Yeah I know. Just not with the program at all. And I can prove that by the number of Ron Paul stickers I see out here. And the threats of physical harm some of those Paul supporters issue when I point out that these have always been Ron Paul positions.

 

Obama Stupid and Lazy






Obama may not be as intelligent as his supporters assure us.

By Steve Baldwin, a Western Journalism Exclusive

Is Obama Stupid and Lazy?Although that’s quite a provocative question, evidence is mounting that Obama may not be as intelligent as his supporters and cheerleaders in the media constantly assure us. The reality may be that Obama is mostly a creation of the liberal media. Indeed, the more we dig into his past, the more we find very little substance and discover how a network of liberal professors, law firms, and others, gave him a pass on performance while he pursued his political agenda.

Educational Background
We know very little about Obama’s academic performance. Sources state that he attended an elite K-12 school in Hawaii called Punahou School, but the school claims that his records are missing.
Obama attended the prestigious Occidental College in California. This is puzzling, however, because he has admitted in his book and elsewhere that he was engaged in heavy drug use while in high school. This seems to show that his studies were the last thing on his mind. How he got in remains a mystery and Obama’s attorneys have blocked access to those records.
Obama finished up his undergraduate years at Columbia College, but, again, Obama won’t release those records either. We have no information to suggest he was a good student. We do know, however, that he did not graduate with honors from Columbia. As the New York Sun writes:
University Spokesman Brian Connolly confirmed that Obama graduated with a major in
political science but without honors. Nevertheless, he was later admitted to Harvard Law
School.
Being accepted by Harvard Law School without graduating with honors from Columbia suggests that Obama was admitted to Harvard based on race and perhaps, by that time, his growing reputation as a liberal political superstar.
Obama has also refused to release his Columbia thesis, which was about nuclear disarmament of the West. Perhaps Obama is fearful that his thesis, which likely advocates the disarming of the West at the peak of the Cold War, would be seen as incredibly stupid – which it would be.​

Obama at Columbia University​

Indeed, the only article anyone can find written by Obama during his undergraduate years is one published by the Sundial, a campus newspaper. Titled Breaking the War Mentality, it’s an idiotic piece that reads like something out of the mind of a 14 year old. Moreover, it simply repeats the propaganda lines of various campus anti-war groups. He writes favorably of nuclear freeze groups, of whom, we now know – thanks to the opening of KGB archives – were being manipulated by the Soviets.

Indeed, the numerous efforts of Obama’s legal team to seal all his academic records brings suspicion that Obama wants to hide his lack of academic achievements, which means that liberal college administrators at Occidental and Columbia admitted him based on his skin color and perhaps even his liberal political pedigree. With college faculty and administration completely dominated by liberals and with rage for affirmative action at its peak at that time, this is a highly possible scenario.
Not graduating with honors from Columbia College almost guarantees that Obama’s acceptance to the Harvard Law School was hinged on affirmative action. We also know that some prominent liberals were lobbying the school to gain Obama admittance. It’s no wonder Obama has refused to release any Harvard records as well; nor will he release his LSAT or SAT scores. Moreover, how Obama was elected to the presidency of the Harvard Law Review is also controversial.
Historically, those who become president of the HLR do so based off of outstanding grades, but not in Obama’s case. Indeed, at the time of his election, there was a push to promote blacks to leadership positions on campus, regardless of merit. The left felt that racial promotions, regardless of merit, was a way to pay back the white man’s “debt” to blacks for the slavery era.
Obama made headlines when he was elected the first black president of the HLR. But breaking the racial barrier was the goal of those who elected him in much the same way many Americans voted for him for president due to his skin color. When affirmative action programs promote people due skin color and not merit, eventually someone pays a price. In Obama’s case, America is paying the price. At the time, Obama even admitted that his HLR election was about race, telling the New York Times:​

The fact that I’ve been elected shows a lot of progress.

