"You're going to destroy my Presidency"

[oVo]

Don't worry America, I'm working the bugs out of the laser beam thing

and when I get it right? buhzapp! heads will roll.

[InkL0sed]

And you wonder why I don't bother to actually argue with you anymore? You deserve nothing but flaming.

I don't care if you argue or not, but to not be able to specify or criticize what you take issue with is indicative of a poorly formed world view on your part, not mine.

Also, I would warn you to avoid flaming. We aren't supposed to go that route.

I can't argue with you because your world view is so ridiculously warped (and ridiculous) that we will never see eye to eye; I don't personally care enough about you to write essay after essay debunking the absurd things you say for naught.

So I'll stick with making fun of you instead, and worrying about how many of you there are out there.

[GabonX]

I hate to break it to you, but there are a lot of us out there..and our views are just as valid (if not more valid) than yours.

They thought Churchill was a right wing nut job until he was right too.

[jsholty4690]

Don't worry America, I'm working the bugs out of the laser beam thing

and when I get it right? buhzapp! heads will roll.

That's what I'm afraid of.

[Frigidus]

Being female, black, gay, or some other form of minority is a political asset while being a white male is a political liability.

One guy that isn't a white male (he's only half white, gasp!) is elected president and suddenly being a white male is a liability?

U.S. House U.S. Senate U.S. Population %
White 332 (76.3%) 81 (81%) 74
Black 42 (9.7%) 1 (1%) 13.5
Jewish 30 (6.8%) 14 (14%) Not sure of exact, but less than 6%
Hispanic 25 (5.7% ) 2 (2%) 14.8
Asian 5 (1.1%) 2 (2%) 5
Native Amer. 1 (0.2%) 0 (0%) 0.8

Maybe it's just me, but it looks like it's pretty good to be white right now.

Edit: That semi-chart looks much cleaner in my post, just hit quote to see it there.

[luns101]

If you're going to go down the laser beam route then this would probably be a little better.....

[jsholty4690]

If you're going to go down the laser beam route then this would probably be a little better.....

You know that doesn't look half bad on him. I could see that happening.

[GabonX]

Being female, black, gay, or some other form of minority is a political asset while being a white male is a political liability.

One guy that isn't a white male (he's only half white, gasp!) is elected president and suddenly being a white male is a liability?

U.S. House U.S. Senate U.S. Population %
White 332 (76.3%) 81 (81%) 74
Black 42 (9.7%) 1 (1%) 13.5
Jewish 30 (6.8%) 14 (14%) Not sure of exact, but less than 6%
Hispanic 25 (5.7% ) 2 (2%) 14.8
Asian 5 (1.1%) 2 (2%) 5
Native Amer. 1 (0.2%) 0 (0%) 0.8

Maybe it's just me, but it looks like it's pretty good to be white right now.

Our recent election has demonstrated empirically that such is not the case.

The numbers you've posted don't take a lot of factors into account. What group of the 40 to 70 year old demographic has the education which would qualify them to become a politician on the national level? How many white individuals mentioned ran against rational minority opposition candidates? Such a figure is meaningless without this information.

There's no question that racism has existed in the past, and that it still exists in one form or another to this day. Past circumstances have created a practical reality where most people who are qualified to be political leaders in this country today ARE white males.
We have seen what happens when a less experienced minority candidate opposes these white male counterparts.

My concern doesn't address the past as that is said and done, but rather what will the future be like? Will being white continue to be a liability as it is today? Will the situation worsen?

I would like to think that the future holds real social equality, but that isn't the direction I see us taking.

Anyhow, this is getting a bit off topic.

[oVo]

ALL YOUR BASE IS US!

[GabonX]

The Obama administration again is blocking the public from seeing White House visitor logs, this time refusing to disclose meetings with health care executives.

The nonprofit group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington said it was filing suit Wednesday afternoon against the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Secret Service.

Within hours after the group announced it was filing suit, the White House relented, in part, saying it would voluntarily release the names and dates of visits. That is less information than is contained in the White House visitor logs, which would also show which White House employee requested the meeting. Despite the voluntary release, the Obama White House is still taking the same legal position as the Bush White House, arguing that release of the information is not required.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32087532/ns ... hite_house

[bedub1]

You clearly have no understanding of Obama's life. Being told "no" for the first time in his life? What, do you think he was raised with a silver spoon or something?

