Skip to main content

Passing over established journalist and interviewers who have relavent questions in order to provide an hour long interview with who?  A youtube user who sets in her bathtub full of cereal and then spends time eating that same cereal?  Certainly for our contemporary period Obama is certainly the most unpresidential president that this nation has ever seen.  

 

I think a better word for it would be an embarassment but then we got what the majority  of the American voters wanted.  Enjoy liberal Democrats you certainly got your showperson and your standard is on full display.  Just remember that the nuclear button is also in the hand of this person and his impact on the Nation will last long past his term in office.  We really shouldn't be surprised though because some could say this is what you get when you promote a community organizer into the position of the highest office in the land.  If this all wasn't real it might make a great sitcom or movie but this is the person representing our nation to the world??  

 

 

Be as the Bereans ( Acts 17:11 )

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

And YOU are the person misrepresenting him to this forum.

 

That old "community organizer" business is just plain silly.  The president also was a a researcher with Business International Group, a global business consulting firm; a U.S. Senator; a state senator; an attorney with the civil rights law firm of Miner, Barnhill and Galland; and a lecturer on constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School.  Yet you and other silly put-down artists seize solely on the community organizer work to allegedly characterize his pre-Presidential experience.

 

Such buffoonery shows just how egregiously biased you are and how irrational and unfair you are in your highly selective and grossly truncated representation of the work experience of Barack Obama.

 

Shameful!

Originally Posted by daddy joe:
Originally Posted by Contendah:

And YOU are the person misrepresenting him to this forum.

___________________________________

I see NOTHING in the post that misrepresents that embarrassing waste of space that currently occupies the office.  

 

 ____

That you see nothing does not mean nothing is there.  I showed gbrk that his/her/its representation of the work experience of the President was a gross MISREPRESENTATION. I showed that by citing work experience far beyond the limited scope that gbrk put forth. That gbrk grossly misrepresented Obama's pre-Presidential experience should be apparent to anyone who is not totally biased and clueless.  That apparently does not include you.

 

The danger is quite severe. The problem with what the president is doing is that he's not simply posing a danger to the constitutional system. He's becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid. That is the concentration of power in every single branch.------Jonathan Turley

 

If Obama is a constitutional scholar, he studied constitutions of marxist states and/or banana republics.

Originally Posted by Stanky:

The danger is quite severe. The problem with what the president is doing is that he's not simply posing a danger to the constitutional system. He's becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid. That is the concentration of power in every single branch.------Jonathan Turley

 

If Obama is a constitutional scholar, he studied constitutions of marxist states and/or banana republics.

___

You sure are rambling and drifting away from the obvious, namely your mis-characterization of the President's employment history.  Do you think that by throwing out a bunch of non-related stuff you can avoid acknowledging the shallowness  of your ASSertion?

The only ASS needing sertion is you. Obama was indeed a community organizer:

 

In 1985, Barack Obama traveled halfway across the country to take a job that he didn't fully understand. But, while he knew little about this new vocation--community organizer--it still had a romantic ring, at least to his 24- year-old ears. With his old classmates from Columbia, he had talked frequently about political change.Now, he was moving to Chicago to put that talk into action. His1995 memoir, Dreams from My Father, recounts his idealistic effusions: "Change won't come from the top, I would say. Change will come from a mobilized grass roots. That's what I'll do. I'll organize black folks. At the grass roots. For change."

http://www.newrepublic.com/art...-political-education

 

As a state Senator, if a vote would put between a "rock or a hard place" politically, he voted "present" rather than take a stand.

 

In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the Illinois legislature — to support a bill that would let some juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a tough-on-crime moderate.

 

In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for nor against the bill. He voted “present,” effectively sidestepping the issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12...agewanted=1&_r=0

 

When Obama ran for President, he was a newbie freshman senator with little experience.

 

As to his time with Business International Group:

 

He tells of underheated sublets, a night spent in an alley, a dead neighbor on the landing. From their fire escape, he and an unnamed roommate watch “white people from the better neighborhoods” bring their dogs to defecate on the block. He takes a job in an unidentified “consulting house to multinational corporations,” where he is “a spy behind enemy lines,” startled to find himself with a secretary, a suit and money in the bank.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10...litics/30obama.html?

