Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
sums it up nicely.....Obama's as phony as a three dollar bill...thankfully the people are realizing it...too late for some of them who voted for him...but they will get to pay for it and it's going to be painful... do they deserve it, maybe..
SNIP:
By Thomas Sowell
The president is more concerned about the effect of his words than their relation to fact.
Many years ago, I was a member of a committee that was recommending to whom grant money should be awarded. Since I knew one of the applicants, I asked if this meant that I should recuse myself from voting on his application.
“No,” the chairman said. “I know him too — and he is one of the truly great phonies of our time.
The man was indeed a very talented phony. He could convince almost anybody of almost anything — provided that they were not already knowledgeable about the subject. He had once spoken to me very authoritatively about Marxian economics, apparently unaware that I was one of the few people who had read all three volumes of Marx’s Capital and had published articles on Marxian economics in scholarly journals. What our glib talker was saying might have seemed impressive to someone who had never read Capital, as most people have not. But it was complete nonsense to me.
Incidentally, he did not get the grant he applied for.
This episode came back to me recently, as I read an incisive column by Charles Krauthammer, citing some of the many gaffes in public statements by the president of the United States. One presidential gaffe in particular gives the flavor and suggests the reason for many others. It involved the Falkland Islands.
Argentina has recently been demanding that Britain return the Falkland Islands, which have been occupied by Britons for nearly two centuries. In 1982, Argentina seized these islands by force, only to have British prime minister Margaret Thatcher take the islands back by force.
With Argentina today beset by domestic problems, demanding the return of the Falklands is once again a way for Argentina’s government to distract the Argentine public’s attention from the country’s economic and other woes.
Because the Argentines call these islands “the Malvinas,” rather than “the Falklands,” Barack Obama decided to use the Argentine term. But he referred to them as “the Maldives.” It so happens that the Maldives are thousands of miles away from the Malvinas. The former are in the Indian Ocean, while the latter are in the South Atlantic.
Nor is this the only gross misstatement that President Obama has gotten away with, thanks to the mainstream media, which sees no evil, hears no evil, and speaks no evil when it comes to Obama.
Like other truly talented phonies, Barack Obama concentrates his skills on the effect of his words on other people — most of whom do not have the time to become knowledgeable about the things he is talking about. Whether what he says bears any relationship to the facts is politically irrelevant. A talented con man or a slick politician does not waste his time trying to convince knowledgeable skeptics. His job is to keep the true believers believing. He is not going to convince the others anyway.The presidential gaffe that struck me when I heard it was Barack Obama’s reference to a military corps as a military “corpse.” He is obviously a man who is used to sounding off about things he has paid little or no attention to in the past. His mispronunciation of a common military term was especially revealing to someone who was once in the Marine Corps, not Marine “corpse.”
all of it here with comments
Obama and the Art of Phoniness | National Review Online
NoTeaPartyPleez NoTeaPartyPleez
Oh, please.....You really want to go there? Did you have a problem with the previous president's inarticulation? Can I say, "phuck no" for you?
To see the bullshit from 2000-2005 go to
The Complete Bushisms
Well that was a massive waste of board space attempting (I guess?) to prove that Barack Obama isn't prone to mistruths and waxing eloquent about things he knows little about by providing a rather petty list of misstatements by W. ......
No, it was an example of how idiots like you turned a blind eye to sheer fucking stupidity at its highest level for 8 years.
And I'm sure your beloved professor is a purveyor of facts over opinion. Your post oozes it.
I'd be more than happy to discuss facts about Barack Obama, NoTea...your problem is that you want us to accept the "myth" of Obama rather than look at who he truly is.
I did love Sowell. The thing that I found most intriguing about Thomas Sowell is that he was an avowed Marxist as a young man. He believed in many of the same things that progressives now believe in. His conversion came about when he started studying the economies of communist countries and found that what he had believed to be true simply didn't work in the real world. At that point he became what now passes for a libertarian. He's not a stick in the mud ideologue...he's a rather pragmatic ex-Marine academic...which is in and of itself rather amazing.
