Comments

I guess I can’t call President Obama a liar on this, because it would be racist of me… — 55 Comments

1. The less they cover their soft underbelly, the harder the new media will stab it.

   Go Breitbart, Giles, O’Keefe, and Beck!

2. What nonsense. ACORN and the countless czars are seeing to it that this is one of the biggest issues facing our country, and as you suggest, the President knows it. Can you imagine what the census data would reflect if ACORN had something to do with it–that was their plan, and may well still be their plan. It’s sad that prevarication comes so easily to our President.

3. Ah. Inside a seedy Green Room somewhere on the fringe of the universe called Legacy Media…a chance encounter:

   “You there – what do you have to say about the appearance of widespread corruption and illegal practices in ACORN, an organization you were intimately involved with?”

   “George, Acorn is NOT the story you were looking for.”

   “Yes, sir. ACORN is not the story I was looking for.”

   “You want to talk about the mess left by Booosh, and why racists are obstructing health care reform.”

   “Yes sir. Everybody is talking about how racism is obstructing progress on health care reform… and why such attitudes are a legacy of the Booooosh years…
   “

4. ^ Too close to reality to be funny.

   Anyway, I’ve been saying this for a long time:

   “Who would have thought that even the Democrats could come up so soon with another politician on the national stage who is a liar as smooth, easy, and natural as Bill Clinton? They not only did it within a decade, they actually came up with somebody who, by comparison, makes Bill Clinton look like an honest man.”

   http://weblog.theviewfromthecore.com/2009_06/ind_005746.html

5. You’ve got that right, ELC. With Clinton, you occasionally got the sense that something was off, that perhaps he felt the slightest bit of shame about lying. Obama is so shameless it is appalling.

6. Question: Did you know Bill Ayers?
   Obama: No, should I have.

   Question: What about your pastor’s racialist views?
   Obama: Never! Uhh-uhh, no, never heard any such thing.

   Question: Did you get a loan for your home from a guy named Rezko back in Chicago?
   Obama: Rezko, Rezko who?

   Question: How about the funding for ACORN?
   Obama: ACORN gets Government funding? I wouldn’t know about that, you’d have to ask Van Jones.

   Question: You knew Van Jones?
   Obama: Van Jones? — never heard of him!

7. really, this issue is not that important that the president needs to monitor it so closely. I’m more concerned about the financial crisis, iran, pakistan and our borders, health care, and the debt. Sure, what they did was wrong and they need to be punished for it. But continually attacking obama for someone elses mistakes is just stupid. And your remarks about being called a racist, I’d call that flipping the race card, it’s something the republicans do best, for example, limbaugh stated he wanted blacks and whites to be segregated. And you support what he says, so don’t be so surprised when people call you one, it’s the company you keep.

8. Dear Mr. President,

   Pay attention to this…

   You are negligent.

   You fail to recognize there are alternative viewpoints for health care. You only refer to having to do something, that the status quo isn’t an option.

   You fail to recognize there are alternative points of view on TV and ther radio.

   Your negligence will only hurt the country. The side you are aligned with has FAILED and you will FAIL with them.

   However, this country will succeed. No matter what the left and you throw at us – we will succeed.

   We have to. We will not be negligent.

   We will succeed.

   Sincerely,

   Somebody who pays attention – unlike you.

9. This goes to the heart of whats wrong. Obama is daily proving he lacks the moral understanding or makeup to adequately address the financial mess, Iran, Pakistan, or any other problem for that matter.

   I suspect we haven’t seen the worst of what destructiveness the Obama coddled Acorn really has at its core.

10. Swizzle wrote:

    “…your remarks about being called a racist, I’d call that flipping the race card, it’s something the republicans do best, for example, limbaugh stated he wanted blacks and whites to be segregated. And you support what he says, so don’t be so surprised when people call you one, it’s the company you keep.”

    Swizzle needs to keep his or her schtick for stirring his or her Kool Aid.

    When has neo ever said she supports or listens to Limbaugh? She’s not responsible for what Limbaugh says or thinks. I’m sick of liberals throwing up Limbaugh as a justification for shutting down discussions of important issues. It’s so tired and bankrupt.

