrosse, Wisconsin; October 18, 2000
* "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully."[11] — Saginaw, Michigan; September 29, 2000
* "Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country."[12] — Poplar Bluff, Missouri; September 6, 2004
* "You know, I'm the President during this period of time, but I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so, before I arrived in President, during I arrived in President."[13] — ABC News interview, December 1, 2008
* "I'm going to put people in my place, so when the history of this administration is written at least there's an authoritarian voice saying exactly what happened."[14] (Announcing he will write a book about "the 12 toughest decisions" he had to make.)
* "I want to thank you for taking time out of your day to come and witness my hanging." — At the dedication of his portrait, Austin, Texas; January 4, 2002[15]
* "Make no mistake about it, I understand how tough it is, sir. I talk to families who die." — Washington, D.C.; December 7, 2006[16]
* "The California crunch really is the result of not enough power-generating plants and then not enough power to power the power of generating plants." — January 14, 2001[17]

Foreign affairs

* "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."[18] — Washington, D.C., August 5, 2004
* "We were trying to say something differently, but nevertheless it conveyed a different message". — January 12, 2009 Press Conference (Time Magazine, January 26, 2009, p13).
* "Bush goes to Hel. That's what a lot of people want." — On his visit to the Hel Peninsula, Gdansk, Poland, June 8, 2007[19]
* "Mr. Prime Minister, thank you for your introduction. Thank you for being such a fine host for the OPEC summit." — Addressing Australian Prime Minister John Howard at the APEC Summit, Sept. 7, 2007[19]

Economics

* "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family."[5] — Greater Nashua, New Hampshire, January 27, 2000
* "I understand small business growth. I was one." — New York Daily News, February 19, 2000
* "There's no question about it. Wall Street got drunk -- that's one of the reasons I asked you to turn off the TV cameras -- it got drunk and now it's got a hangover. The question is how long will it sober up and not try to do all these fancy financial instruments." — Speaking at a private fundraiser and surreptitiously recorded by a reporter with the footage subsequently leaked on various news outlets, Houston, Texas, July 18, 2008[20]
* "I've abandoned free market principles to save the free market system." — Washington, D.C., Dec. 16, 2008[20]

Education

* "Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?"[5] — Florence, South Carolina; January 11, 2000
* "As yesterday's positive report card shows, childrens do learn when standards are high and results are measured." — On the No Child Left Behind Act, Washington, D.C.; Sept. 26, 2007[21]
* "You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass... a literacy test."[22] — Townsend, Tennessee; February 21, 2001
* "Then you wake up at the high school level and find out that the illiteracy level of our children are appalling." —Washington, D.C.; Jan. 23, 2004[23]
Gee, I don't know where I could have gotten such an idea...

j2k4
09-08-2009, 11:37 PM
"Touchy" wouldn't be the word.
Fact is, he is their President, much like he is your President and indeed, every American's President.
You parse words- and intent- to no discernible effect and with no justification.


...
I have never felt any compulsion to refer to B.O. as "a drooling idiot", and frankly, I don't think you can prove George Bush is one, either...so why say it?

General

* "They misunderestimated me."[8] — Bentonville, Arkansas; November 6, 2000
* "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."[9] — Nashville, Tennessee; September 17, 2002
* "Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream."[10] — LaCrosse, Wisconsin; October 18, 2000
* "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully."[11] — Saginaw, Michigan; September 29, 2000
* "Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country."[12] — Poplar Bluff, Missouri; September 6, 2004
* "You know, I'm the President during this period of time, but I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so, before I arrived in President, during I arrived in President."[13] — ABC News interview, December 1, 2008
* "I'm going to put people in my place, so when the history of this administration is written at least there's an authoritarian voice saying exactly what happened."[14] (Announcing he will write a book about "the 12 toughest decisions" he had to make.)
* "I want to thank you for taking time out of your day to come and witness my hanging." — At the dedication of his portrait, Austin, Texas; January 4, 2002[15]
* "Make no mistake about it, I understand how tough it is, sir. I talk to families who die." — Washington, D.C.; December 7, 2006[16]
* "The California crunch really is the result of not enough power-generating plants and then not enough power to power the power of generating plants." — January 14, 2001[17]

Foreign affairs

* "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."[18] — Washington, D.C., August 5, 2004
* "We were trying to say something differently, but nevertheless it conveyed a different message". — January 12, 2009 Press Conference (Time Magazine, January 26, 2009, p13).
* "Bush goes to Hel. That's what a lot of people want." — On his visit to the Hel Peninsula, Gdansk, Poland, June 8, 2007[19]
* "Mr. Prime Minister, thank you for your introduction. Thank you for being such a fine host for the OPEC summit." — Addressing Australian Prime Minister John Howard at the APEC Summit, Sept. 7, 2007[19]