NoTeaPartyPleez NoTeaPartyPleez
Oh, please.....You really want to go there? Did you have a problem with the previous president's inarticulation? Can I say, "phuck no" for you?
To see the bullshit from 2000-2005 go to
The Complete Bushisms
it was talking about Obama's phoniness...but nice try trying to derail the thread..If it were up to me I'd ban your childish ass for pulling that crap
and NONE of those compare to not knowing how to pronounce a branch of the military he is CIC of..
now go bow to your Obama shrine and take this with you
Those are the Cliff Notes.[/B]
During the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama mispronounced the word "corpsman" twice, and he got the name of the corpsman wrong.
President gets 'corpsman' wrong - YouTube
No, it was an example of how idiots like you turned a blind eye to sheer fucking stupidity at its highest level for 8 years.
And I'm sure your beloved professor is a purveyor of facts over opinion. Your post oozes it.
I'd be more than happy to discuss facts about Barack Obama, NoTea...your problem is that you want us to accept the "myth" of Obama rather than look at who he truly is.
I did love Sowell. The thing that I found most intriguing about Thomas Sowell is that he was an avowed Marxist as a young man. He believed in many of the same things that progressives now believe in. His conversion came about when he started studying the economies of communist countries and found that what he had believed to be true simply didn't work in the real world. At that point he became what now passes for a libertarian. He's not a stick in the mud ideologue...he's a rather pragmatic ex-Marine academic...which is in and of itself rather amazing.
Tea Party is just another lefty here who will not question the President.....no matter what.....we saw the same thing with many righties with Bush.....just defend him no matter what.....never question,just go along with rest of the herd....
I'd be more than happy to discuss facts about Barack Obama, NoTea...your problem is that you want us to accept the "myth" of Obama rather than look at who he truly is.
I did love Sowell. The thing that I found most intriguing about Thomas Sowell is that he was an avowed Marxist as a young man. He believed in many of the same things that progressives now believe in. His conversion came about when he started studying the economies of communist countries and found that what he had believed to be true simply didn't work in the real world. At that point he became what now passes for a libertarian. He's not a stick in the mud ideologue...he's a rather pragmatic ex-Marine academic...which is in and of itself rather amazing.
Tea Party is just another lefty here who will not question the President.....no matter what.....we saw the same thing with many righties with Bush.....just defend him no matter what.....never question,just go along with rest of the herd....
Yup, that's right. You near-sighted wingnuts think American history didn't happen before January 2009. Somebody needs to remind you so you can put some things into perspective.
Obama was elected because Bush had an approval rating of 22% in 2008 and people were sick of a war that was built on lies. That's fucking perspective.
Well that was a massive waste of board space attempting (I guess?) to prove that Barack Obama isn't prone to mistruths and waxing eloquent about things he knows little about by providing a rather petty list of misstatements by W. ......
No, it was an example of how idiots like you turned a blind eye to sheer fucking stupidity at its highest level for 8 years.
And I'm sure your beloved professor is a purveyor of facts over opinion. Your post oozes it.
Those are the Cliff Notes.[/B]
if you say so......you could have gotten your point across with just 10 of those....yea i know....hard to believe....
During the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama mispronounced the word "corpsman" twice, and he got the name of the corpsman wrong.
President gets 'corpsman' wrong - YouTube
What a complete failing MORON
History is not going to treat the brother well at all.
Maybe he and smiling Jimmy Carter can have a run off for the EPIC FAIL POTUS award.
This is getting hard to watch
-Geaux
Those are the Cliff Notes.[/B]
if you say so......you could have gotten your point across with just 10 of those....yea i know....hard to believe....
not only is he an sniveling pooping in his diaper Democrat sheep but a liar too
nothing new for him
During the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama mispronounced the word "corpsman" twice, and he got the name of the corpsman wrong.
President gets 'corpsman' wrong - YouTube
What a complete failing MORON
History is not going to treat the brother well at all.
Maybe he and smiling Jimmy Carter can have a run off for the EPIC FAIL POTUS award.
This is getting hard to watch
-Geaux
Uh-huh. Then go stick your head back in the sand where it's been for the last 40 years or so.