11. swizzle,

    So Republicans are responsible for the company they keep but Obama is not? You do know that his campaign gave $800,000 to ACORN? You do also realize that they are being investigated in 17 states for voter fraud, aside from the newest allegations? So, don’t blame me if the president looks bad because ACORN comes up, or Rezko, or Ayers. It’s the company he keeps.

12. swizzle, this calling our attention to other issues where Obama is screwing up is bad business. Iran? The Taliban? Debt? You must be kidding.

    The only place on your list where he’s not screwing up is “the financial crisis,” and that’s because a) it’s over, and b) he didn’t do anything about it. swizzle, you should read the papers more.

13. Obama has a longstanding and intimate relationship with ACORN. To pretend otherwise is to insult our intelligence.

    For what it’s worth, I would not accept swizzle’s characterization of what Limbaugh said at face value. The discussion I have seen and the transcript looks like his comments were quoted out of the context and manner in which they were said, which was sarcastically. Links, please, swizzle, or we should assume that you are making it up.

14. swizzle,

    LOL. That was hilarious. This is a HUGE issue. And as much as you and other liberals would like it to, it isn’t going to go away. Obama is ACORN, ACORN is Obama, and ACORN is corrupt and filthy from top to bottom.

    And I have no idea what you are talking about with that race remark. So bizarre I don’t even understand what your point is. Are you saying that if someone calls a Republican a racist for pointing out Obama’s lies and the Republican objects, that makes the Republican racist for objecting?

    By the way, when did Limbaugh say he is in favor of segregation? Can you link, please? The only people I am aware of that are in favor of segregation are black liberationists like Rev. Wright, who happens to be one of Obama’s best friends.

15. swizzle,

    You lie !

    to steal Joe Wilson’s words….

    And… you are lazy. If you honestly believe Rush said what you think he said with sincerity and the right wouldn’t just turn him off or drum him for it…

    you are lazy and ignorant.

    You do not represent due diligence for sure…. Do some research before you type.

16. 🙂 And I’m so glad the senate and house are voting to defund acorn. 🙂

    🙂 They were going to do the census. 🙂

    Now the american public can see their operation for what it is…

    So it isn’t something that Obama is doing as you said. But they won’t be doing a Census for the left/∅bama anymore 🙂 🙂 😉 🙂

17. swizzle
    1. Maybe not monitor it closely, but at least be truthful. I suspect he is made aware of Senate and House votes, right?

    2. We are also concerned about the items on your list, and talk about them often. Define “continually.”

    3. Someone else’s fault? Obama was an annual leadership trainer for ACORN. They sought him specifically to represent them in their motor-voter legislation. He is on foundation boards that have sent hundreds of thousands of dollars to ACORN. He tabbed them for “non-partisan” assistance in GOTV campaigns and to eventually be paid over a billion for census help in 2010. Obama was the “Senator From ACORN.”

    4. Limbaugh did not say he wanted to segregate the races. That was a reductio ad absurdum after a bus assault. It’s clear you didn’t hear or read his comments, just repeated something you fell into on the internet.

    0-4 today, swizzle. The game’s not as easy as it looked when you’re playing in your head.

18. Andrew Breitbart is a national treasure. It has been fascinating to watch this whole thing unfold.

    I was wondering how Obama and Pelosi would handle this. Funny thing is, they both publicly did the same thing: “ACORN who?” LOL. They can’t face it head on. It is toxic.

19. ELC asks “…Who would have thought…?” Easy. Just keep nominating and electing narcissistic sociopaths with the personal instincts of Stalin and belief in regulatory corporate control that would do any Fascist proud.

20. Oh, and Neo, “raaaaacist” has five a’s. You need a spell checker.

21. really, this issue is not that important that the president needs to monitor it so closely.

    So when a special prosecutor is appointed, and Obama faces potential impeachment, do you think he might start monitoring then? Or would he wait for the impeachment vote to do that? Would a trivial detail like that intrude upon the Messiah’s consciousness?

