OT: Obama is Conservative

[gandalf]

OMFG! Great video jfiq. I understand this completely.

Question: Do you think it’s possible he’s reading a speech or talking points that were written by somebody else? A campaign aide, for example? That is how things work in the real world. Did you notice how he … paused … as he read the part about ‘the bomb’?

He knew damn well it wasn’t accurate. He’s also standing up there in front of a crowd of people and in front of television cameras trying to carry a speech. Which I’m sure you do ALL THE TIME, so you know how difficult it is, and how people never make mistakes.

The larger arc of his experience, his education, the time spent living in Hawaii, it suggests that your overall assertion: that he doesn’t know what happened at Pearl Harbor — you’re FULL OF SHIT. Partisan crap-mongers.

And I completely understand how fringe-lunatics seize on stuff like this as ‘evidence’ that Obama is somehow ignorant about American History because he was edumacated in a madrassa and is a secret muslim.

For the rest of us: ‘Zbig’ was a prof at Columbia when I was there. I had several friends who took his class and would come back to the dorm and talk politics for hours. ‘Z’ might have been there when Obama was getting his BA. Wonder if he took classes with Zbigniew…

[gandalf]

surveyor, quite right! Zarqawi is dead and gone.

I meant Zawahiri. The ‘Dick Cheney’ of Bin Laden’s world. He’s still at large.

[gandalf]

surveyor, quite right! Zarqawi is dead and gone.

I meant Zawahiri. The ‘Dick Cheney’ of Bin Laden’s world. He’s still at large.

[gandalf]

surveyor, quite right! Zarqawi is dead and gone.

I meant Zawahiri. The ‘Dick Cheney’ of Bin Laden’s world. He’s still at large.

[gandalf]

surveyor, quite right! Zarqawi is dead and gone.

I meant Zawahiri. The ‘Dick Cheney’ of Bin Laden’s world. He’s still at large.

[gandalf]

surveyor, quite right! Zarqawi is dead and gone.

I meant Zawahiri. The ‘Dick Cheney’ of Bin Laden’s world. He’s still at large.

[jficquette]

[quote=gandalf]Allan, I had trouble with Zakaria’s labels as well.

I think the larger point is correct though, Bush/McCain and the new Republican party is ideological and interventionist, while Obama’s positions are more in line with conservatism and even approach realpolitik at times. I think he’s closer to Bush 41 and Eisenhower.

And I agree, BTW, that the main driver with AQ is religious extremism.

My counter question would be, do you really truly honestly believe Obama is that ignorant?

Consider Obama’s background:

Columbia University, BA in Political Science, Thesis on Soviet Disarmament

Harvard Law, magna cum laude, President Law Review

Visiting Professor of Constitutional Law at University Chicago

Senator, elected by the majority of the state of Illinois (not House of Representative districts), sitting on the Foreign Relations Committee with access to intelligence

The whole notion that he’s dumb or ignorant or naive? I just don’t buy it. Who on this board has this kind of career or credentials? surveyor??

[/quote]

Gandalf, you are just an intellectual snob who doesn’t understand that character, judgement, integrity is not something you “learn” in today’s dumbed down educational system.

BTW, Obama refuses to release his thesis. I would guess that it would be just as unorganized, and inconsistent as Obama is as a person.

The Unibomber, Kaczynski, attended Harvard and University of Michgan and obtained a PHD in Math. He also taugh at Berkeley at the tender age of 25.

So much for credentials with Kaczynski.

My guess is Obama is more of an affirmation action case then anything. He certainly didn’t have enough sense to stop going to his racist church and he certainly isn’t bright enough to have consistent views or maybe he just isn’t bright enough to remember what he has said in the past.

As far as teaching constitutioanl law goes look how poorly he fields questions on the secound amendment. This is an area he should be an expert in but is inconsistent.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=gandalf]Allan, I had trouble with Zakaria’s labels as well.

I think the larger point is correct though, Bush/McCain and the new Republican party is ideological and interventionist, while Obama’s positions are more in line with conservatism and even approach realpolitik at times. I think he’s closer to Bush 41 and Eisenhower.

And I agree, BTW, that the main driver with AQ is religious extremism.

My counter question would be, do you really truly honestly believe Obama is that ignorant?