 

"A spy behind enemy lines" does not say much about his views on business. He sounds like a Soviet spy.

 

Constitutional legal scholar? His actions mirror that of generalísimos of Central and South America! As to Jonathan Turley's assessment of Obama's Presidency, Turley might actually be the more scholarly of the two:

 

Professor Jonathan Turley is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has written extensively in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal theory to tort law. He has written over three dozen academic articles that have appeared in a variety of leading law journals at Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, Harvard, Northwestern, University of Chicago, and other schools.

 

After a stint at Tulane Law School, Professor Turley joined the George Washington faculty in 1990 and, in 1998, was given the prestigious Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law, the youngest chaired professor in the school’s history. In addition to his extensive publications, Professor Turley has served as counsel in some of the most notable cases in the last two decades including the representation of whistleblowers, military personnel, judges, members of Congress, and a wide range of other clients. He is also one of the few attorneys to successfully challenge both a federal and a state law — leading to courts striking down the federal Elizabeth Morgan law as well as the state criminalization of cohabitation.

http://jonathanturley.org/about/

I think the actions of this President and his performance has well demonstrated that he is the most unqualified and unpresidential person to ever hold the office, an utter embarassment.  

 

The only sad thing is how little the national media cared to investigate and vent this candidate.  Why do you think his school records were sealed and kept from the public?  I doubt he's actually earned or worked for anything he's ever got including the office he holds now.  He refuses to even recognize the terrorism that has already found it's way to our nation.  The fact that so many still support him and defend him can only mean you are so gullable that you will beleive anything as long as a Democrat or Liberal says it or you are so biased against Conservative or Republicans that you don't even care to allow the Consitution itself to be trodded under.  

 

This man is such an utter failure and incompetent that he has to provide interviews to someone like this woman who eats the cereal that she bathes in and who has absolutely no knowledge about what's going on in the world today.  He's never put himself in a position where someone that's fully educated and critical will make inquiries and have a serious interview with him.  

How can any person be taken seriously, about terrorism, when they refuse to acknowledge RADICAL Islamic sponsored terrorism?  This administration has consistantly gone out of it's way to disassociate Muslims from Terror acts when they have been responsible for 99% of them?  Examples such as calling the attack on that military base work related violence when it was totally evident it was Islamic terror related which also meant that some benefits they should have received had it been catagorized terrorism rather than work place violence.  

 

How about Bengazi where they went over and above doubling down that it was a video that caused it through spreading protest, calling off any possible response teams telling them to stand down and to this day the useless media fails to really investigate this bungle.  This alone should disqualify Hillary from any higher office and should result in some going to jail even.  And to date yet no real indication about where Obama was, who was givnig the orders and no media accountability of an event greatly worse than Watergate.  Bengazi was surely justification for a vote to impeach (any other President) had everyone not been worried about being called racist.  

 

This same man who traded known, demonstrated, confined, terrorist for a traider yet now to avoid embarassment at their incompetetiance there is  pressure not to hold this traider accountable and the media goes silent and ceases to investigate or report yet again?

 

This President, and administration, will come closer to associating conservative Christians or Conservative enemies (Tea Party, whom they even launched an breach of power attack against through the IRS) than associate Muslims with terror activities.  Yet we are to take any speech about Terror from Obama seriously???  We are to take Obama seriously about ANYTHING???   The only real demonstratable accomplshment the man is really responsible for is the ability to deliver a speech and from that speech at the long ago DNC in 2004 started his quest toward higher office.  A person who has been given everything, never investigated or vetted, media protected and even his school records sealed and unavailable yet we are to swoon over yet another speech he most likely didn't write?  

 

Sorry but I'll base my opinion about him upon his actions rather than what he says.  On what he does rather than what he says.  His actions say far more about who and what he is than anything else yet the media still remains silent and dumb and yet there are so many that still defend him.  Amazing!

 

Does political party affilation really make people that blind?   Does protecting liberalism really come at a cost of willful looking over violations to our Constitution, the only thing that protects us from Dictatorship?   Just how much abuse is going to be tollerated to avoid being called racist?  ANY other President who performed such would have surly faced impeachment under any other time and under identical circumstances yet this one skates free?  and worse, is defended yet still?

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×