OT: Obama is dumber than a box of rocks

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Casca]Let’s review the bidding:

Bobama went off to Occidental, a hotbed of liberal shitheadery, in 1981. Seven years later, he shows up at Harvard to go to law school. In the interim, he claimed to be the Director of the Developing Communities Project (DCP), a church-based community organization originally comprising eight Catholic parishes in Greater Roseland on Chicago’s South Side. Anyone who knows Chicago, knows that Roseland is a sham community with no residents. It is the piece of dirt that surrounds the airport, and is completely owned and run by the mob. This was when he went to work for Tony Rezko.

At Harvard, he becomes the President of the Law Review without ever writing a single article. One suspects the soft racism of low expectations. It’s just as racist to choose someone for a job by the color of their skin as to deny one. Bobama stays off the record, collects his Magnum cum Loaded, and heads back to Chitown.

Two years later he parks his shingle at a law firm where he had no clients, and did no work. He also becomes a “Visiting Professor” of ConnLaw at UofC. One might wonder, would this not require advanced study of some sort, or at least publishing a book? Not if you’re a democrat. Is this a great country or what?

In 1996 he inherited his state senate seat, and became Rezko’s stooge in the statehouse. From then on, he’s been living off the fat of the electorate.

QED, he’s never had a job.[/quote]

Ok, rebutting nearly every point above is going to take toO long, but it’s got to be done:

Occidental: no idea what the political leanings of an entire college/university are, but I certainly know staunch republicans who attended “liberal” liberal arts colleges and still came out dyed-in-the-wool republicans. That statement is completely illogical.

President of Harvard Law Review: Being the president of any school’s “Law Review” is not a writing job. You participate, with faculty who oversee the publication and provide continuity, in choosing scholarly articles generally written by legal scholars, judges and sometimes students. Most likely he paid his dues prior to becoming President as a lesser editor in a prior year–and may have written a case comment or note that simply wasn’t published–not all of them are. You, in particular, would have no way of knowing whether he wrote anything or not unless he or someone who knows his work well, disclosed it. He probably spent his time as president editing, cite checking, fact checking and generally performing tasks of an editor of a publication.

(From the Harvard LR website: Second year editors generally wrote Recent Cases, and occasionally a few wrote Notes. Most Notes, however, were written by third-year members of the Board. The President took primary responsibility for the selection and editing of articles, but he often called on third-year members of the Board for assistance in this task.)

Some schools put out 1 or 2 publications a year under 1 editor, Harvard publishes every month because they are the gold standard. Law review members are selected thus: Using a competitive process that takes into account first-year grades, an editing exercise, and a written commentary on a court decision, The Harvard Law Review selects between 41 and 43 editors annually from the second-year Law School class, which numbers 560.

Two editors from each of first-year class’s seven sections (fourteen in all) are selected half by their first year grades and half by their scores on the writing competition. Another twenty are selected solely on their scores on the writing competition. The other seven to nine are selected by a discretionary committee, either to fulfill the review’s race-based affirmative action program, to select students who just missed the cut by either of the other two processes, or by some other criteria as the committee sees fit. (Wikipedia).

So, Casca, your view of his Harvard experience is nothing short of ignorant.

Private practice: most junior practicing lawyers do a LOT of work but the work is for someone else’s clients (partners). I am not sure how you could obtain hard data that he “did no work.” If he got a paycheck, he was working… And two years is about average for most beginning lawyers to put in at a firm before moving on to the next step in the career path, unless they are seeking partnership.

UofC professorship: There is a great article in the NY Times (you probably don’t read that much, the reading level might be a bit above your ability) on his years as a ConLaw professor. No, you don’t have to have any special study to be a law professor other than to have obtained stellar grades in the subject you wish to teach (as well as in most other classes in law school). UofC is a fairly conservative law school, so his being offered (but declining) tenure there says something about his ability. And, to date, he has written two books–both autobiographical in nature.

Senate seat: can’t really speak to this as there is not much factual basis in these claims.

US Senate: I remember reading that he ran a great campaign that involved a lot of grass roots work. I don’t see anything wrong with reaching out to people who feel disenfranchised and offering them a voice.