Consider Obama’s background:

Columbia University, BA in Political Science, Thesis on Soviet Disarmament

Harvard Law, magna cum laude, President Law Review

Visiting Professor of Constitutional Law at University Chicago

Senator, elected by the majority of the state of Illinois (not House of Representative districts), sitting on the Foreign Relations Committee with access to intelligence

The whole notion that he’s dumb or ignorant or naive? I just don’t buy it. Who on this board has this kind of career or credentials? surveyor??

[/quote]

Gandalf, you are just an intellectual snob who doesn’t understand that character, judgement, integrity is not something you “learn” in today’s dumbed down educational system.

BTW, Obama refuses to release his thesis. I would guess that it would be just as unorganized, and inconsistent as Obama is as a person.

The Unibomber, Kaczynski, attended Harvard and University of Michgan and obtained a PHD in Math. He also taugh at Berkeley at the tender age of 25.

So much for credentials with Kaczynski.

My guess is Obama is more of an affirmation action case then anything. He certainly didn’t have enough sense to stop going to his racist church and he certainly isn’t bright enough to have consistent views or maybe he just isn’t bright enough to remember what he has said in the past.

As far as teaching constitutioanl law goes look how poorly he fields questions on the secound amendment. This is an area he should be an expert in but is inconsistent.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=gandalf]Allan, I had trouble with Zakaria’s labels as well.

I think the larger point is correct though, Bush/McCain and the new Republican party is ideological and interventionist, while Obama’s positions are more in line with conservatism and even approach realpolitik at times. I think he’s closer to Bush 41 and Eisenhower.

And I agree, BTW, that the main driver with AQ is religious extremism.

My counter question would be, do you really truly honestly believe Obama is that ignorant?

Consider Obama’s background:

Columbia University, BA in Political Science, Thesis on Soviet Disarmament

Harvard Law, magna cum laude, President Law Review

Visiting Professor of Constitutional Law at University Chicago

Senator, elected by the majority of the state of Illinois (not House of Representative districts), sitting on the Foreign Relations Committee with access to intelligence

The whole notion that he’s dumb or ignorant or naive? I just don’t buy it. Who on this board has this kind of career or credentials? surveyor??

[/quote]

Gandalf, you are just an intellectual snob who doesn’t understand that character, judgement, integrity is not something you “learn” in today’s dumbed down educational system.

BTW, Obama refuses to release his thesis. I would guess that it would be just as unorganized, and inconsistent as Obama is as a person.

The Unibomber, Kaczynski, attended Harvard and University of Michgan and obtained a PHD in Math. He also taugh at Berkeley at the tender age of 25.

So much for credentials with Kaczynski.

My guess is Obama is more of an affirmation action case then anything. He certainly didn’t have enough sense to stop going to his racist church and he certainly isn’t bright enough to have consistent views or maybe he just isn’t bright enough to remember what he has said in the past.

As far as teaching constitutioanl law goes look how poorly he fields questions on the secound amendment. This is an area he should be an expert in but is inconsistent.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=gandalf]Allan, I had trouble with Zakaria’s labels as well.

I think the larger point is correct though, Bush/McCain and the new Republican party is ideological and interventionist, while Obama’s positions are more in line with conservatism and even approach realpolitik at times. I think he’s closer to Bush 41 and Eisenhower.

And I agree, BTW, that the main driver with AQ is religious extremism.

My counter question would be, do you really truly honestly believe Obama is that ignorant?

Consider Obama’s background:

Columbia University, BA in Political Science, Thesis on Soviet Disarmament

Harvard Law, magna cum laude, President Law Review

Visiting Professor of Constitutional Law at University Chicago

Senator, elected by the majority of the state of Illinois (not House of Representative districts), sitting on the Foreign Relations Committee with access to intelligence

The whole notion that he’s dumb or ignorant or naive? I just don’t buy it. Who on this board has this kind of career or credentials? surveyor??

[/quote]

Gandalf, you are just an intellectual snob who doesn’t understand that character, judgement, integrity is not something you “learn” in today’s dumbed down educational system.

BTW, Obama refuses to release his thesis. I would guess that it would be just as unorganized, and inconsistent as Obama is as a person.

The Unibomber, Kaczynski, attended Harvard and University of Michgan and obtained a PHD in Math. He also taugh at Berkeley at the tender age of 25.

So much for credentials with Kaczynski.

My guess is Obama is more of an affirmation action case then anything. He certainly didn’t have enough sense to stop going to his racist church and he certainly isn’t bright enough to have consistent views or maybe he just isn’t bright enough to remember what he has said in the past.

