How Obama Got Elected

She's certainly entitled to her opinion. The problem is, she'd have cast a ballot for Sarah Palin.... which pretty much puts any notion of discernment or high standards to rest.

Say what you will, walking the walk goes a long way. Sarah Palin had a record as a reformer and that's what appeals to me.

Unlike the Dems who speak out of both sides of their mouths. Tell me how can you be both against evil corporations and at the same time be in favor the largest corporate welfare bailout in the history of the world? While you are rationalizing that, I am going to go to work. :tongue:
 
Unfortunately.. none of which you post as evidence truly is evidence of intelligence... do not confuse popularity with intelligence

As stated before.. there is no reason to think he is a stupid man... just no real evidence of anything to quantify people calling him "brilliant"




I wouldn't call him stupid but I wouldn't call him brilliant by any stretch,, why? because of the nefarious people he chooses to associate himself with..
 
Unfortunately.. none of which you post as evidence truly is evidence of intelligence... do not confuse popularity with intelligence

You are so clueless.

Do you really think that the people who voted him editor of the Harvard review elected him because he was popular?


As stated before.. there is no reason to think he is a stupid man... just no real evidence of anything to quantify people calling him "brilliant"

There are none so blind as those too stupid to see.

Jesus said that, I think
 
You are so clueless.

Do you really think that the people who voted him editor of the Harvard review elected him because he was popular?

And from what I have heard, not a single published work authored by him during his tenure as editor. Isn't that... well... incredulous? :tongue:

I know you must have some rationale for how that happens in the real world. I shall abide patiently while you formulate your response.
 
In a recent news article from The Telegraph it's been reported that in Russia the propaganda is still so thick that average Russians have no idea that their economy has tanked.


Russia's crumbling economy provides stiffest test yet for autocratic leader

Subjected to more than a century of propaganda masquerading as news, Russians often seem to live in a different reality from the rest of us
By Adrian Blomfield in Moscow

And sure enough, at a time when their country is locked in its worst financial crisis in a decade, they are more optimistic about the economy than they have ever been. According to opinion polls, 57 per cent reckon it is flourishing, up from 53 per cent in July.

The survey's findings are a triumph for the state, proving that the Kremlin has not lost its touch when it comes to manipulating fact. Obeying orders from the top, Russian television has banned the use of words such as "crisis", "decline" and "devaluation". Coverage of the mayhem in the country's stock market, where shares have fallen by 75 per cent since August, is scant.

Instead, just as in Soviet times, Russians are told how bad everything is in the West. The US, Russians are told, is in irreversible decline, while desperate Britons are throwing themselves into the Thames. The Queen, facing imminent penury, has been forced to pawn her diamonds and, according to one tabloid front page, we can no longer afford to bury our dead.

It has fallen to Russia, one television commentator gravely intoned, to come to the rescue of Europe. Russia, another newspaper declared, was set to become the continent's lender of last resort.

(more...)
Russia's crumbling economy provides stiffest test yet for autocratic leader - Telegraph

But here in America... we have a free and neutral press, as witnessed by how knowledgeable our citizens are.

Oh wait... :eek:

See... that's the problem with the majority of libs. They treat politics as if it were some sort of "team sport", where the MOST IMPORTANT thing is making sure that their jersey beats the other guy's jersey. And they get so busy doing that, they don't see THE JOB that's been done on them.

Libs constantly complain about "corporatism". It's one of their favorite themes. But as long as the media is spitting out the propaganda they like best... they don't bother to look at the fact that there's just a handful of CORPORATIONS deciding what we'll hear in the mainstream.
Digital TV Project: Who Controls the Media


Frankly, it shouldn't matter if you're liberal or conservative... EVERYBODY ought to be pissed that they have to go to the internet and wrangle up the news for themselves. EVERYBODY ought to be pissed that it's nearly impossible to get "just the facts, ma'am" from our newspapers. Everybody ought to be pissed that what we once referred to as "yellow journalism" is today's modern standard. And for you 'non-corporatist' Obama supporters, maybe you ought to be wondering right about now... WHY a handful of corporations decided your guy was THEIR guy. :disbelief:
 
Last edited:
You are so clueless.