    Seriously, though, are you seriously suggesting that the Obama White House isn’t having meetings daily about the ACORN scandal? Recall that Obama has publicly expressed his views on local police matters, and on Kanye West’s behavior in the VMA awards. But a key Democrat pressure group he used to work for blows up on the launch pad, and that slipped below his radar?

    Even liberals aren’t that stupid. (Are they?)

22. Yes, just so everyone is aware, Swizzle doesn’t know what he’s talking about in regards to what Rush said. I’m sure he thinks he does, because he read it somewhere, but as is frequently the case with liberal Rush observers that put this stuff out, they’re either not really paying attention, they are being willfully stupid, or they have a complete and utter lack of recognition of satire and parody.

    Rush was commenting on a taped altercation on a school bus that has been making the rounds of the internet lately. On the tape you see a busload of mostly black kids and one white kid sitting among them. Somthing happens and a fight breaks out and one (or more?) of the black kids starts whaling on the white kid. Since there’s no sound you can’t really tell exactly what’s going and who said what to start the whole thing. It was pretty vicious for a few moments there but eventualy some of the other kids sort of pulled the most aggressive guy away.

    Rush was riffing on the fact that Newsweek had just come out with a story saying babies judge people by skin color even as young as six months. Basically, we’re all born racists. So he was saying (even though it was impossible to tell what really happened) with tongue firmly in cheek that it was obvious that the white kid was being racist and that we should have separate buses for racist white kids to keep them apart from everyone else. He even went as far as, I think, to say there should be bars on the windows of the buses that carried the white kids so the rest of society would be safe, seeing as how Newsweek was claiming (in a sense) that all white people were born racists. That was the occasion that he “advocated” segregated buses. It was complete and total satire. For anyone who listened to it to even pretend he was making a sober proposal to have segregated buses would be beyond stupid. What happens, though, is someone like Media Matters comes along, prints a transcript of the parts they want to highlight, leaving out any indication of the verbal clues that tell you he’s being satirical, and print it and promote as straight commentary. Then people like Swizzle come along, read that, and think they know what’s going on, little realizing they are being played like a $2 fiddle. So instead of Rush looking stupid, it’s the people who don’t know what they’re talking about and believe everything they read that wind up looking stupid because they’ve bought someone else’s spin. Then the wonder why we don’t take them particularly seriously. Basically, because they don’t give us much reason to.

    Whether you like Rush or not, or appreciate his humor or not, the point I’m making is, Swizzle, what you think is true is completely false. You’ve been duped and you ought to be more careful with your sources. Don’t be so credulous next time. Listen for yourself and draw your own conclusion or at the very least avoid taking as gospel the words of someone whose interest lies in being inaccurate.

    To summarize: Rush did not advocate segregated buses. He was being satirical in a verbal sketch, which is basically what he does. To base any opinion of him on that “fact” means you don’t know what’s going on and you should try harder or get better sources.

    Sorry for the long comment about something not directly related to Neo-Neocon but this sort of willful stupidity really grates on me. Rush isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, even on the right, but if you’re going to criticize him at least don’t be mind-boggling stupid and uninformed about it.

23. It has reached the point where we ought to _hope_ that President Obama is a lying weasel. The alternative is that he is delusional, living with “the fierce urgency of now” in the multiple realities he creates, uncreates, and re-creates for himself, moment by moment.

24. Honestly … what can the man say?

    Yea I’m in bed with ACORN. Have been since my politcal career began. Really I made my bones on this corrupt ACORN community organization. These are my homies!

    So his answer is no surprise. His future answers will be interesting … IF and only IF they will continue be asked!

25. Lie? Moi?

26. Give the guy a break. He has other important things on his plate, like monitoring David Paterson’s poll standings to see whether he might be hurt by Paterson’s candidacy.

27. So here is the latest defense of ACORN from the UK Guardian:

    Communism is dead. Al-Qaida isn’t as scary as it used to be. But an American rightwing without a bogeyman to fear can’t long survive. Enter Acorn — the Association of Community Organisations for Reform Now.

