Ohio Chatter DEV

stlouiedipalma

The birther comment is just a reaction to your natural progression to questioning his academic record. Trump tried that when it was apparent that his challenge to Obama's birth certificate had failed. Since you followed suit, I had to figure that you were trying the same failed ploy.

As I stated before, not one single U.S. President has had to undergo the type of scrutiny that those of your ilk put Obama under. I have been critical of other Presidents but I never questioned their heritage.

stlouiedipalma

I Wear Pants;818315 wrote:I think the problem here is no one has said Obama is awesome. Yet anytime someone says something in defense or tries to argue a counter point against a "Obama is bad because" reason we're met with a "oh yeah your messiah/god/whatever" crap.

It's dumb.

So is pretending anyone with questions about Obama's past is crazy. The birther thing was insane, that's for sure. But even I am kind of curious as to why there isn't a lot of stuff on Obama's academic past. Not that I think I'm necessarily entitled to know but I am curious.

Of course we look small by comparison, Obama's black.

/**** joke

I never said anyone looked small below the waist, lol.

Manhattan Buckeye

"The birther comment is just a reaction to your natural progression to questioning his academic record."

I question his academic record because he hasn't released it - we all know he went to Columbia and HLS. I wonder what classes he actually took. People praise his intelligence based on his degree credentials, but what did he study. Law school outside of the 1L first semester can be a joke. You can take difficult classes like corporate or partnership tax, or you can coast with "angry studies and the law", the latter of which is widely available at Harvard.

fish82

stlouiedipalma;818332 wrote:The birther comment is just a reaction to your natural progression to questioning his academic record. Trump tried that when it was apparent that his challenge to Obama's birth certificate had failed. Since you followed suit, I had to figure that you were trying the same failed ploy.

As I stated before, not one single U.S. President has had to undergo the type of scrutiny that those of your ilk put Obama under. I have been critical of other Presidents but I never questioned their heritage.

Me either...probably because no other POTUS has ever had such a murky heritage open to question. It was uncharted territory, and his opponents thought they had something and ran with it. Don't act like you people wouldn't have done the same thing.

Manhattan Buckeye

"It was uncharted territory, "

Indeed, in my lifetime:

W: governor of Texas

Clinton: governor of Arkansas

GHWB: CIA director

Reagan: governor of California

Carter: governor of Georgia

How does Obama's experience match up with this?

I Wear Pants

fish82;818482 wrote:Me either...probably because no other POTUS has ever had such a murky heritage open to question. It was uncharted territory, and his opponents thought they had something and ran with it. Don't act like you people wouldn't have done the same thing.

stlouiedipalma

manhattan buckeye,

You list the political experience (and I suppose resumes) of recent Presidents. All Obama has relating to that is U.S. Senator.

You want to knock his political experience, I don't have a propblem with it.
You want to knock his performance in office, I don't have a problem with it.

Once you start questioning his academic qualifications and heritage, you look like all those crazies whose agenda goes beyond the political arena. That's all I get upset about. It cheapens your argument against him when you do this.

BTW, of all those Presidents you listed GHWB has probably the most impressive credentials of them all. An entire lifetime spent in public service, and in my opinion a better President than most liberals will admit.

Thinthickbigred

tk421;818290 wrote:Uh huh, I like how getting rid of 50% of the population will make the country better. I'm sure it would. Anyone who isn't a liberal is automatically a right wing nut, right?

NO I just dont like that far right 10% fringe that puts the GOP agenda together ... Its a good thing they dont know how to put a ticket together ... I think McCain would have been a good president ..But his running mate ????? cmon that was absurd That old man dies and then what ???? Atleast Obama has a qualified backup .....I dont like the far far left either Im a middle grounder ..I like this president I think its a great thing having him as our leader and it does so much more good than harm .. He has done a very good job ...We got that SOB didnt we .. He will end our wars over seas ..Leave him in office

BGFalcons82

stlouiedipalma;818558 wrote:BTW, of all those Presidents you listed GHWB has probably the most impressive credentials of them all. An entire lifetime spent in public service, and in my opinion a better President than most liberals will admit.

W's daddy was real popular with the libs back in the day because he was seen as the anti-Reagan. Lest we not forget, Ronald Wilson Reagan was loathed by the Libs/Left, so anyone that dared called Reaganomics, "voodoo economics", would always be a hero in their minds.