WHAT THEY SAID: In honor of president Reagan's funeral, here's a useful corrective to the notion that his legacy was always celebrated. Today, almost everyone concedes his historical significance. But that wasn't what was said at the time. Here's a smattering of commentary from the 1980s.
"A few years from now, I believe, Reaganism will seem a weird and improbable memory, a strange interlude of national hallucination, rather as the McCarthyism of the early 1950s and the youth rebellion of the late 1960s appear to us today." - Arthur Schlesinger, Washington Post, May 1, 1988.
"I wonder how many people, reading about the [Evil Empire'] speech or seeing bits on television, really noticed its outrageous character Primitive: that is the only word for it. What is the world to think when the greatest of powers is led by a man who applies to the most difficult human problem a simplistic theology one in fact rejected by most theologians?... What must the leaders of Western Europe think of such a speech? They look to the head of the alliance for rhetoric that can persuade them and their constituents. What they get from Ronald Reagan is a mirror image of crude Soviet rhetoric. And it is more than rhetoric: everyone must sense that. The real Ronald Reagan was speaking in Orlando. The exaggeration and the simplicities are there not only in the rhetoric but in the process by which he makes decisions." - Anthony Lewis, New York Times, March 10, 1983
"Something like the speech to the evangelicals is not presidential, it's not something a president should say. If the Russians are infinitely evil and we are infinitely good, then the logical first step is a nuclear first strike. Words like that frighten the American public and antagonize the Soviets. What good is that?" - Rick Hertzberg, New Yorker macher, quoted in the Washington Post, March 29, 1983.
"President Reagan has substituted a mindless militarism for a foreign policy, rattling arms from El Salvador to Saudi Arabia, frightening our friends from Japan to West Germany. He proposes a 50 percent increase in defense expenditures. Much of it will be dissipated in the self-defeating spiral of an open-ended nuclear-arms race that poses a greater threat to our own internal and external security than all the Communist propaganda that ever emanated from Moscow. Already, the cost of Reagan policies is devastating to our country in economic strength, in diplomatic influence, in national security, in moral stature." -- John B. Oakes, former senior editor, New York Times, November 1, 1981.
"All evidence indicates that the Reagan administration has abandoned both containment and détente for a very different objective: destroying the Soviet Union as a world power and possibly even its Communist system. [This is a] potentially fatal form of Sovietphobia a pathological rather than a healthy response to the Soviet Union." Princeton Professor Stephen Cohen, 1983.
"'We've really got to start talking,' says George Ball, undersecretary of state in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations. 'The fact is we've let these fellows get away with murder, and the situation now is much too serious for that.' To ideological men like Ronald Reagan, new information is only useful if it confirms old prejudices. Though he is shrewd enough to bend and budge under pressure (hence, for example, his abandonment of old positions on Taiwan), in his heart Reagan knows he has always been right about the nature of the world, of communism, of America's proper role." - Robert Kaiser, Washington Post, October 30, 1983.
"Are we rushing headlong into the next step of those 40 years of progressions by which we do something then they do something, by which we pretend that we're going to build this and it will somehow strengthen our deterrent then they do it, and low and behold, the next thing we know is, the President of the United States is addressing the nation saying, My fellow Americans, I hate to tell you this, but the Soviet Union is deploying more of these, and we have to respond, and I'm asking the Congress for more money in order to respond. Star Wars is guaranteed to do that, and it's guaranteed to threaten the heavens -- the one line we haven't yet crossed with weaponry: the heavens." Senator John Kerry, on SDI, the program that brought the evil empire to its knees, August 5, 1986.
"In his distaste for bilateral efforts to manage the superpower rivalry and his instinctive predilection for unilateral ones, Reagan is counting on American technological and economic predominance to prevail in the end. The most striking, and questionable, theme in his star wars speech was his apparent belief that the U.S. could mobilize its scientific community and its economic resources in quest of an impenetrable antiballistic-missile shield over the entire nation without triggering perilously destabilizing countermeasures, both offensive and defensive, on the part of the U.S.S.R. Reagan's views notwithstanding, there is little reason to hope that the many handicaps of the Soviet economy will be decisively advantageous to the U.S. in the long run, allowing the U.S. to beat the U.S.S.R. in an arms race." -- Strobe Talbott, Time, April 18, 1983.