As far as teaching constitutioanl law goes look how poorly he fields questions on the secound amendment. This is an area he should be an expert in but is inconsistent.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=gandalf]Allan, I had trouble with Zakaria’s labels as well.

I think the larger point is correct though, Bush/McCain and the new Republican party is ideological and interventionist, while Obama’s positions are more in line with conservatism and even approach realpolitik at times. I think he’s closer to Bush 41 and Eisenhower.

And I agree, BTW, that the main driver with AQ is religious extremism.

My counter question would be, do you really truly honestly believe Obama is that ignorant?

Consider Obama’s background:

Columbia University, BA in Political Science, Thesis on Soviet Disarmament

Harvard Law, magna cum laude, President Law Review

Visiting Professor of Constitutional Law at University Chicago

Senator, elected by the majority of the state of Illinois (not House of Representative districts), sitting on the Foreign Relations Committee with access to intelligence

The whole notion that he’s dumb or ignorant or naive? I just don’t buy it. Who on this board has this kind of career or credentials? surveyor??

[/quote]

Gandalf, you are just an intellectual snob who doesn’t understand that character, judgement, integrity is not something you “learn” in today’s dumbed down educational system.

BTW, Obama refuses to release his thesis. I would guess that it would be just as unorganized, and inconsistent as Obama is as a person.

The Unibomber, Kaczynski, attended Harvard and University of Michgan and obtained a PHD in Math. He also taugh at Berkeley at the tender age of 25.

So much for credentials with Kaczynski.

My guess is Obama is more of an affirmation action case then anything. He certainly didn’t have enough sense to stop going to his racist church and he certainly isn’t bright enough to have consistent views or maybe he just isn’t bright enough to remember what he has said in the past.

As far as teaching constitutioanl law goes look how poorly he fields questions on the secound amendment. This is an area he should be an expert in but is inconsistent.

John

[gandalf]

surveyor, please check the YouTube link posted by jfiq…

It’s really remarkable how he stumbles over “the bomb that fell on Pearl Harbor” part. It could even have been something as small as a typo on the speech, leaving off the ‘s’ on bomb(s). He’s speaking in front of a large group of people and in front of cameras.

You agree?

Or do you think he’s dumb?

BTW, I don’t think Bush43 is dumb at all. He’s been incredibly shrewd and has won every ‘political’ battle he’s been in. I think his flaws are flaws of character and comprehension. And I also think he’s a chicken-shit and flinched after 9/11. Played right into AQ’s trap. Big-time.

[gandalf]

surveyor, please check the YouTube link posted by jfiq…

It’s really remarkable how he stumbles over “the bomb that fell on Pearl Harbor” part. It could even have been something as small as a typo on the speech, leaving off the ‘s’ on bomb(s). He’s speaking in front of a large group of people and in front of cameras.

You agree?

Or do you think he’s dumb?

BTW, I don’t think Bush43 is dumb at all. He’s been incredibly shrewd and has won every ‘political’ battle he’s been in. I think his flaws are flaws of character and comprehension. And I also think he’s a chicken-shit and flinched after 9/11. Played right into AQ’s trap. Big-time.

[gandalf]

surveyor, please check the YouTube link posted by jfiq…

It’s really remarkable how he stumbles over “the bomb that fell on Pearl Harbor” part. It could even have been something as small as a typo on the speech, leaving off the ‘s’ on bomb(s). He’s speaking in front of a large group of people and in front of cameras.

You agree?

Or do you think he’s dumb?

BTW, I don’t think Bush43 is dumb at all. He’s been incredibly shrewd and has won every ‘political’ battle he’s been in. I think his flaws are flaws of character and comprehension. And I also think he’s a chicken-shit and flinched after 9/11. Played right into AQ’s trap. Big-time.

[gandalf]

surveyor, please check the YouTube link posted by jfiq…

It’s really remarkable how he stumbles over “the bomb that fell on Pearl Harbor” part. It could even have been something as small as a typo on the speech, leaving off the ‘s’ on bomb(s). He’s speaking in front of a large group of people and in front of cameras.

You agree?

Or do you think he’s dumb?

BTW, I don’t think Bush43 is dumb at all. He’s been incredibly shrewd and has won every ‘political’ battle he’s been in. I think his flaws are flaws of character and comprehension. And I also think he’s a chicken-shit and flinched after 9/11. Played right into AQ’s trap. Big-time.

[Author]

Posts