    Finally, something for the Republican party to use to stoke fear among its constituency. Acorn is perfect. The nationwide community group is full of scary black and poor people — who tend to support the Democrats. And, most convenient of all, it registers millions of them, legally, to vote in US elections. Spooky.

    This article is linked at the top of the page of BigGovernment right now. It is classic. In fact, it is so classic I am in awe of the author:

    1. There are no real threats, Republicans just make them up.
    2. Republicans hate poor and black people.
    3. This is all just an attempt to suppress the votes of poor and minority populations.

    These people are masterful in their propaganda. And all of that is woven into only the first two paragraphs.

28. Also, now that I think about it, that sentence that says ACORN is made up of “scary” black people is full of accusations of racism.

    Huh. Who would have thought. From a liberal? Naaaah!

29. A great point by Mark Stein, which either neo or one of the posters brought up last week. Still, it’s worth repeating. From Steyn’s National Review column from Sept. 12:

    My National Review colleague Jay Nordlinger was reminded of an old observation by the great Theodore Dalrymple. During his time as an English prison doctor, Dalrymple frequently met ne’er-do-wells who said they’d “fallen in with the wrong crowd,” but, oddly enough, in all those years, he never met the wrong crowd.

    Likewise, Obama didn’t “join” himself to the liberal leadership; he is the liberal leadership. The administration didn’t fall in with the wrong crowd; they are the wrong crowd. Van Jones, Yosi Sergant, and ACORN are where Barack Obama has chosen to live all his adult life. Even if he wanted to be the bipartisan centrist of David Brooks’s fantasies, look at his Rolodex and then figure out just where such a man would estimate the “center” to be.

30. I didn’t bother to watch any of the interviews.

    Did even one of these hacks tell Obama the CBO has already demonstrated that he is a habitual liar – specifically on his charge that health car reform will not either raise taxes or increase the deficit?

    Or did they call him out on it when he’s repeatedly stated that the House and Senate plans can rob 10% of Medicare and still provide the same level of service to our senior citizens – simply by reigning in fraud, waste and abuse?

    Sadly Stephanopoulos’s deeply penetrating [satire] ACORN query was a probing as it got.

    Our press sucks.

31. Good catch, Neo.

    Wretchard the Cat incoporates this into a “Unified Field Theory”:

    http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/09/20/5994/#more-5994

32. “I’m more concerned about the financial crisis, iran, pakistan and our borders, health care, and the debt…it’s the company you keep.”

    Definitely all of the above; and when is a lie tantamount to perjury; and a series of lies which taint, rationalize and inspire partisan political decision making and government policy which sabotages, weakens and jeapordizes the republic and it’s authentic allies, tantamount to collusion with the enemy and treason? The Democrats and Obungler crossed that line a long time ago…

33. Regarding his claims of ignorance on ACORN, consider this possibility.

    IF Obama is basically just a front man, a face for the crowd, someone to give speeches on behalf of the powers at work behind the scenes, then – as much as it pains me to admit this possibility – he may NOT have had a clue as to what was/is going on in the country.

    Compare President Bush the Younger and his typical work day to President Obama.

    You will easily find references to Bush’s busy work schedule and how full his plate was on any given day. Heck, if he took a vacation you had the media screaming bloody murder cause there was a war on!

    Now, consider just the past 8 months of President Obama.

    Exactly how many vacations has he taken so far?

    If he is constantly giving speeches, when is he actually directing his administration?

    Doesn’t really sound like he’s taking the job too seriously.

    If he isn’t directing his administration, who is???? Don’t even consider Rahm Emmanual – this would have to go way deeper.

    Who exactly is running the office while Obama is off playing celebrity?

    Then again, there remains the possibility that even if Obama IS simply a front man, that he still knows about things like ACORN and is simply professing ignorance.

    That’s not good either.

    Or should we take his word at face value, and believe that the President who once worked cheek and jowl with ACORN, even including a remark in one of his speeches about an “acorn not falling far from the tree”, and had massive support from ACORN during the last election for at least a year, didn’t realize just how heavily funded the organization was by the federal government – much less how corrupt it was?

    None of these options is very palatable.

