FORBES controversial article: "How Obama Thinks"

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wiglaf
    replied
    This article looks like one of Josh's rants, just throwing in anything he can think of to bash him. The ground zero mosque thing made me lol, these assholes act like it was the president's idea just because he didn't step on the mayor's toes to deal with it. And the terrorist thing? Get a grip. Just admit that you love to demonize the guy and move on. It ain't gonna bring the stock market back.

    Originally posted by z31maniac
    Maybe we should elect people who have actually run successful businesses or companies, vs people who have spent their entire lives in the Academic sphere waxing poetic about how things should be.
    Yeah like the last guy and his collection of failed oil companies?

    Leave a comment:


  • ck_taft325is
    replied
    Originally posted by Farbin Kaiber
    My answer...



    His book, is not titled "Short Conversations of my Father", is it?


    No but that would have almost made more sense by the sounds of it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Farbin Kaiber
    replied
    Originally posted by CorvallisBMW
    How much can you learn about a man and his views on the world of politics from a few short conversations when you're 10 years old? Shit I hardly new what the word 'politics' meant when I was 10.

    I'm not saying that his dad had zero influence on him, but to claim that Obama is trying his hardest to be an exact copy of his father is a hell of a stretch.

    My answer...

    Originally posted by ck_taft325is
    ...you seem to be blatantly ignoring the "Best Selling Novel" he wrote. In which he speaks candidly of his Father's influence on his life, views, morality, ect.
    His book, is not titled "Short Conversations of my Father", is it?

    Leave a comment:


  • ck_taft325is
    replied
    So you're claiming the President is illiterate and cannot read?

    Furthermore, you seem to be blatantly ignoring the "Best Selling Novel" he wrote. In which he speaks candidly of his Father's influence on his life, views, morality, ect.

    Either he's a liar or you're not being logical.

    Leave a comment:


  • CorvallisBMW
    replied
    Originally posted by Farbin Kaiber
    Keep in mind this is not some "guy", it's his absent father. Someone that left him. You are all looking this like adults, we are talking about the pliable mind of a "bastard" child. And, not just any child, but a black child, raised by white family, longing to find his true "identity".
    How much can you learn about a man and his views on the world of politics from a few short conversations when you're 10 years old? Shit I hardly new what the word 'politics' meant when I was 10.

    I'm not saying that his dad had zero influence on him, but to claim that Obama is trying his hardest to be an exact copy of his father is a hell of a stretch.

    Leave a comment:


  • CorvallisBMW
    replied
    Originally posted by joshh
    You can spin it all you want.

    If they were against his release to that degree why in the world would they then say this...


    "Nevertheless, if Scottish authorities come to the conclusion that Megrahi must be released from Scottish custody, the US position is that conditional release on compassionate grounds would be a far preferable alternative to prisoner transfer, which we strongly oppose," the memo reportedly said. "

    So the first statement is obviously for PR purposes. To satisfy people like you into thinking they didn't want him released.

    I can find all kinds of links that say they supported his release if you like. But the words in the memo itself speak the real truth of the White Houses feeling of his release.
    I fail to see how direct, accurate quotes, taken in context, constitutes 'spinning'.

    Yes they did oppose his release, over and over, in many public statements, memos and press releases. I've proven that time and time again, posting links to various news sources and proving undeniably that they did want to see a convicted terrorist released.

    If you can't accept that, that's your problem.

    And please, post these supposed memos that claim to support his release. You've mentioned them several times but have never actually shown them to anyone. Can we please see them?

    Leave a comment:


  • Farbin Kaiber
    replied
    Originally posted by CorvallisBMW
    Perhaps not irrelevant, but I would argue that it's insignificant. Again, he met the guy for what, a few days? I don't believe that he shaped his entire world and political views based on a few conversations with the guy back in the 70s.

    Keep in mind this is not some "guy", it's his absent father. Someone that left him. You are all looking this like adults, we are talking about the pliable mind of a "bastard" child. And, not just any child, but a black child, raised by white family, longing to find his true "identity".

    Leave a comment:


  • joshh
    replied
    Originally posted by CorvallisBMW
    Perhaps not irrelevant, but I would argue that it's insignificant. Again, he met the guy for what, a few days? I don't believe that he shaped his entire world and political views based on a few conversations with the guy back in the 70s.

    As some people already pointed out, his views are consistent with those of the Democratic party.


    Democratic party=Huge government, Healthcare control, Land entitlement, tax the people silly, Social Justice, open borders, gun control, twisting the Constitution....

    Yeah he sure does.....

    Leave a comment:


  • joshh
    replied
    Originally posted by CorvallisBMW
    Not well written.

    Not to the point.

    It is misleading.

    He's off the mark by a mile.

    Oh and please post this supposed memo that says the White House wanted him released. Because I've read the ACTUAL memo and it very, very clearly states, in several instances, that they are strongly opposed to him being released.