Economics

* "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family."[5] — Greater Nashua, New Hampshire, January 27, 2000
* "I understand small business growth. I was one." — New York Daily News, February 19, 2000
* "There's no question about it. Wall Street got drunk -- that's one of the reasons I asked you to turn off the TV cameras -- it got drunk and now it's got a hangover. The question is how long will it sober up and not try to do all these fancy financial instruments." — Speaking at a private fundraiser and surreptitiously recorded by a reporter with the footage subsequently leaked on various news outlets, Houston, Texas, July 18, 2008[20]
* "I've abandoned free market principles to save the free market system." — Washington, D.C., Dec. 16, 2008[20]

Education

* "Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?"[5] — Florence, South Carolina; January 11, 2000
* "As yesterday's positive report card shows, childrens do learn when standards are high and results are measured." — On the No Child Left Behind Act, Washington, D.C.; Sept. 26, 2007[21]
* "You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass... a literacy test."[22] — Townsend, Tennessee; February 21, 2001
* "Then you wake up at the high school level and find out that the illiteracy level of our children are appalling." —Washington, D.C.; Jan. 23, 2004[23]
Gee, I don't know where I could have gotten such an idea...


And he did it all without a teleprompter.

George Bush was your drooling id- I mean 'president' as well, wasn't he?

You've chosen to throw in with the world leader of "ah", "um" and "er".

As to methodology, why don't you do a little "parsing of words and intent" on behalf of B.O., rather than parroting the pedestrian insults of the liberal punditry who are his surrogates?

Defend his socialist agenda or tell us why that which history tells us is socialism is not in fact socialism merely due to a change of authorship.

Saying it's better for no reason other than that it is different doesn't cut it; those who read this stuff are slavering for your answer.

clocker
09-09-2009, 12:03 AM
Defend his socialist agenda or tell us why that which history tells us is socialism is not in fact socialism merely due to a change of authorship.

Saying it's better for no reason other than that it is different doesn't cut it; those who read this stuff are slavering for your answer.
Nice try, Kev.
Neither the dictionary nor history "tell" us that anything Obama stands for is "socialism".
You and your buddies on the far right try to frame this administration as something other than embodying the higher aspirations of Americans by casually labeling them as socialists...a transparent attempt to sow fear and divisiveness.
I ain't letting you define the rules of the game.

Perhaps you'd like to explain exactly what you find socialist about any of the Obama proposals.

BTW...
The school that Obama spoke from today is my alma mater.
Surprised it's still there...

j2k4
09-10-2009, 08:52 PM
Perhaps you'd like to explain exactly what you find socialist about any of the Obama proposals.

Because they are the next step in the progression from the comprehensive system of social democracy which has burgeoned so bounteously since the extended reign of FDR.

clocker
09-10-2009, 10:42 PM
Perhaps you'd like to explain exactly what you find socialist about any of the Obama proposals.

Because they are the next step in the progression from the comprehensive system of social democracy which has burgeoned so bounteously since the extended reign of FDR.
Hmm, how odd.
Since Roosevelt left office in 1945, Republicans have controlled the Presidency for 36 years compared to Democrats at 28 years.
Yet you attribute all our problems to the party which has been the minority most of the time.
How could this happen?

j2k4
09-10-2009, 10:54 PM
Since Roosevelt left office in 1945, Republicans have controlled the Presidency for 36 years compared to Democrats at 28 years.
Yet you attribute all our problems to the party which has been the minority most of the time.

No, I attribute all our problems to the party which has controlled the House and Senate for about 9/10s of that same time.

Your problems getting/holding the White House may be the lingering affect of FDR's presumptive life-time appointment.

pentomato
09-10-2009, 11:03 PM
Damn the conservative assembleman from california, Married, totally pro family values and has two lovers on the side, and kinki, those conservatives you have to love them and their family values, they are so sincere.

clocker
09-10-2009, 11:21 PM
No, I attribute all our problems to the party which has controlled the House and Senate for about 9/10s of that same time.

.
Basically, after all this time...you attribute all the nation's ills to Democrats and I to Republicans.
I guess we really have nothing more to say.

j2k4
09-11-2009, 02:00 PM
Well we also have different points of view about what precisely is on that list of ills...I am aware of a good deal of agreement between us, but these points have to do with basic human tendencies and behaviors, so...