My issue with him is that he asked us to read his lips, but we failed to watch our hips as he grabbed the cash out of our wallets. Gee....let's look back at that plan...tax hikes for spending cuts....hmmmm. How'd that work out? Anyone remember the monumental spending cuts we were promised??? As Ronnie used to say, "here we go again".

Manhattan Buckeye

"Once you start questioning his academic qualifications and heritage,"

When did I question his heritage? Are you still lying that I'm a birther?

He went to Harvard Law School. Big freaking deal. 600 graduates a year can make that claim - he didn't work at a top firm or clerk at any level other than at the summer free lunch associate level. He easily could have had an appellate clerk position if not SCOTUS, why didn't he do it? He's taken the path of least resistance his whole life. He could have worked at WLRK, Cravath, S&C, Simpson, etc....he could have clerked for Justice Marshall or someone else. He didn't do it.

Even people that defend him question why he didn't clerk. He's shut doors most people would beg to have opened.

Belly35

Nice article about Obama academics

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/are_obamas_academic_defenders.html

Thinthickbigred

Manhattan Buckeye;818488 wrote:"It was uncharted territory, "

Indeed, in my lifetime:

W: governor of Texas

Clinton: governor of Arkansas

GHWB: CIA director

Reagan: governor of California

Carter: governor of Georgia

How does Obama's experience match up with this?

Atleast he put a qualified team together which is 90% of the battle in administarting // He was smart enough to keep Gates on as Secretary of deffense I believe that is the first time in history that when a different potical party won the whitehouse a sec of deffens was retained .. I thought that was genius and very non arrogant

Writerbuckeye

Thinthickbigred;818586 wrote:NO I just dont like that far right 10% fringe that puts the GOP agenda together ... Its a good thing they dont know how to put a ticket together ... I think McCain would have been a good president ..But his running mate ????? cmon that was absurd That old man dies and then what ???? Atleast Obama has a qualified backup .....I dont like the far far left either Im a middle grounder ..I like this president I think its a great thing having him as our leader and it does so much more good than harm .. He has done a very good job ...We got that SOB didnt we .. He will end our wars over seas ..Leave him in office

You can't be a "middle grounder" and like this president and his policies. The two don't mesh..and to say Obama's backup is qualified to be president, is ridiculous. Every time he opens his mouth he says something more stupid than the time before. It makes me wonder how he walks without falling on his face.

Writerbuckeye

stlouiedipalma;818302 wrote:The ****ing Bush presidency is the main reason why the economy tanked in the first place. Why is it that you continue to deny this?

Because it's not true. Both parties are at fault and if you want to get REALLY technical -- the whole mortgage meltdown began with a Democrat policy of trying to fudge numbers so unqualified people could get home mortgages. Well, they got them alright -- and then they couldn't afford them.

The policy began under Carter (Community Reinvestment Act), was expanded greatly under Clinton, who had his administration put an emphasis on using it, and was allowed to go unchecked via Freddie and Fannie Mae (Congress didn't do its job and oversee these runaway agencies).

Hell, Bush at least tried to reign in Fannie and Freddie at one point but got shot down by the black caucus and Barnie Frank, who vehemently insisted there was nothing wrong with either of them or the mortgages they were approving. The video has been out on YouTube forever -- just Google it.

You and liberals everywhere can keep saying the economic crash was all Bush's fault as much as you want -- but that doesn't change the facts.

Don't forget, when all this mess was beginning to crash, the current occupant of the White House was a US Senator. What exactly did he do to help prevent things from getting worse while he was there? Oh, that's right...nothing.

So stop the partisan rhetoric on this issue. People from both parties got us deep into this mess, and Obama and Congress have made it 10 times worse by throwing billions at it that didn't do a damn bit of good, and may well end up making it all worse when history is finally written on this issue.

jhay78

stlouiedipalma;818295 wrote:
Yeah, Bush was really down to earth. Tell that to the families of the 4,000+ he sent to their deaths FOR A LIE.

Hard to take anything you say seriously when you spout crap like that. Conspiracy theories like that remind me of . . . of . . . birthers!

stlouiedipalma;818310 wrote:Well, Manhattan Birther, I'm being argumentative because birthers like you have no basis for your claims. I can't recall any President of the United Staes who has had his citizenship and background brought into scrutiny like this one. Ultimately it makes those like you who question his heritage and background look small by comparison.

No previous President of the United States had a father who was a Kenyan communist, ERRR, citizen.

Writerbuckeye;818718 wrote:Because it's not true. Both parties are at fault and if you want to get REALLY technical -- the whole mortgage meltdown began with a Democrat policy of trying to fudge numbers so unqualified people could get home mortgages. Well, they got them alright -- and then they couldn't afford them.