His mother gets knocked up by a Tanzanian immigrant. It doesn't work out he moves back to Africa, while she gives birth in Hawaii. She meets a Muslim man they get hitched or something like that. They take little Barrack to Indonesia and he goes to school in a Madrassa for sometime. They come back to the good old USA when he's in his teens, smokes a little pot and gets scholarships to go to the top schools in the US. He then drops out for a little while (I think not completely sure) and meets up with a lot of questionable charaters (domestic terrorists, drug dealers, and others) gets high again, and goes back to school. Finishes in the middle of his class (no one really remembers him). He goes to Chicago and works for ACORN and some lawyers marries and becomes a Community Organizer. He then gets elected to IL's house of reps or senate (it doesn't matter does it?) and then gets elected to the Senate (does nothing there) and is finally elected President.

Oh, and somewhere he found time to write two books. Where does he find the time?

Did I miss anything?

Nice summary! The guy doesn't know how to do anything but spend other peoples money. He's never worked for anything in his life. He's a worthless pile of shit, and I hope he doesn't screw this country up too much.

[InkL0sed]

Code: Select all

                 
                U.S. House            U.S. Senate              U.S. Population %
White       332 (76.3%)                81 (81%)                           74
Black          42 (9.7%)                  1 (1%)                         13.5
Jewish        30 (6.8%)                 14 (14%)                        < 6%
Hispanic     25 (5.7% )                  2 (2%)                           14.8
Asian            5 (1.1%)                  2 (2%)                           5
Native Amer. 1 (0.2%)                  0 (0%)                            0.8

[GabonX]

Code: Select all

                 
                U.S. House            U.S. Senate              U.S. Population %
White       332 (76.3%)                81 (81%)                           74
Black          42 (9.7%)                  1 (1%)                         13.5
Jewish        30 (6.8%)                 14 (14%)                        < 6%
Hispanic     25 (5.7% )                  2 (2%)                           14.8
Asian            5 (1.1%)                  2 (2%)                           5
Native Amer. 1 (0.2%)                  0 (0%)                            0.8

The numbers you've posted don't take a lot of factors into account. What group of the 40 to 70 year old demographic has the education which would qualify them to become a politician on the national level? How many white individuals mentioned ran against rational minority opposition candidates? Such a figure is meaningless without this information.

There's no question that racism has existed in the past, and that it still exists in one form or another to this day. Past circumstances have created a practical reality where most people who are qualified to be political leaders in this country today ARE white males.
We have seen what happens when a less experienced minority candidate opposes these white male counterparts.

My concern doesn't address the past as that is said and done, but rather what will the future be like? Will being white continue to be a liability as it is today? Will the situation worsen?

I would like to think that the future holds real social equality, but that isn't the direction I see us taking.

Anyhow, this is getting a bit off topic.

It's not simply an issue of "well if we have this many white people and this many black people...Equality!"

This is bigoted thinking. People should be rewarded for merit, and this means that groups will be disproportionately successful.

Jewish people have a disproportionately high presence in the Senate, and probably the House too. Is this because people are bigoted and view Jews favorably or because they have worked harder?

Oppressive Zog machine?

[bedub1]

Code: Select all

                 
                U.S. House            U.S. Senate              U.S. Population %
White       332 (76.3%)                81 (81%)                           74
Black          42 (9.7%)                  1 (1%)                         13.5
Jewish        30 (6.8%)                 14 (14%)                        < 6%
Hispanic     25 (5.7% )                  2 (2%)                           14.8
Asian            5 (1.1%)                  2 (2%)                           5
Native Amer. 1 (0.2%)                  0 (0%)                            0.8

The numbers you've posted don't take a lot of factors into account. What group of the 40 to 70 year old demographic has the education which would qualify them to become a politician on the national level? How many white individuals mentioned ran against rational minority opposition candidates? Such a figure is meaningless without this information.