34. Look at how the MSM attempted to use the Abu Gharib incidents of a handful of soldiers abusing prisoners (soldiers who are HOW many levels of command removed from the CIC?) to discredit and case negative aspersions on Bush.

    And now look at this in comparison….With all the direct and indirect links from this CRIMINAL organization to politicians (some politician in PA is a MEMBER of Acord) and to Obama himself…….if this was a conservative community organization, engaged in voter fraud and now also these child prostitution/tax avoidance issue, and was even remotely connected to a GOP president……

    This would be trumpeted as a national scandal of WATERGATE proportions. “Who among the president’s men knew about their activities, and when did they know it; and it is critical that we connect all the dots from bottom to top.” You think this would make it to 60 Minutes? Ya think? You think the DC press corps would be screaming non-stop demands at the WH press secretary? Do you think there would be full scale hearings already underway on the Hill. Do you think there would already be a special prosecuter appointed? Ya THINK?

    But no…….it’s all just “let’s focus on the business of the nation”……”Glen Beck is just a crazy loon”……oh, and if we’re going to be investigative journalists, let’s dig up dirt on the two undercover kids and expose THEM (hmmm, reminiscent of the investigation done resulting from the swiftboaters allegations – the allegations are not investigated, the SWIFTBOATERS are)…….”this is all a right wing racist plot to deny black people the vote.”

    To me, the major issue is (and has been for the past decade or so) is the abdication of ANY sense of responsibilty for fairness and objectivity on the part of the vast majority of the Media in this country. Aside from the (slimed, scorned and discredited) Fox News, and the (slimed, scorned and discredited) A.M. Talk radio programs, and internet bloggers — the print and electronic media in this nation may as well just be called Pravda.

    Why not just follow Obama’s suggestion – “bail out” the (selected and chosen) media companies that are broke – make them subsidized like NPR and PBS, and bring them all under one utopian umbrella and call it “The Ministry of Truth.” May as well.

35. kcom. Using logic to prove a point with a liberal is a waste of time and effort. Liberals are good, conservatives evil; what more is there to say. In fact, the liberals who initially posted the message that Rush was pushing for segregation knew they were wrong and that what they were saying was racist. But the goodness of the message outweighed their deliberate lie. Thus, on balance, the message had to go out even if not supported by the facts. When did a liberal ever look back at the devastation s/he caused. Liberals don’t have a past, only a present and future. And, they intend to change whatever it is that is their present, regardless.

    On a different note, I believe that the reason Obama did not go on Fox on Sunday was the fear that he would not be able to control the interview. Suppose Chris Wallace had actually asked for a copy of Obama’s health plan so that we could all benefit from a discussion of its plusses and minuses. That his plan “has no clothes” seems to have gotten by the msm and the majority in Congress. In fact, when he stated to the Congress that his plan would have this or that feature, he was outright lying because he doesn’t have a plan. Does nobody want to deal this grand deception? Are we all fools to debate the content of a shadow?

36. I think Scottie has the right of it. When in the last 8-9 months has BHO ever been not seen on TV? When in that same time period has it appeared that he has actually spent time in the Oval Office behind the desk actually doing the work of a president??

37. I believe we are now watching the slow-motion of train wreck of Obama’s presidency.

    The main risk is the jeopardy our nation faces with a leader as damaged as Obama is becoming at the helm.

    Forty months to go.

38. Unfortunately we are in the train huxley…

39. I think that even quite a few of the mesmerized, utopian, dreamers, white guilt sufferers, Kambaya singers and gullible dummies who voted Obama in are starting to wise up, and are smart enough to figure out that if the IRS is gonna collect a $3,800 annual penalty from you if your family doesn’t do as the government says and buy health insurance, that this is just a “tax,” the sort of “tax” that Obama said he would never impose.

    It is but one step from this realization to the realization that the new, higher federal excise taxes on cigarettes were a “tax,” as will be the estimated $1,700-$3,000 increases in annual household energy bills that will inevitably come from “cap and trade,” as are the higher health care costs, or cuts in benefits, denials of service, longer wait times, and doctor, nurse, specialist and hospital shortages that will result from “health care reform” a “tax,” and, as a matter of fact, so are all of the extra interest payments citizens will have to pay–via increased taxes or reduced services–on Obama’s gigantic debt, deficits and $10+ trillion dollar spending spree a “tax,” and this one a multi-generational one, too.