Indeed, according to the NYT, the head of the HLR used to be selected based on grades, but that’s no longer the case:​

The system came under attack in the 1970’s and was replaced by a program in which about

half the editors are chosen for their grades and the other half are chosen by fellow students
after a special writing competition. The new system, disputed when it began, was meant to
help insure that minority students became editors of the Law Review.
No one will reveal what Obama wrote for his essay, but we can assume Obama wrote a feel-good liberal essay on some politically correct topic and, combined with the incentive to “make history,” the HLR staff voted him as president. But it’s clear his election was not due to his scholarship. It was all about race and politics. Obama even admits as such in 1990 HLR statement:
Since the merits of the Law Review’s selection policy has[sic] been the subject of commentary for the
last three issues, I’d like to take the time to clarify exactly how our selection process works…
I must say, however, that as someone who has undoubtedly benefited from affirmative action
programs during my academic career, and as someone who may have benefited from the Law
Review’s affirmative action policy when I was selected to join the Review last year, I have not
personally felt stigmatized either within the broader law school community or as a staff member
of the Review.
Note that in the very first sentence of this statement, Obama writes the noun “merits” as plural and the verb “had” as singular! And this from the editor of the HLR? Ironically, Obama’s statement confirming that the affirmative action mentality elected him also affirms how affirmative action lowers academic standards. ​

What is strange about Obama’s tenure with HLR is that he wrote hardly anything for the publication during his two year term with them. Only one article has been found, an unsigned six-page summary on the question of whether fetuses should be able to file suits against their mothers. According to Poltico:
The temperate legal language doesn’t display the rhetorical heights that run through his memoir, published a few years later….
Others have pointed out numerous logic and grammatical errors in the piece that any “brilliant” HLR editor would not have made. Indeed, as far as can be determined, Obama is the first HLR president in Harvard’s history to not have written anything for the Review under his own name. Was Obama not capable of writing well-researched legal briefs? What was he afraid of?
Harvard is notorious for its liberal faculty and one can see how a promising, liberal, half-Kenyan, black-activist would be passed for work that wouldn’t have been accepted from a white or Asian student.
Yes, Obama graduated in the top 10% of his class, but with the obsessive, affirmative-action mentality held by his professors, one can assume that he was favored on reasons other than intellectual merit. Obama’s politics were well known to them and as a result of being a history-making first president of the HLR, it’s a good bet that his professors treated him the same way the Harvard admission officers treated him – lowering the standards and inflating the grades.
Speaking Ability​

Jon Favreau is the main speechwriter at The White House​

One reason why the media has declared Obama to be “brilliant” is because of his inspirational speeches. However, Obama doesn’t write his speeches—His campaign speeches were written by Jon Favreau, who is now his main speechwriter at the White House. The soaring words and inspirational phrases were all written by Favreau. Without Favreau, Obama’s speeches are mediocre.
Don’t believe me? Visit YouTube.com and search for “Obama with no teleprompter,” and you’ll find a slew of speeches in which he sounds like a fool, stuttering and stammering. Without a speech prepared for him and without a teleprompter, he’s a less thanaverage speaker. Being unable to speak extemporaneously, like the media claims he can, is a sign of his lack of brilliance. What’s more, not only is his grammar and syntax off in his unprepared speeches, his thoughts are also confusing:
Well, let me — let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s.
It will be a strong friend of Israel’s under a McCain government — administration. It will​

be a strong friend of Israel’s under an Obama administration. So that policy is not going to change.
Even Bush was a better “off-the-cuff” speaker than Obama is.
Moreover, it was discovered that many of Obama’s speeches contained the same phrases as those of Deval Patrick, the Governor of Massachusetts. These same boilerplate platitudes that many American voters found so appealing were, in fact, used by a left-wing Governor in Massachusetts. Regardless, there was is an explanation for this plagiarism; David Axelrod was the campaign strategist for both Obama and Patrick.
Professional Career
Following his graduation from Columbia, Obama claims he worked as a research assistant for a high powered consulting firm. This position he supposedly held has turned out to be misleading and nothing short of a joke. A colleague has since reported what Obama really did: He actually worked for a small company that published a business forecasting newsletter. Obama would take economic reports from other countries and collate them into a three ring binder to be sent out to subscribers. He didn’t do any legal work for them. In fact, he did work typical of an intern.
After Obama graduated from Harvard Law, he did not to seek work as a clerk for a prominent liberal judge, as most of his Harvard colleagues did. The work of a law clerk is demanding and it is doubtful that Obama was capable of completing such a challenge. Instead, Obama was hired by a Chicago law firm. But he didn’t do any heavy lifting there either. Instead, he spent all his time writing notes for his first book. As Allison Davis, a founding partner of the firm wrote:
Some of my partners weren’t happy with that, Barrack sitting there with his key board on his lap and his feet up on the desk writing the book.
No can find any law briefs written by Obama at this time. It appears that he was just “parked” at the law firm, preparing himself for a political career. Indeed, Obama will NOT release his billing records for this time period, so it is suspected that he is hiding the fact that he didn’t engage in any substantial work for this law firm. ​