So your post is just another not-so-subtle racist comment: just another jobless black man, eh? You are sickening.

[Casca]

If that’s your idea of a rebuttal, I hope you’re not a lawyer. Allow me to tighten up your drivel:

Since one may find a republican on campus, then a university is not a steaming pile of liberalism.

You conveniently skip the Roseland/Rezko connection.

Being President of Harvard Law Review imputes something, I’m not sure what. It’s hardly a job. My view of HLS is nothing short of unimpressed.

He didn’t have any clients at the practice or try any cases because he was a stooge for more senior lawyers.

He went from visiting lecturer/fellow to being offered tenure at UofC all without publishing so much as an oped. I guess that whole publish or perish thing is history. He was by then of course a state senator. I’m shocked to see a Chicago politician offered a sinecure.

Now the State Senate years are a mystery, since there are no records, none, nada. All we really know is that he carried water for Rezko, and was present on a number of occasions.

He’s led the life of a privileged parasite. From prep school through two private universities, to the toniest law school in the land, he never flipped a burger. Since then, he’s never had to be accountable for a bottom line. That would make him unqualified for MOST grown up work.

[Casca]

If that’s your idea of a rebuttal, I hope you’re not a lawyer. Allow me to tighten up your drivel:

Since one may find a republican on campus, then a university is not a steaming pile of liberalism.

You conveniently skip the Roseland/Rezko connection.

Being President of Harvard Law Review imputes something, I’m not sure what. It’s hardly a job. My view of HLS is nothing short of unimpressed.

He didn’t have any clients at the practice or try any cases because he was a stooge for more senior lawyers.

He went from visiting lecturer/fellow to being offered tenure at UofC all without publishing so much as an oped. I guess that whole publish or perish thing is history. He was by then of course a state senator. I’m shocked to see a Chicago politician offered a sinecure.

Now the State Senate years are a mystery, since there are no records, none, nada. All we really know is that he carried water for Rezko, and was present on a number of occasions.

He’s led the life of a privileged parasite. From prep school through two private universities, to the toniest law school in the land, he never flipped a burger. Since then, he’s never had to be accountable for a bottom line. That would make him unqualified for MOST grown up work.

[Casca]

If that’s your idea of a rebuttal, I hope you’re not a lawyer. Allow me to tighten up your drivel:

Since one may find a republican on campus, then a university is not a steaming pile of liberalism.

You conveniently skip the Roseland/Rezko connection.

Being President of Harvard Law Review imputes something, I’m not sure what. It’s hardly a job. My view of HLS is nothing short of unimpressed.

He didn’t have any clients at the practice or try any cases because he was a stooge for more senior lawyers.

He went from visiting lecturer/fellow to being offered tenure at UofC all without publishing so much as an oped. I guess that whole publish or perish thing is history. He was by then of course a state senator. I’m shocked to see a Chicago politician offered a sinecure.

Now the State Senate years are a mystery, since there are no records, none, nada. All we really know is that he carried water for Rezko, and was present on a number of occasions.

He’s led the life of a privileged parasite. From prep school through two private universities, to the toniest law school in the land, he never flipped a burger. Since then, he’s never had to be accountable for a bottom line. That would make him unqualified for MOST grown up work.

[Casca]

If that’s your idea of a rebuttal, I hope you’re not a lawyer. Allow me to tighten up your drivel:

Since one may find a republican on campus, then a university is not a steaming pile of liberalism.

You conveniently skip the Roseland/Rezko connection.

Being President of Harvard Law Review imputes something, I’m not sure what. It’s hardly a job. My view of HLS is nothing short of unimpressed.

He didn’t have any clients at the practice or try any cases because he was a stooge for more senior lawyers.

He went from visiting lecturer/fellow to being offered tenure at UofC all without publishing so much as an oped. I guess that whole publish or perish thing is history. He was by then of course a state senator. I’m shocked to see a Chicago politician offered a sinecure.

Now the State Senate years are a mystery, since there are no records, none, nada. All we really know is that he carried water for Rezko, and was present on a number of occasions.

He’s led the life of a privileged parasite. From prep school through two private universities, to the toniest law school in the land, he never flipped a burger. Since then, he’s never had to be accountable for a bottom line. That would make him unqualified for MOST grown up work.