40. Unfortunately we are in the train huxley…

    Baklava: Yes. You’ll notice that I addressed that concern in my second paragraph.

41. “OBAMA: You know, what I know is, is that what I saw on that video was certainly inappropriate and deserves to be investigated.”

    Note that Obama did not specify ACORN in this statement.

42. On top of Obama’s Sunday run now he wants to bailout the newspapers?

    Just add TARP and you have instant Pravda. Sweet.

43. Good catch David

44. Kurt,

    I never got the sense that Clinton was at all ashamed about lying. I got, instead, the sense that he thought he WASN’T lying. Clinton thought what he said was true–when he said it. He could say something totally different later and still think he was being honest. Obama, on the other hand, knows he’s lying every time. Funny how people can see these things differently, isn’t it?

    Steve G.,

    I think the reason Obama didn’t go on Fox for an interview yesterday was not that he feared being unable to control the interveiw, but rather because he intended an object lesson to the other outlets: Toe the line or you will lose your access to the Big O.

    Huxley,

    I hope you are right about the slow-motion train wreck. The thing that bothers me is that, even if you are right, if these guys manage to change the legal structures (health care, energy, financial structures, and all the rest) in the ways they’re trying to, and if they can slip them in under the train-wreck wire, we will be left with horribly complex and destructive legislation in place that will have the full enforcement power of the federal bureaucracy, and attendant sense of mission, behind it–whether we like it or not. These guys still control the 2 elective branches of the federal government–and I still am not so sanguine as I think you are that the Constitution and the electorate will save us.

    I’d sure rather be wrong about that, though.

45. And we should never forget that, along with controlling the eletive branches of the federal government, they control the enforcement apparatus, as part of the executive.

46. It’s a fast motion train wreck that only seems slow motion as we are so super aware….

    the voters with their head in the sand are like the infant in the car seat – they have no idea…. they aren’t paying attention.

    Can we save the next generation?

47. if these guys manage to change the legal structures (health care, energy, financial structures, and all the rest) in the ways they’re trying to, and if they can slip them in under the train-wreck wire, we will be left with horribly complex and destructive legislation in place that will have the full enforcement power of the federal bureaucracy, and attendant sense of mission,

    betsybounds: No bout adoubt it! There is going to be damage and some of it will be long-lasting.

    However, I think the worst of it, such as the public option and most, if not all, of cap-and-trade, will not make it through Congress.

    Obama’s polls continue to sink and all his personal appearances can’t put him together again.

    My main worry, though, is foreign policy. Obama doesn’t need congressional approval to do all sorts of mischief and let even worse mischief fester.

    Plus if Obama manages to discredit himself entirely as a leader, we are sitting ducks for something nasty.

    I still suspect that Hillary Clinton is waiting in the wings for Obama to implode so she can swoop in and put things together. Hillary has plenty of problems too, but she is more realistic, competent and not entirely anti-American.

48. Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” comment hearkens back to an old joke from the Soviet Union.

    A worker, fed-up with waiting in a bread line, rushes out in the street and screams at the top of his voice, “the President of the Soviet Union is an idiot!”.

    Whereupon, he is promptly arrested and charged with two crimes: one is demeaning the President of the Soviet Union, the second is revealing State secrets!

49. I think Hillary is un-American, if you measure her with the yardstick of her recent behavior toward the Honduran Supreme Court. I’m still trying to work out the logic on that.

    Honduras aside, I think Hillary’s negatives are way too high for a successful run at the White House – and those negatives are all named Bill. Folks liked Bill, they forgave him a lot, but they’re relieved he’s not President anymore and the last thing anybody wants is Bill back in the White House with too much time on his hands.