Obama at the University of Chicago Law School​

After he accepted this position, Obama’s incompetence was exposed. Here is what one blogger, familiar with the exams Obama gave while “teaching” at the University of Chicago:​

But it gets even worse when you try to read the Constitutional Law exams at Chicago; for instance, here’s an exam from 2003 [when Obama was 42 years old] where the preposition doesn’t agree with the verb:​

Law week, two men, Richard and Michael, walked into you office and asked for your help.
You learn that they are a monogamous, gay couple who have been living
together for the past ten years. Both men are successful architects, and after devoting the past decade on their respective careers, they have now decided that they want to marry and raise children together.
Setting aside the “Law” and “you office” typos, a man doesn’t devote a decade on his career – he devotes a decade to his career.​

But of course that’s the same pattern we saw back in 1990, and which persisted throughout
the 1990s and into this decade – the nouns don’t agree with the verbs, and the verbs don’t agree with the
prepositions – and that’s just sweating the little stuff.​

The other night, a few of us got together and were trying to parse some of the gibberish in the old exam
answer sheets, and after about fifteen minutes of reading stuff like this, we just threw our hands up in the
air, and begged, “No mas!”
A more interesting question arises if we assume that a court rejects Helen’s claim that a
fundamental right is at stake, and instead chose to subject PFVA to rational basis review.
The recent Romer opinion may not overturn (in fact, it doesn’t even mention) Bowers, but
it nevertheless indicates that even under rational, basis review, the Equal Protection Clause
does not permit classifications based merely on a majority’s “distaste” of a particular group –
at least not insofar as the classification is not merely directed at the group’s ability to engage
in particular conduct that the majority finds disturbing, but rather, is “class legislation” that
potentially disadvantages the group in a range of activities unrelated to any particular conduct.​

By our count, that’s approximately 10.75 different negations in one sentence. But then somebody noticed
this little gem from the 1996 answer sheet:
Which spin on Romer the Court might adopt is anybody’s guess. What is safe to say is that the
views of particular justices on the desirability of rearing in children in homosexual households
would play a big part in the decision.​

This paragraph doesn’t even make sense. Obama was not only incomprehensible in his writing, but he was obsessed with group identity and other bogus legal theories. During the presidential campaign Obama claimed he was a “Constitutional law professor” at the University of Chicago Law School, but this is not true. He was listed on the Chicago Law School website as a “Senior Lecturer in Law.” That is not the same as a law professor. As Lynn Sweet writes in the Chicago Sun-Times:
The University of Chicago released a statement on Thursday saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.)
‘served as a professor’ in the law school—but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there
part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed on Friday. ‘He did not hold the title
of professor of law,’ said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and
Lecturer in Law at the school, on East 60th St. in Chicago. . . .​

The university statement said, ‘From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack
Obama served as a professor in the Law School.’ The school probably did not mean to imply that
Obama became a University of Chicago professor a year out of law school. But the word ‘served’ is
key— Nagorsky said Obama carried out, or served, a function of a professor—teaching a core
curriculum course while a senior lecturer—while at the same time not holding down that rank.. . . .​

While Obama was also part of the law school community, his appointment was not part of an academic
search process and he did not have any scholarly research obligations which professors often do.
It appears as if the University of Chicago babysat him as well. Not having to complete any research like real professors do, Obama was free to continue his hard left networking and community organizing in preparation for his political career. ​