The policy began under Carter (Community Reinvestment Act), was expanded greatly under Clinton, who had his administration put an emphasis on using it, and was allowed to go unchecked via Freddie and Fannie Mae (Congress didn't do its job and oversee these runaway agencies).

Hell, Bush at least tried to reign in Fannie and Freddie at one point but got shot down by the black caucus and Barnie Frank, who vehemently insisted there was nothing wrong with either of them or the mortgages they were approving. The video has been out on YouTube forever -- just Google it.

You and liberals everywhere can keep saying the economic crash was all Bush's fault as much as you want -- but that doesn't change the facts.

Don't forget, when all this mess was beginning to crash, the current occupant of the White House was a US Senator. What exactly did he do to help prevent things from getting worse while he was there? Oh, that's right...nothing.

So stop the partisan rhetoric on this issue. People from both parties got us deep into this mess, and Obama and Congress have made it 10 times worse by throwing billions at it that didn't do a damn bit of good, and may well end up making it all worse when history is finally written on this issue.

I Wear Pants

Writerbuckeye;818718 wrote:Because it's not true. Both parties are at fault and if you want to get REALLY technical -- the whole mortgage meltdown began with a Democrat policy of trying to fudge numbers so unqualified people could get home mortgages. Well, they got them alright -- and then they couldn't afford them.

The policy began under Carter (Community Reinvestment Act), was expanded greatly under Clinton, who had his administration put an emphasis on using it, and was allowed to go unchecked via Freddie and Fannie Mae (Congress didn't do its job and oversee these runaway agencies).

Hell, Bush at least tried to reign in Fannie and Freddie at one point but got shot down by the black caucus and Barnie Frank, who vehemently insisted there was nothing wrong with either of them or the mortgages they were approving. The video has been out on YouTube forever -- just Google it.

You and liberals everywhere can keep saying the economic crash was all Bush's fault as much as you want -- but that doesn't change the facts.

Don't forget, when all this mess was beginning to crash, the current occupant of the White House was a US Senator. What exactly did he do to help prevent things from getting worse while he was there? Oh, that's right...nothing.

So stop the partisan rhetoric on this issue. People from both parties got us deep into this mess, and Obama and Congress have made it 10 times worse by throwing billions at it that didn't do a damn bit of good, and may well end up making it all worse when history is finally written on this issue.

I put a lot of it on Glass-Steagle to be honest.

jmog

Footwedge;818186 wrote:McCain mirrored virtually every political point that W did. The only one that differed....was McCain's denouncement of torture, something Bush whacked his pud to. Most importantly, he mirrored the same old crap on intervention, endless wars and world hegemony. Nary the teeniest thought regarding the trillions these needless wars have cost and will continue to cost. Educated Americans, in particular the independents, had had enough of W and his growing nose. That is why McCain lost. You can blame the media for every ail of the world all you want. The fact is....W was as ****ty of a president that I can ever remember. Oh I know...it was liberal media that put W's approval rate in the low twenties.

I see someone drunk the kool aid.

jmog

stlouiedipalma;818302 wrote:The ****ing Bush presidency is the main reason why the economy tanked in the first place. Why is it that you continue to deny this?

You can't be serious with this, if you truly believe the economy tanking was all, or even mostly Bush's fault, and not the fault of both parties in Washington, then you are ignorant of how the economy actually crashed. You apparently just take MSNBC as gospel truth.

jmog

stlouiedipalma;818332 wrote:
As I stated before, not one single U.S. President has had to undergo the type of scrutiny that those of your ilk put Obama under. I have been critical of other Presidents but I never questioned their heritage.

1. Maybe it makes up for the lack of scrutiny he went under during the campaign as most candidates do. What he has "gone through" pales in comparison to what the liberal media has done to Sarah Palin. If you don't agree with this then you are 100% biased.

2. You are wrong, most Presidents are scrutinzed heavily, just under different topics. Was Bush asked about his citizenship? No. Was he scrutinized by the media 100x worse than what Obama has been? Absolutely.

Writerbuckeye

Obama HID and refused to release all his records from his time before becoming a politician, especially his college years. That stuff has always been available to the public from other presidents and candidates; why hide it? Why doesn't he want us to see all the great stuff he wrote as editor of the Law Review...unless of course he didn't write much of anything (likely)? Why not release your transcripts and any other records of your college years, unless you were a so-so student and didn't excel at much of anything (again likely). God forbid, we can't have the truth be told about someone as opposed to the fictional version we're subjected to seeing every night in the MSM.

believer

Writerbuckeye;819050 wrote:God forbid, we can't have the truth be told about someone as opposed to the fictional version we're subjected to seeing every night in the MSM.