"Ronald Reagan came to Europe to persuade people that he is not the shallow, nuclear cowboy of certain unkind assessments. Said White House spokesman David Gergen, on the eve of departure, Some in Europe do not know or understand him. But now that the president has been among them for over a week, Europeans may think they got him right the first time. In Rome, he made a stab at identifying himself as a pilgrim for peace. But by the time he got to London he had reverted to type as a cold warrior. And yesterday in Bonn, he reiterated his commitment to peace through strength which is fancy talk for continuing the nuclear arms race." - Mary McGrory, Washington Post, June 10, 1982.
Now shall I go retrieve a few reminiscent bits about G H W Bush? Or can you handle it?
So what exactly is your point? All of this justifies just what? That Obama failed to raise the bar?
-Geaux
So what exactly is your point? All of this justifies just what? That Obama failed to raise the bar?
-Geaux
That Bush was our dumbest president. And Obama is just like him.
I'd be more than happy to discuss facts about Barack Obama, NoTea...your problem is that you want us to accept the "myth" of Obama rather than look at who he truly is.
I did love Sowell. The thing that I found most intriguing about Thomas Sowell is that he was an avowed Marxist as a young man. He believed in many of the same things that progressives now believe in. His conversion came about when he started studying the economies of communist countries and found that what he had believed to be true simply didn't work in the real world. At that point he became what now passes for a libertarian. He's not a stick in the mud ideologue...he's a rather pragmatic ex-Marine academic...which is in and of itself rather amazing.
Tea Party is just another lefty here who will not question the President.....no matter what.....we saw the same thing with many righties with Bush.....just defend him no matter what.....never question,just go along with rest of the herd....
Yup, that's right. You near-sighted wingnuts think American history didn't happen before January 2009. Somebody needs to remind you so you can put some things into perspective.
Obama was elected because Bush had an approval rating of 22% in 2008 and people were sick of a war that was built on lies. That's fucking perspective.
Well that was a massive waste of board space attempting (I guess?) to prove that Barack Obama isn't prone to mistruths and waxing eloquent about things he knows little about by providing a rather petty list of misstatements by W. ......
No, it was an example of how idiots like you turned a blind eye to sheer fucking stupidity at its highest level for 8 years.
And I'm sure your beloved professor is a purveyor of facts over opinion. Your post oozes it.
But wait. We were told Bush was an idiot. Obama was the smartest president we've ever had. Bush got in to Yale because his dad had been there. Obama got into Harvard on his own.
Surely you can't be excusing the rampant fuck ups Obama has produced by saying Bush did them too? Could you? That would mean Obama is NOT smarter than Bush.
Are you saying that Obama is not smarter than Bush?
NoTeaPartyPleez NoTeaPartyPleez
Oh, please.....You really want to go there? Did you have a problem with the previous president's inarticulation? Can I say, "phuck no" for you?
To see the bullshit from 2000-2005 go to
The Complete Bushisms
it was talking about Obama's phoniness...but nice try trying to derail the thread..If it were up to me I'd ban your childish ass for pulling that crap
and NONE of those compare to not knowing how to pronounce a branch of the military he is CIC of..
now go bow to your Obama shrine and take this with you
I'd ban your ass for frivolous bullshit.
None compare to "Mission accomplished..." in MAY 2003
Now go ask forgiveness from the 50,000 without legs and arms......And get a little perspective.
if you say so......you could have gotten your point across with just 10 of those....yea i know....hard to believe....
not only is he an sniveling pooping in his diaper Democrat sheep but a liar too
nothing new for him
Oh, no I believe in full disclosure. What I posted was only 5 of 10 pages of the incredibly stupid stuff Bush said. All documented.
Stephie, tsk tsk....when you resort to calling someone a liar it's because YOU have pooped your diapers, not me.