Obama worked for Acorn​

At this point in his life, Obama worked for a number of community organizing groups but finding anything written by him is almost impossible. His name did appear on a ACORN lawsuit against Citibank which forced them to approve home loans for people who were not qualified (yes, Obama and his ACORN friends contributed to the credit crisis now destroying America), but he is one of nine attorneys listed and there is no evidence he wrote any of the briefs.
Indeed, it does not appear that he ever used his Harvard Law School degree to engage in any legitimate legal work. Perhaps he learned so little about the law at Harvard, he simply wasn’t prepared to engaged in any real legal work.
We do know that his community organizing work was generally considered incompetent. When he was hired by the Annenberg Foundation to carry out reforms focused on a few dozen public Chicago schools, he was a complete failure. He and his best fiend, terrorist Bill Ayers, were given a $150 million grant to improve the performance of a few dozen schools, but internal Annenberg audits reveal there was zero improvement. In fact, in some areas, the school’s performance declined, as I explained in “What is Obama’s Real Education Agenda?”:
Indeed, a 2003 a report by the Chicago Annenberg Research Project, a group entrusted with
analyzing the results of the Annenberg Challenge, found that ‘there were no statistically significant
difference in student achievement between Annenberg Schools and demographically similar non-
Annenberg schools. This indicates that there was no Annenberg effect on achievement.’ And that
was in academics.
Even in the touchy-feely areas of ‘student’s sense of self-efficacy and social competence’ the report
found ‘there were no statistically significant differences in these outcomes between Annenberg [funded]
schools and non-Annenberg schools.’ It gets worse. The report revealed that in some areas such as
‘student peer support for academic learning, inclusive school leadership, and teacher commitment,’
these ‘failed to improve and some weakened.’
How can one blow $150 million and not show any improvement? This is the extent of Obama’s executive experience and it reveals total incompetence. And yet the Obama team had the gall to attack Governor Palin for being inexperienced!
Dreams of my Father
Dreams From My Father by Bill Ayers​

By the beginning of October 2008, my confidence that Dreams had been thoroughly doctored and that the doctor was none other than terrorist emeritus Bill Ayers.
This stunning revelation wasignored by the establishment media until best-selling author Chris Anderson, in his new book, Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage, revealed that sources close to Obama confirm that Bill Ayers wrote Dreams of My Father. But for years, Obama claimed to have written it and also claimed to have not known Ayers well. Now we know both statements are lies. As Cashill writes:
Only in America could an America-hating terrorist conspire with an unskilled writer of uncertain
origins on an untruthful memoir and succeed in getting the man elected president. This plot is an
absolutely rich, so thoroughly cinematic, that the literary gatekeepers refuse to believe it’s true.
Sorry to disillusion you.
State Senate Career
While in the Illinois State Senate, his accomplishments were meager. In fact, he didn’t show up much of the time. Records show he didn’t even bother to vote much of the time either. He also voted “present” more than any other legislators – 130 times — which simply means you’re “neutral” on the issue being voted upon. The few bills he introduced were handed to him by veteran legislators.
He was handed 26 bills by a fellow senator his first years as a state senator, bills all written by others. He was known as a “Bill Jacker,” which is someone who steals other people’s legislative ideas and then claims credit for them. Even the so called “ethics” legislation he often mentioned on the campaign trail was a fraud. This was an already crafted bill created by Senator Emil Jones. Jones allowed Obama to take a lead on it to help his career. This is not a sign of genius.
U.S. Senate Career
In the U.S. Senate Obama once again repeated his “bill jacking” actions. He often claimed credit for bills he was merely a co-sponsor of but had no involvement in creating. When Texas State Senator Kirk Watson was questioned by Chris Matthews to list any of Obama’s legislative accomplishments, he was unable to name one. The exchange can be viewed here.
Following a number of meetings involving intense negotiations on the 2006 immigration “reform” bill (the amnesty bill), there was a press conference. Obama showed up and actually spoke as if he was part of the negotiations when in fact he had nothing to do with the crafting of the bill.
McCain accused Obama of “partisan postering” since the few meetings they had never produced any legislation. Maybe he is not the only one who is sick of his lies and stupidity.​

Obama even took credit for a banking bill which disinvested money from Iran:
Just this past – this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which
is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran as a way of racheting up the pressure
to ensure that they don’t obtain a nuclear weapon.
The problem is, Obama was not a member of the Banking Committee and had nothing to do with the bill.
Having very little legislative accomplishments and stealing other people’s ideas is not a sign of brilliance. It’s a sign of laziness and arrogance.​

Many of his Polices Aren’t Just Liberal, They’re Stupid!​

Outside of “identity politics” and sports, Obama has little understanding of the real world:

• His repeated bows to foreign leaders, which suggests he doesn’t understand basic protocol.
• His efforts to try terrorists in civilian court reveal a severe misunderstanding of the U.S. Constitution.
• His idea that massive government spending will generate private sector jobs is a bizarre view not held by any credible free market economist and has no historical precedent.
• His belief that additional burdens placed upon the private sector will not have any impact on job creation defies all logic.
• His belief that government must take over all health care in order to make it more efficient completely ignores the history of socialized medicine all over the world.
• He appears to have no basic understanding of free-market economics.
• His view that apologizing to America’s enemies will earn us goodwill is naïve and incredibly stupid.

Nor does Obama Understand even Basic History:

• He claimed the Americans liberated Auschwitz and Treblinka. They did not.
• He said the whole world came together to save Berlin during the airlift. No they didn’t; it was mostly an American and British effort.
• He portrays his father as a freedom fighter, when in fact he was part of an extremely violent, corrupt movement in Kenya.
• He believes his Kenyan family was involved with the African freedom movement. No, they weren’t. Obama’s relatives have attempted to impose Sharia law in Kenya.
• He even thinks the origins of his name is Swahili. No, its not. It’s Arabic. Swahili has nothing to do with his name.
• He claims that as a result of the Selma march, he was born. Not true. Obama was born four years before the Selma march.

Obama’s Stupidity is Reflected by the Most Naive Cabinet Ever.

Obama’s lack of knowledge about how the free enterprise system works is not just limited to him, but also reflected in who he has chosen to lead his administration. J.P Morgan tracks the percentage of cabinet officials — 432 in all – who have private sector experience. They’ve been doing this since 1900. The vast majority of Presidential cabinets have selected around 50% of its people from private sector backgrounds. Except Obama’s cabinet. Only 8% of his cabinet officials hail from the private sector. This does not mean they’re stupid, but it does reveal how incredibly naïve it is for Obama is to appoint so many people with NO private sector experience to oversee a collapsing economy.
He’s all fluff and no content.​

The Cult of Personality
They all apparently believed he was destined for power and would be the one who transforms America. Not because of his intelligence; but because of the fabricated image he projected.
http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/is-obama-stupid-and-lazy/​

 

I kind of doubt anyone is going to read the above propaganda or actually even can in the mess its in.

But I'll stick with my assessment that at least in my experience and observation President Obama is the most intelligent, effective, and hardest working president I've seen in my lifetime.

And only brainwashed parrots would try to claim President Obama has definitely proven himself far more capable and intelligent than any of his challengers.

 

LOL, even the left wingers are starting to wake up!!!

How Obama Has Failed Us


By Jeralyn, Section Other Politics
Posted on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 11:37:03 AM EST
Tags: (all tags) Share This: Digg!


Jeff Sachs at Huffpo:

[A]t every crucial opportunity, Obama has failed to stand up for the poor and middle class.
...Obama could have cut hundreds of billions of dollars in spending that has been wasted on America's disastrous wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Yemen, but here too it's been all bait and switch. Obama is either afraid to stand up to the Pentagon or is part of the same neoconservative outlook as his predecessor. The real cause hardly matters since the outcome is the same: America is more militarily engaged under Obama than even under Bush.
​

[More...]

Who runs America today? The rich and the multinational corporations. Who runs the White House? David Plouffe, whose job it is to make sure that ever word, every action of the president is calculated for electoral gain rather than the country's needs.
​

Sach's solution: A third party candidate:

America needs a third-party movement to break the hammerlock of the financial elites. Until that happens, the political class and the media conglomerates will continue to spew lies, American militarism will continue to destabilize a growing swath of the world, and the country will continue its economic decline.
​

It's probably too late for that, but if Obama loses in 2012, the reason will be clear. He threw his base (and seniors) under the bus to pacify the center and the right. Nobody likes a sellout

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2011/7/24/12373/9964

 

Getting pretty far behind aren't you Natural Boy.

By the way you bet lots of progressive/liberal/Democrats are upset with President Obama for not being liberal enough. That's why his approval rating is below 50% now. But its not like they are going to vote Republican a year from now.

And in the meantime who are you going to vote for boy?:excited:

 

What exactly is so extreme about the Tea Party's stance of smaller government and more personal liberty?