There's no question that racism has existed in the past, and that it still exists in one form or another to this day. Past circumstances have created a practical reality where most people who are qualified to be political leaders in this country today ARE white males.
We have seen what happens when a less experienced minority candidate opposes these white male counterparts.

My concern doesn't address the past as that is said and done, but rather what will the future be like? Will being white continue to be a liability as it is today? Will the situation worsen?

I would like to think that the future holds real social equality, but that isn't the direction I see us taking.

Anyhow, this is getting a bit off topic.

It's not simply an issue of "well if we have this many white people and this many black people...Equality!"

This is bigoted thinking. People should be rewarded for merit, and this means that groups will be disproportionately successful.

Jewish people have a disproportionately high presence in the Senate, and probably the House too. Is this because people are bigoted and view Jews favorably or because they have worked harder?

Oppressive Zog machine?

dude...you can't talk like that. "they worked harder".....gah! We are all equal! The constitution doesn't say "we are all created equal" it says "we are all equal and deserve everything equally!"

[GabonX]

The sparking genius of Marx and Engels
Envisioned the future rise of the commune.
Dean has outlined us the road to the freedom
And great Obama is leading us through it.

[Martin Ronne]

You clearly have no understanding of Obama's life. Being told "no" for the first time in his life? What, do you think he was raised with a silver spoon or something?

That would explain his silver tung.

[Nobunaga]

[HapSmo19]

I can't argue with you because your world view is so ridiculously warped (and ridiculous) that we will never see eye to eye; I don't personally care enough about you to write essay after essay debunking the absurd things you say for naught.

Please, no. Say it ain't so,...yo.
I can't go without the words of wisdom from the kid that was probably conceived to Funky Cold Madina.

[InkL0sed]

I can't argue with you because your world view is so ridiculously warped (and ridiculous) that we will never see eye to eye; I don't personally care enough about you to write essay after essay debunking the absurd things you say for naught.

Please, no. Say it ain't so,...yo.
I can't go without the words of wisdom from the kid that was probably conceived to Funky Cold Madina.

I gave up on this idiot a long time ago.

[F1fth]

I was going to make this a longer post, but it's not even worth it. You guys are being unfair in regards to two matters, both of which I think you are aware of though you may act otherwise:

1) The summary is extremely subjective and woefully inadequate, as evidenced by a cursory reading of Wikipedia. Among other achievements, Obama got into and graduated from Harvard Law School magna cum laude (means "with honors," so you guys know). That in and of itself is a testament of his work and dedication. He also was a professor of constitutional law for twelve years at the University of Chicago Law School, another achievement. There are more and you all know this, but instead you all play stupid of course (or at least I hope you all are "playing").

2) Contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of Dems do not worship the ground Obama walks on and covet everything he says as gospel. You extreme rightists like to divide everything into black and white ("either you're with us or you're against us") and insist that if we're not calling Obama "a worthless pile of shit" that we must never think he can do no wrong -- and by the way, why does having political philosophies that you disagree with make you not just a bad person, but shit? There are definitely some things about Obama's policy that bother me and feel that some of the decisions he has made have been questionable, but hey, we weren't expecting the messiah nor perfection (though many conservatives said just that). Fact is though, he's done stuff that I've liked and stuff that I've disliked, just the same for everybody. Instead of wasting energy on arguing against the man, why don't you argue against the policies that you disagree with and for the ones you do; you know, something actually productive.

But I'm sorry to disturb you all with reality. Carry on being idiots if you wish.

[jsholty4690]

I was going to make this a longer post, but it's not even worth it. You guys are being unfair in regards to two matters, both of which I think you are aware of though you may act otherwise:

1) The summary is extremely subjective and woefully inadequate, as evidenced by a cursory reading of Wikipedia. Among other achievements, Obama got into and graduated from Harvard Law School magna cum laude (means "with honors," so you guys know). That in and of itself is a testament of his work and dedication. He also was a professor of constitutional law for twelve years at the University of Chicago Law School, another achievement. There are more and you all know this, but instead you all play stupid of course (or at least I hope you all are "playing").