Do you really think that the people who voted him editor of the Harvard review elected him because he was popular?




There are none so blind as those too stupid to see.

Jesus said that, I think

Vote... AKA winning a contest via popular selection... does not mean he was the most brilliant student, lawyer, or anything else

Again... nothing he has shown, proves any brilliance... Stephen Fucking Hawking, this man is not
 
Nah, he won't be carter two. Carter was too wimpy militarily and that's what sunk him, Obama is going to be sure to not make that mistake. .....

:lol: Sure, that's why he campaigned on declaring defeat in Iraq, and meeting with rouge natioNs without preconditions, because he's A TOUGH GUY. :lol:

What's he going to do, pull a Chicago gangster routine on these guys?
 
:lol: Sure, that's why he campaigned on declaring defeat in Iraq, and meeting with rouge natioNs without preconditions, because he's A TOUGH GUY. :lol:

What's he going to do, pull a Chicago gangster routine on these guys?




lol,, AlQada gave him the finger today! we will see what happens next!:lol:
 
I wouldn't call him stupid but I wouldn't call him brilliant by any stretch,, why? because of the nefarious people he chooses to associate himself with..

I agree!

Obama%20Family%20and%20Cheney.jpg
 
:lol: Sure, that's why he campaigned on declaring defeat in Iraq, and meeting with rouge natioNs without preconditions, because he's A TOUGH GUY. :lol:

What's he going to do, pull a Chicago gangster routine on these guys?

I saw a terroist expert today saying that the election of Obama was "Al Qeada's worst nightmare." Bush was AQ's greatest recruiter.

Likewise the Iranians have suddenly had to backpeddle from their pledge to negotiate with the U.S. because Obama called their bluff. You rightees don't understand how to win the "war on terror" at all. Bin Laden said his goal was to "bankrupt America." The only way that can happen is if we get involved in a protracted land war in Asia. AQ has no army, no navy, and no air force. They can't do any real damage to a country of 300 million people unless we let fear control us, and Bush-Cheney was all about fear.
 
Say what you will, walking the walk goes a long way. Sarah Palin had a record as a reformer and that's what appeals to me.

Unlike the Dems who speak out of both sides of their mouths. Tell me how can you be both against evil corporations and at the same time be in favor the largest corporate welfare bailout in the history of the world? While you are rationalizing that, I am going to go to work. :tongue:

You mean like the same way you can be for the bridge to nowhere while

simoutaneously being against it?
 
I saw a terroist expert today saying that the election of Obama was "Al Qeada's worst nightmare." Bush was AQ's greatest recruiter.

Likewise the Iranians have suddenly had to backpeddle from their pledge to negotiate with the U.S. because Obama called their bluff. You rightees don't understand how to win the "war on terror" at all. Bin Laden said his goal was to "bankrupt America." The only way that can happen is if we get involved in a protracted land war in Asia. AQ has no army, no navy, and no air force. They can't do any real damage to a country of 300 million people unless we let fear control us, and Bush-Cheney was all about fear.


Gee.. Why don't you tell that to the families of the three thousand people that died on 9/11.
 
Gee.. Why don't you tell that to the families of the three thousand people that died on 9/11.

Why don't you tell me why Bush stated that "Clinton seems to have a fixation concerning Bin Laden" prior to 9-11? Why don't you tell me why Bush stated six months after the attack, "Bin Laden is not a concern of mine". And why don't you tell me why it is now over seven years since 9-11, and Bin Laden is still alive and free. Perhaps had we regarded this as a police case from the start and sent some special people out to bring Bin Laden in, we would have saved over 4000 American lives, and over half a million Iraqi lives. Perhaps we would not be experiancing the economic debacle that is upon us, either.

Actions have consequences, and the actions of the Bush administrations have severly damaged this nation and, indeed, the whole world.
 
Somebody needs to.

Terrorism is a minor threat.

China and Russia are much bigger threats.
really?
how many Russians have killed American civilians?
how many Chinese have killed American civilians?


more proof that you are a MORON
 

Forum List

Back
Top