Legalized drugs are fine ...as long as it comes with the personal responsibility to deal with the effects of such personal decisions. It's the liberal stance that the individual can do whatever but the village is forced to pay for it that doesn't work out.

Public education, as setup in America, is an expensive failure. Throwing more money at it just makes it a more expensive failure. Why not offer vouchers to each student and let the family choose where the student goes to school? Why do liberals demand urban children be stuck in shitty urban schools? That seems nonsensical to me.

Selling off national parks? Who wants to do that?!? I suppose it's the same mythical demons who want dirty air and dirty water...

P.s. According to Gallop, obama's approval rating dipped below Carter's today and made him the lowest rated in history for this day of his presidency. (obama is more than 10pts below where Bush was at this point in his term lol)

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/wa...1/29/obamas-job-approval-drops-below-carters/

 

Isn't that what you do daily? :excited:

 

It's at 43% ...and falling.

Whoever ends up beside the 'R' will get a fat personal $ donation and my vote. Many millions of others feel the same way. Few of us are donating through the primaries because we really don't care who wins the nomination, we are focused on the general election and ridding ourselves of the obama administration.

 

Wanting to do away with Social Security. Wanting to do away with our progressive tax system. Denying global warming/climate Change. supporting killing people who might just be innocent. Booing gay soldiers in combat zones, and of course their overt racism and protection of the 1%.

If that was the case how come conservative/Republican/Tea Baggers not only write the drug laws, and advocate for drug testing of everyone except them, they also want to outlaw abortion and even pornography?

Its because conservatism is a lie as it is preached and practiced in this nation and all the conservatives really want to do is to tell everyone else how to live.

No you see that's just another one of those brainwashed parrot lies that are constantly told by the right wing false propaganda machine.

And I can prove that right here with one simple question. By what standard do you say our public education system has failed. Don't we have one of the highest literacy rates in the world? Don't graduate at least 75% of high school students?

See there you're just lying again aren't you?

Man you just showed how completely ignorant you are.

LIBERTARIAN PAPERS VOL. 3, ART. NO. 1 (2011)
1
OF PRIVATE, COMMON, AND PUBLIC PROPERTY AND
THE RATIONALE FOR TOTAL PRIVATIZATION
HANS-HERMANN HOPPE*
I

http://libertarianpapers.org/articles/2011/lp-3-1.pdf

Ron Paul Calls For Federal Public Lands To Be ‘Sold Off To Private Owners’

http://thinkprogress.org/green/2011/10/21/349536/ron-paul-public-lands/

Yeah but the same Gallup has gone on record saying its pretty amazing President Obama's Approval rating remains unexpectedly high for the unemployment rate and state of the economy.

But tell me what polls say any of the GOP Candidates can beat President Obama?

 

Yes as I have said because he is not liberal enough for some progressives and liberals. He also has lost favor with some minorities because they want him to do more for them.

But at the end of the say they won't be voting Republican.

Now who are you going to vote for there Texas Boy?

Rick Perry?:excited:

 

Hey stumbler, I can tell you who I'm not going to vote for

So it looks like my vote will cancel out your vote for Obama:excited:

 

But you can't tell me who you are going to vote for can you?

Because there is no viable Republican on the other side.

And in the meantime the democrats gain on the Republicans every week and look like they might even take back the house.

I credit President Obama on that by making the conservative/Republican/Tea Baggers in congress protect the richest 1% at the expense of the rest of the nation over and over again ever since he proposed his jobs bill.

 

Not that it was necessary to make them do what they do instinctively anyway...all that was necessary is for Obama to point out the obvious. And I hope he does it repeatedly in the next year. Because what Republicans are doing is political suicide. They're advocating raising taxes on poor people, and cutting their Social Security and Medicare benefits, all so they don't have to raise taxes on the top 1%. That's a pretty tough sell, no matter how much they babble about "job creators" and "shared sacrifice".

 

You talk about an ass kicking Kimi, President Obama is still pushing his jobs bill or the pieces of it while the White House maintains with a straight face President Obama is not on the Campaign trail through swing states.

And I believe them. Because I'm betting as far as the Barack Obama re-election campaign we ain't seen nothing yet.