I've never got on wikipedia to look up Obama. I'm sorry that I didn't get every little thing that he did down because I don't care what he did in his past. I was proving a point that I knew more about him than the average voter did. While, on his past I want to make this clear, his past is irrelevant now. What matters now is what he does in the White House because if he fails the country fails (I'm not Rusch Limbaugh) and so far, he has been less than stellar in my book.

2) Contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of Dems do not worship the ground Obama walks on and covet everything he says as gospel. You extreme rightists like to divide everything into black and white ("either you're with us or you're against us") and insist that if we're not calling Obama "a worthless pile of shit" that we must never think he can do no wrong -- and by the way, why does having political philosophies that you disagree with make you not just a bad person, but shit? There are definitely some things about Obama's policy that bother me and feel that some of the decisions he has made have been questionable, but hey, we weren't expecting the messiah nor perfection (though many conservatives said just that). Fact is though, he's done stuff that I've liked and stuff that I've disliked, just the same for everybody. Instead of wasting energy on arguing against the man, why don't you argue against the policies that you disagree with and for the ones you do; you know, something actually productive.

But I'm sorry to disturb you all with reality. Carry on being idiots if you wish.

Last time I checked I'm not a far right loney who sees everything in black and white. I'm not an idiot who believes all Dems. worship the ground he walks on, just look at the Blue Dogs breaking with him on Health Care. The people I'm talking about are those who will blindly follow any leader, whether he (or she) is Republican or Democrat is completely irrelevant.

You want me to attack his policies? Fine, good by me. His plan to close Gitmo, was never planned out (does that remind you of someone 70% or so of Americans didn't like?). His Health Care and Stimulus Plans are a joke. The Health Care plan will put all Private Insurance Companies out of business because what business can compete with the government? I have one more question to ask you, Would you in your own life try to get out of debt by creating more debt? I ask this because that is what we are doing with the Stimulus Bill. Oh, and don't get me started on his 'tax evasion buddies.'

[strike wolf]

I doubt he said that especially in those specific words.


On another note was I the only one who thought it said Watergate and not Waterloo?

[thegreekdog]

I was going to make this a longer post, but it's not even worth it.

I know... I can't believe these assholes... And, hey, why bother educating them when you can make fun of them, pat yourself on the back for a job well done, get into your BMW that you dad bought you and drive to the mall?

Apart from that moronic comment by you, I agree with at least your #1. The dude worked hard. It's as simple as that. He graduated from high school, college, and law school, at the tops of his respective classes. That takes hard work. As for the professor part... professors are the laziest people I know, especially law school professors. But, let's assume he worked hard there. So, we get to the presidency... no one can say the president doesn't work hard. He's probably the hardest working president I've ever read about.

2) Contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of Dems do not worship the ground Obama walks on and covet everything he says as gospel. You extreme rightists like to divide everything into black and white ("either you're with us or you're against us") and insist that if we're not calling Obama "a worthless pile of shit" that we must never think he can do no wrong -- and by the way, why does having political philosophies that you disagree with make you not just a bad person, but shit? There are definitely some things about Obama's policy that bother me and feel that some of the decisions he has made have been questionable, but hey, we weren't expecting the messiah nor perfection (though many conservatives said just that). Fact is though, he's done stuff that I've liked and stuff that I've disliked, just the same for everybody. Instead of wasting energy on arguing against the man, why don't you argue against the policies that you disagree with and for the ones you do; you know, something actually productive.

Two words for you, that were not proposed by anyone except Democrats - "Hope" and "Change"

Two other comments for you:

First, I've yet to read any Obama supporters on this website or on any other newsmedia site (other than those "whacko righty" websites) criticize anything that he has done. When you, and others, start criticizing the president, I can get on board with the idea that people don't see him as the savior.

Second, there are any number of threads on this website discussing the president's policies. Perhaps you can find them. Stop being a whiny baby and either argue for what the president is doing or against what the president is doing.

[InkL0sed]

I haven't criticized anything Obama does on this board because I'm stubborn like that. No, I don't agree with everything he does, and I don't think the vast majority of his supporters are that way either. We just think he's miles better than any Republican would have been.

[GabonX]

It's not completely unlikely that you will be drafted because of his tepid foriegn policy.

If he fails to engage threats in the world, and they pursue the course that they are already on, we may even be able to make a conservative out of you