    One other big negative – Hillary can’t succeed against Barack Obama because she can never overcome having sold out to him and taken Secretary of State. If she had really been passionate about Good Government, she would have stayed in the Senate and opposed some of the President’s foolish policies. The reality of the betrayal of standards in taking a job under Obama will make a potential Hillary candidacy a non-starter.

50. Betsybounds–you may be right about Clinton. But in retrospect, I guess his lies seem to have been so prevalent and in some cases so ridiculous that it just became obvious he was lying. When he shook his finger and scolded us that he “did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky” it was obvious to me that he was lying–the same thing a few months later when he said, “it depends what the meaning of ‘is’ is.” He was so over the top in some of his lies, that I for one didn’t think that there was any way anyone could possibly take him seriously.

    As a liar, Obama is over the top, too, but at the moment he seems, to me at least, a little smoother about it than my memories of Clinton. Or maybe I should say that Clinton’s lies always involved some element of performance, but Obama’s are just lies plain and simple. I used to be able to tolerate Clinton’s speeches, but I change the channel or the radio station whenever I hear Obama start to speak.

51. “Hillary has plenty of problems too, but she is more realistic, competent and not entirely anti-American.”

    I too once gave Hillary, similarly, the benefit of the doubt. The problem with Hillary is that it is now obvious there isn’t anything she won’t do in pursuit of her political ambition. She’s proven she’s not competent or principled by her personal stance concerning the Honduras issue. The integrity of the Honduras constitution and it’s state institutions are now a surrogate issue for our own; by their stance on this the Democrats have betrayed the most important underpinnings of the authentic and principled democratic republic. These people don’t understand how serious this issue is, the betrayal of Honduras and the alignment of America with Castro, Chavez and company on this issue is tantamount to treason. From Acorn to a now criminal level of deficit spending to enhance state control, they’re testing the limits for what they can get away with virtually everyday now. People can’t believe it’s happening, they don’t want to believe it’s happening, unfortunately it is.

52. It’s funny. Nothing that has happened in the past two years has changed my mind from my initial impression of Obama. If anything, I gave him too much benefit of the doubt, i.e., “He can’t possibly be as clueless and dishonest as he comes across.”

    Now I do follow politics closely, but I’m no expert. I’m a computer nerd by trade and my primary interests are more nerdy stuff like math, science and computers. But the nature of Obama was immediately apparent to me, and I was dead-on correct. I’m no genius, so there must be some kind of mental illness that affects a certain percentage of the population that folks like us are immune to. Maybe Savage is right… liberalism is a mental disorder.

    There are principled and intelligent liberals out there, ones for whom I can have respect (if sometimes grudgingly), but Obama _never_ struck me as smart, only good-looking and a good speaker, although now I find his speech style to be painfully monotonous. In comparison, my opinion of Clinton has gone up since Obama took office, as well as that of Bush (especially Bush!). Everything Obama says boils down to either meaningless platitudes or the same recycled liberal nonsense that was discredited before I was born. Where’s the smart? I think President Bush, for all his shortcomings, was a lot smarter than Obama. He handled our friends and enemies competently balancing our international relations with the need to keep the U.S. safe. Under Bush, the U.S. might have lost standing in the world, but we still had some solid allies. Who is our solid ally today? Who hasn’t been dissed, snubbed or outright attacked among our few remaining friends in the world? The U.K.? France? (specifically President Sarkozy?) Israel? Poland? The Czech Republic? Meanwhile, Obama kisses the derrieres of our enemies and they laugh and keep doing what they were doing all along.

    Worst. President. Ever.

53. Pingback:The Obama Conundrum: Who Is He… What Is He… « Nice Deb

54. I’m more concerned about the financial crisis

    In case you hadn’t gotten the memo from the Democrat propaganda tool-apparatus, the financial crisis was tied in with mortgages, and ACORN were the ones that made the banks give out such high risk loans.

    How much dot connecting do you actually need here?

55. As of 8/16/19, Neo’s link to Charlie Gibson’s “I didn’t know about it” doesn’t work, even via wayback — because the domain’s changed from biggovernment.com to breitbart.com. Thus:

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2009/09/15/charlie-gibson-on-acorn-scandal-i-don-t-even-know-about-it/

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>