 

It appears that only the hard core Kool-Aid drinkers will be voting for Obummer in 2012, you know the Kimikos, Stumblers,Dl's and the occupiers.

 

If that's true and you're not a fool you can tell me which GOP candidate currently wins in a poll against Obama.

And if you can't you're obviously what I said you are.

 

When the truth will not work...just overload the Bull Shit..

 

Damn you are still around...figured you would be sucking dicks this time of the evening.....

 

I just thought I'd point out that in the case of President Obama the claim his approval rating is lower than President Carter's is a fluke.

Bogus Stat Alert

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/11/bogus_stat_alert.php?ref=fpblg


So while President Obama is actually gaining in the polls its the Tea Party's approval rating that is falling even in the districts that elected Tea Party candidates in the last election.


More Now Disagree with Tea Party – Even in Tea Party Districts

http://www.people-press.org/2011/11...even-in-tea-party-districts/?src=prc-headline

 

September 13, 2011
Obama Is Lost, Incapable of Changing Course

By Cal Thomas

"If you live long enough, you'll make mistakes. But if you learn from them, you'll be a better person." -- Bill Clinton
Nearly every time President Obama delivers a speech about the economy or jobs, something bad happens. The day after his speech to Congress Thursday night, the Dow Jones industrial average plunged 303 points, a decline replicated in other indexes in the U.S. and overseas.



This president is such a prisoner of his leftist ideology he seems incapable of pulling a Clinton and triangulating to get something done that motivates the private sector to hire workers and spur economic growth.
How many more of these speeches must we endure before everyone realizes his ideas and proposals aren't working? In his Thursday speech, the president repeatedly appealed to Congress to "pass" his "jobs bill." From the White House Rose Garden Monday, he announced that the bill was on its way to Congress. Let the political posturing begin!
The president claimed to have signed within a month of taking office "the biggest middle-class tax cut in history." Washington Post Fact Checker columnist Glenn Kessler called his claim "ridiculous." Kessler gave him four Pinocchios, his highest award for dissembling.
The president's approval numbers continue to fall because the public is slowly getting it. In 2009, in another speech, the president promised his stimulus policies would create 3 million to 4 million new jobs by the end of 2010. They didn't come close, and they still haven't. In fact, jobs were lost, leaving a net deficit of 6.7 millions jobs since the recession began, according to Heritage Foundation calculations and Bureau of Labor Statistics figures.
Obama is like a lost man who refuses to ask for directions. That's because he has never worked in the real world with people who create real jobs. He operates on theories and an ideology that is incapable of achieving his goals.
For example, he speaks mostly of redistributing wealth, not creating wealth. He wants us to hate the wealth creators, rather than follow their example. The result has been a growing dependency on government, robbing too many of their liberty and opportunity.
Like the floodwaters that have devastated the Northeast, the federal government has overrun its constitutional limits. It should not be spending and borrowing more, but less.
The biggest contributor to economic uncertainty is Obamacare. Businesses don't know what their costs will be and so some are either getting waivers (if they are politically friendly to the administration) or ending private insurance for their employees.
Ask yourself: If the federal government has made such a mess of Medicare and Medicaid (not to mention stretching Social Security to the breaking point), what reasonable hope is there that it will do better with an even larger national health care monstrosity? One might just as well spring Bernie Madoff from prison and put him in charge of stock portfolios.
There was a time in America not too long ago when people mostly looked out for themselves and their relatives. Parents cared for their children when they were little and the children returned the favor when their parents got old. Now we dump the kids in day care and they return the favor by dumping their elderly parents in nursing homes. The biblical commandment about honoring your mother and father was once taken seriously. Now it's the government's responsibility because too many think we are constitutionally mandated to be free of "burdens."
If we want government to become smaller and perform within its constitutional boundaries, we are going to have to expect less from it and more from ourselves. President Obama understands none of this because others have largely aided him throughout his life and unremarkable pre-presidential career. He has great form, but little substance, except his failed ideology. The tragedy is he has learned nothing from failure.
If the wisdom of Bill Clinton isn't sufficient for him, there is also Sophocles, who wrote in "Antigone": "All men may err; but he that keepeth not his folly, but repenteth, doeth well; but stubbornness cometh to great trouble."

CalThomas@tribune.com

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/09/13/president_obamas_folly_111315.html