We won't read about the truth on the Appointed One until well after he leaves office. And that will be in the form of many NY Slimes best seller hard cover books available at your nearest Barnes & Nobles bookstore.

The MSM doesn't want us to know the details on Obama's fraudulent "qualifications" to be POTUS because they know full well that they are party to the ineptitude and inexperience we're currently facing.

stlouiedipalma

Writerbuckeye;819050 wrote:Obama HID and refused to release all his records from his time before becoming a politician, especially his college years. That stuff has always been available to the public from other presidents and candidates; why hide it? Why doesn't he want us to see all the great stuff he wrote as editor of the Law Review...unless of course he didn't write much of anything (likely)? Why not release your transcripts and any other records of your college years, unless you were a so-so student and didn't excel at much of anything (again likely). God forbid, we can't have the truth be told about someone as opposed to the fictional version we're subjected to seeing every night in the MSM.

Writer, this sounds similar to your claims that Obama spent "millions" in keeping his birth certificate a secret. You couldn't provide one single piece of evidence to support those claims, despite my repeated requests. How can we take your additional claims seriously?

stlouiedipalma

jmog;819027 wrote:You can't be serious with this, if you truly believe the economy tanking was all, or even mostly Bush's fault, and not the fault of both parties in Washington, then you are ignorant of how the economy actually crashed. You apparently just take MSNBC as gospel truth.

Let's see. The economy falls off the cliff in 2008. The right-wing folks who polulate this forum say it can't have anything to do with eight years of Bush's policies. No, let's blame it on Congress, even though the R's controlled it for 6 of Bush's 8 years in office.

Fast forward to 2011. The economy, although no longer on the brink of total disaster, is floundering and the recovery is stalling. According to the right-wing folks who populate this forum, it's all Obama's fault.

That, my friend, is a classic double standard.

BGFalcons82

stlouiedipalma;819517 wrote:Let's see. The economy falls off the cliff in 2008. The right-wing folks who polulate this forum say it can't have anything to do with eight years of Bush's policies. No, let's blame it on Congress, even though the R's controlled it for 6 of Bush's 8 years in office.

Fast forward to 2011. The economy, although no longer on the brink of total disaster, is floundering and the recovery is stalling. According to the right-wing folks who populate this forum, it's all Obama's fault.

That, my friend, is a classic double standard.

I've asked this before and didn't get much of an argument from the Obama-defenders: What economic policies of Bush's 8 years were changed by Obama? Which ones were preserved, and even ENHANCED, by the Obama Central Planners?

Bush tax cuts? Still in force.
Bush deficit spending? Not enough for their appetites, so they quadrupled-down on this one.
Ignore the national debt? Check mark for both.
TARP? Like coke to a crack-head; they love it.
Increase government's role in Medicare and Medicaid? Bush went for a single in the prescription drug area and this regime went for a homer with ObamaKare.
Stimulus program? Bush tried giving away $600 to working people and Obama went for giving billions to unions, states, supporters, and corporate bailouts.
Fannie and Freddie - the REAL culprits of our housing bubble and collapse? No changes thanks to Frank and Dodd.

So tell us, what ideas has Obama proposed that are so different from what Bush started? Everyone on the Left wants to blame Bush for every economic problem and yet the Dems since 1-2-2007 and Barry's Central Planners since 1-20-2009 continue on with enhanced Bush policies. Double standard? Yep...on the Left. The Right hasn't had a say-so in the economy since the Contract For America. What happened after that all passed??? Hmmm???

Writerbuckeye

stlouiedipalma;819509 wrote:Writer, this sounds similar to your claims that Obama spent "millions" in keeping his birth certificate a secret. You couldn't provide one single piece of evidence to support those claims, despite my repeated requests. How can we take your additional claims seriously?

Don't believe me? Find me several examples of anything Obama wrote while head of the Law Review. I know of one article out there, but no more. If you can find me four more, it'll prove, without question, I'm wrong.

Also, find me a copy of his transcripts or anything that talks about his grades and the courses he took in college (remember he attended several, not just Harvard).

You won't find them, because the records have been closed by Obama.

That's a fact.

If I'm wrong, it should be easy to prove...please go ahead and try.

Archive

Disgusted With Obama Administration.