    "The United States deeply regrets the decision," said the White House spokesman Robert Gibbs. "As we have expressed repeatedly to officials of the government of the United Kingdom and to Scottish authorities, we continue to believe that Megrahi should serve out his sentence in Scotland. On this day, we extend our deepest sympathies to the families who live every day with the loss of their loved ones. We recognise the effects of such a loss weigh upon a family forever."

    The secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, said: "The United States is deeply disappointed … Today, we remember those whose lives were lost on 21 December 1988 and we extend our deepest sympathies to the families who live each day with the loss of their loved ones due to this heinous crime."



    "The Obama administration told Scottish officials last August that, although it opposed any release of the Lockerbie bomber, it would rather see him released in Scotland than transferred to a Libyan prison, according to a secret memo obtained by The Sunday Times in London."

    "According to The Sunday Times report, the Obama administration weighed in last year in the memo sent by Richard LeBaron, deputy head of the U.S. Embassy in London, to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond and other justice officials. In the memo, dated Aug. 12, LeBaron argued against the release."



    That last one is even from your favorite website, Fox News.

    Care to bust out with your usual come-back of "Typical liberal lack of logic" and then proceed to use absolutely zero logic yourself, not even providing a shred of evidence to support your claims?

    You can spin it all you want.

    If they were against his release to that degree why in the world would they then say this...


    "Nevertheless, if Scottish authorities come to the conclusion that Megrahi must be released from Scottish custody, the US position is that conditional release on compassionate grounds would be a far preferable alternative to prisoner transfer, which we strongly oppose," the memo reportedly said. "

    So the first statement is obviously for PR purposes. To satisfy people like you into thinking they didn't want him released.

    I can find all kinds of links that say they supported his release if you like. But the words in the memo itself speak the real truth of the White Houses feeling of his release.

    Leave a comment:


  • CorvallisBMW
    replied
    Originally posted by 87e30
    So you guys are comfortable just ignoring his past and saying that it's irrelevant?

    That's just as absurd as saying he is shaped 100% from his father.
    Perhaps not irrelevant, but I would argue that it's insignificant. Again, he met the guy for what, a few days? I don't believe that he shaped his entire world and political views based on a few conversations with the guy back in the 70s.

    As some people already pointed out, his views are consistent with those of the Democratic party.

    Leave a comment:


  • 87e30
    replied
    So you guys are comfortable just ignoring his past and saying that it's irrelevant?

    That's just as absurd as saying he is shaped 100% from his father.

    Leave a comment:


  • markseven
    replied
    Originally posted by KenC
    That seems like an pretty big assumption. His views coincide with that of the Democratic Party.
    Originally posted by omar85
    are you excite for his reelection party?
    hehe.. yeah.

    Leave a comment:


  • CorvallisBMW
    replied
    Originally posted by joshh
    I'm laughing my ass off at the usual suspects that are crying about this piece well written and to the point.

    It's not misleading in any way. The guy is spot on.

    And if you read the memo from the White House about the Lockerbie bomber the White House was just fine with letting the guy go as long as he stayed in Scotland. You just can't argue that point at all.
    Not well written.

    Not to the point.

    It is misleading.

    He's off the mark by a mile.

    Oh and please post this supposed memo that says the White House wanted him released. Because I've read the ACTUAL memo and it very, very clearly states, in several instances, that they are strongly opposed to him being released.

    "The United States deeply regrets the decision," said the White House spokesman Robert Gibbs. "As we have expressed repeatedly to officials of the government of the United Kingdom and to Scottish authorities, we continue to believe that Megrahi should serve out his sentence in Scotland. On this day, we extend our deepest sympathies to the families who live every day with the loss of their loved ones. We recognise the effects of such a loss weigh upon a family forever."

    The secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, said: "The United States is deeply disappointed … Today, we remember those whose lives were lost on 21 December 1988 and we extend our deepest sympathies to the families who live each day with the loss of their loved ones due to this heinous crime."



    "The Obama administration told Scottish officials last August that, although it opposed any release of the Lockerbie bomber, it would rather see him released in Scotland than transferred to a Libyan prison, according to a secret memo obtained by The Sunday Times in London."

    "According to The Sunday Times report, the Obama administration weighed in last year in the memo sent by Richard LeBaron, deputy head of the U.S. Embassy in London, to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond and other justice officials. In the memo, dated Aug. 12, LeBaron argued against the release."



    That last one is even from your favorite website, Fox News.

    Care to bust out with your usual come-back of "Typical liberal lack of logic" and then proceed to use absolutely zero logic yourself, not even providing a shred of evidence to support your claims?

    Leave a comment:


  • joshh
    replied
    I'm laughing my ass off at the usual suspects that are crying about this piece well written and to the point.

    It's not misleading in any way. The guy is spot on.

    And if you read the memo from the White House about the Lockerbie bomber the White House was just fine with letting the guy go as long as he stayed in Scotland. You just can't argue that point at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Farbin Kaiber
    replied
    Originally posted by KenC
    That seems like an pretty big assumption. His views coincide with that of the Democratic Party.

    Fair enough, that's why I said, "I'd think...", and maybe you are right, that IS where his views coincide, but where does his drive come from, and where are his morals directing from?

    Leave a comment:

Working...