[Casca]

If that’s your idea of a rebuttal, I hope you’re not a lawyer. Allow me to tighten up your drivel:

Since one may find a republican on campus, then a university is not a steaming pile of liberalism.

You conveniently skip the Roseland/Rezko connection.

Being President of Harvard Law Review imputes something, I’m not sure what. It’s hardly a job. My view of HLS is nothing short of unimpressed.

He didn’t have any clients at the practice or try any cases because he was a stooge for more senior lawyers.

He went from visiting lecturer/fellow to being offered tenure at UofC all without publishing so much as an oped. I guess that whole publish or perish thing is history. He was by then of course a state senator. I’m shocked to see a Chicago politician offered a sinecure.

Now the State Senate years are a mystery, since there are no records, none, nada. All we really know is that he carried water for Rezko, and was present on a number of occasions.

He’s led the life of a privileged parasite. From prep school through two private universities, to the toniest law school in the land, he never flipped a burger. Since then, he’s never had to be accountable for a bottom line. That would make him unqualified for MOST grown up work.

[urbanrealtor]

Hey Casca,
You have made some pretty harsh allegations.
Here are some links regarding Obama’s early legislation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml

http://video.chicagotribune.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?clipid1=1226539

Also, it is pretty common to have new lawyers to a firm (especially ones without a real resume) to start basically as assistants. If you have seen how the firms push these guys I don’t think you would criticize that he is lazy.

Do you really consider the work as a legislator in the last 11 years to be totally irrelevant?

[urbanrealtor]

Hey Casca,
You have made some pretty harsh allegations.
Here are some links regarding Obama’s early legislation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml

http://video.chicagotribune.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?clipid1=1226539

Also, it is pretty common to have new lawyers to a firm (especially ones without a real resume) to start basically as assistants. If you have seen how the firms push these guys I don’t think you would criticize that he is lazy.

Do you really consider the work as a legislator in the last 11 years to be totally irrelevant?

[urbanrealtor]

Hey Casca,
You have made some pretty harsh allegations.
Here are some links regarding Obama’s early legislation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml

http://video.chicagotribune.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?clipid1=1226539

Also, it is pretty common to have new lawyers to a firm (especially ones without a real resume) to start basically as assistants. If you have seen how the firms push these guys I don’t think you would criticize that he is lazy.

Do you really consider the work as a legislator in the last 11 years to be totally irrelevant?

[urbanrealtor]

Hey Casca,
You have made some pretty harsh allegations.
Here are some links regarding Obama’s early legislation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml

http://video.chicagotribune.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?clipid1=1226539

Also, it is pretty common to have new lawyers to a firm (especially ones without a real resume) to start basically as assistants. If you have seen how the firms push these guys I don’t think you would criticize that he is lazy.

Do you really consider the work as a legislator in the last 11 years to be totally irrelevant?

[urbanrealtor]

Hey Casca,
You have made some pretty harsh allegations.
Here are some links regarding Obama’s early legislation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml

http://video.chicagotribune.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?clipid1=1226539

Also, it is pretty common to have new lawyers to a firm (especially ones without a real resume) to start basically as assistants. If you have seen how the firms push these guys I don’t think you would criticize that he is lazy.

Do you really consider the work as a legislator in the last 11 years to be totally irrelevant?

[gandalf]

Wow, casca. That’s racist.

What you’ve basically implied is Obama is just another black man who doesn’t work, doesn’t have an education, only got ahead because of affirmative action, etc. That’s RACISM in a nutshell.

What stands out the most is the statements you’ve made have almost no basis in reality. The man excelled in a number of extremely competitive environments which require WORK and COMPETITION. The previous poster pointed this out, as well as some other mistruths, with incisive clarity. So basically, you’re not just a lying, dishonest partisan, you’re also a racist. You’re more like marion than you realize.

The only thing you’ve mentioned that seems to have any factual basis is the Rezko connection, which I will confess troubles me as well. Then again, I wonder if there are any politicians out there that can’t be ‘associated’ with a criminal. Seems like most politicians ARE criminals these days, another senator indicted just the other day. The corruption is systemic and it crosses party lines.

All in all, I find the dishonest, lying partisan crap that gets posted here to be OFFENSIVE, particularly when it employs racial stereotypes. It’s depressing to watch a ‘class’ site like Piggs get taken down with all of this noise. We pride ourselves in bringing data and substance. Both McCain and Obama are exceptional individuals, both qualified to be president. I would prefer to see a more respectful and reality-based discussion. And definitely NO RACISM.

[gandalf]

Wow, casca. That’s racist.

What you’ve basically implied is Obama is just another black man who doesn’t work, doesn’t have an education, only got ahead because of affirmative action, etc. That’s RACISM in a nutshell.

What stands out the most is the statements you’ve made have almost no basis in reality. The man excelled in a number of extremely competitive environments which require WORK and COMPETITION. The previous poster pointed this out, as well as some other mistruths, with incisive clarity. So basically, you’re not just a lying, dishonest partisan, you’re also a racist. You’re more like marion than you realize.

The only thing you’ve mentioned that seems to have any factual basis is the Rezko connection, which I will confess troubles me as well. Then again, I wonder if there are any politicians out there that can’t be ‘associated’ with a criminal. Seems like most politicians ARE criminals these days, another senator indicted just the other day. The corruption is systemic and it crosses party lines.

All in all, I find the dishonest, lying partisan crap that gets posted here to be OFFENSIVE, particularly when it employs racial stereotypes. It’s depressing to watch a ‘class’ site like Piggs get taken down with all of this noise. We pride ourselves in bringing data and substance. Both McCain and Obama are exceptional individuals, both qualified to be president. I would prefer to see a more respectful and reality-based discussion. And definitely NO RACISM.

[gandalf]

Wow, casca. That’s racist.

What you’ve basically implied is Obama is just another black man who doesn’t work, doesn’t have an education, only got ahead because of affirmative action, etc. That’s RACISM in a nutshell.

What stands out the most is the statements you’ve made have almost no basis in reality. The man excelled in a number of extremely competitive environments which require WORK and COMPETITION. The previous poster pointed this out, as well as some other mistruths, with incisive clarity. So basically, you’re not just a lying, dishonest partisan, you’re also a racist. You’re more like marion than you realize.

The only thing you’ve mentioned that seems to have any factual basis is the Rezko connection, which I will confess troubles me as well. Then again, I wonder if there are any politicians out there that can’t be ‘associated’ with a criminal. Seems like most politicians ARE criminals these days, another senator indicted just the other day. The corruption is systemic and it crosses party lines.

All in all, I find the dishonest, lying partisan crap that gets posted here to be OFFENSIVE, particularly when it employs racial stereotypes. It’s depressing to watch a ‘class’ site like Piggs get taken down with all of this noise. We pride ourselves in bringing data and substance. Both McCain and Obama are exceptional individuals, both qualified to be president. I would prefer to see a more respectful and reality-based discussion. And definitely NO RACISM.

[gandalf]

Wow, casca. That’s racist.

What you’ve basically implied is Obama is just another black man who doesn’t work, doesn’t have an education, only got ahead because of affirmative action, etc. That’s RACISM in a nutshell.

What stands out the most is the statements you’ve made have almost no basis in reality. The man excelled in a number of extremely competitive environments which require WORK and COMPETITION. The previous poster pointed this out, as well as some other mistruths, with incisive clarity. So basically, you’re not just a lying, dishonest partisan, you’re also a racist. You’re more like marion than you realize.

The only thing you’ve mentioned that seems to have any factual basis is the Rezko connection, which I will confess troubles me as well. Then again, I wonder if there are any politicians out there that can’t be ‘associated’ with a criminal. Seems like most politicians ARE criminals these days, another senator indicted just the other day. The corruption is systemic and it crosses party lines.

All in all, I find the dishonest, lying partisan crap that gets posted here to be OFFENSIVE, particularly when it employs racial stereotypes. It’s depressing to watch a ‘class’ site like Piggs get taken down with all of this noise. We pride ourselves in bringing data and substance. Both McCain and Obama are exceptional individuals, both qualified to be president. I would prefer to see a more respectful and reality-based discussion. And definitely NO RACISM.

[Author]

Posts