1 - 10 Next
Someday we will get to know what Mr. Obama earned as grades, and read what he wrote in "scholarly" papers. But one must assume from his "performance" in office that he did well in debate and Mock Court, but did poorly when substance was required. And he clearly has fulfilled the prediction prior to his being elected that he had insufficient experience in administration to hold the top administrative post in the Land. Moreover, he has proven to have very poor work habits, taking every opportunity to get out of the office to play golf, and to party with rich friends. It would have been much better for the country if he stayed in town and cultivated some working relationships with both his friends and his opponants...others before him have understood the need to do that and to varying degrees accomplished exactly that, with the result that Presidents and Congress have worked together even when of different opinions. But finally a statement by, about or of the President that we can totally agree with: He cannot work with others.
With their record of lying about Healthcare, does anyone think that any "it is someone else's fault" argument made by the Progressive Liberal Democrat party and its minions will be believed by anyone anymore? Even their hard-core supporters will not believe, although I am sure they will vote for their ideological compadres.
Would not be surprised to find this judge would be in favor of abortions for up to 5 years after conception. After all, it is all in the definition. If a child at 8 months can survive out of the womb, why should the matter of housing location be a factor if it interferes with the convenience of the mother: in the womb, in the BR nursery if the mom has a date and not sitter, etc. Seems a likely extension to me.
In response to:

Best News Ever: Obama is Worst Ever!

4Berserker2 Wrote: Jul 07, 2014 10:28 AM
Nothing to disagree with in your review...unfortunately for us.
Progressive Liberal Democrats don't hate religion any more...or any less...than any individual who disagrees with their view of life and the cosmos. Their anger ramps up exponentially as the quality of the opposition rises. The more they lose on the facts, the angrier they get. What puts them over the top on religion is NOT religious people, although they disrespect them, but the concept of quoting a deity...whom they cannot engage in one of their faux discussions, with shifting comments that change the subject when they begin to lose on the original argument. For them, the Ten Commandments are, at best, the Ten Suggestions. They hate absolutes, because absolutes require consequences. And they truly hate consequences...except for the other guy.
In response to:

Best News Ever: Obama is Worst Ever!

4Berserker2 Wrote: Jul 07, 2014 10:18 AM
Ratings of Presidents is a reflection of three things: 1) How they handle the burdens of office; 2) the performance of Presidents before and after them; and 3) the mood and awareness of the populace at the time they hold office. As at least one poster has already said, quite elegantly, Mr. Obama is not a serious Politician. And neither is he a serious Administrator. He lacks ability in both area; he had no track record and has proven himself incapable of learning on the job. He is, however, a superb campaigner, an accomplished liar and ideologue. One could argue that, with the passage of time, it may be that George W. Bush will rise a bit in the polls, as he over time comes to be compared with Mr. Obama and Mr. Carter and those from earlier in the 20th Century...some of which performed horribly. But that is a matter for historians...you know, those folks who take facts and then create fiction from them based on suppositions. I think that the time will support Mr. Obama at the bottom of the list based on lack of control of the office, lack of ability to work the political system and on his practice of throwing tantrums and taking his marbles and going home when Congress didn't want to play by his rules. And, of course, even then he didn't stay home much, as he was out partying (opps...sorry, campaigning) or playing golf. Of those who at least understood and attempted to perform their obligations as President, I think that Carter still stands alone at the bottom. A genuinely, I believe, well meaning man, he and those around him lacked the vision required to really get the job done. But he tried. Mr. Bush ("W") was a far superior administrator than anyone credited him for, placing truly able people around him. His fall was more a matter of not having a military that accurately foresaw a proper exit strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan than anything else, as the financial meltdown at the end of his term of office was at least as much the fault of Congress as anything else. But perhaps time will reveal that in more clarity. But he erred in looking on wars as being "won" as opposed to "punishment and warning" events; has he finished in both countries after the initial success, left with the admonition, "Don't let those folks attack us again or we will have to come back!", we would have been fine.
That is just not going to happen. Foreign Aid is the world-wide extension of providing welfare, free phones and food stamps for our citizens (well, maybe some illegals too). Internally, this approach provides for additional votes keeping Mr. Obama in power. On the World stage, foreign aid sucks countries into our web, making them more inclined not to actively oppose most things we would like to happen. Oh certainly many countries still defy us...but that tends to be verbal, not through actions...while many others simply stay quiet or deny interest in what we are doing. All is the same...except foreign aid IS free to the countries receiving it, while we, the American Taxpayer, pay for the foreign aid, the welfare, the phones and the food stamps. And, in an attempt to hide this fact, the President doesn't make us pay NOW...no, he adds it to the national debt, the bill for which shall be presented for payment after he leaves office.
I fail to understand this position being presented as if it were a surprise. I am one of all too many folks who, when Mr. Obama first started his run for the Presidency, pointed out his lack of proven ability generally, his lack of any substantive record of administrative record, and a total lack of evidence of his ideological positions on myriad subjects...all of which we usually have at our disposal when deciding on the adequacy or desirability of a Presidential candidate for not only being elected, but being able to actually perform the duties of the Presidency. He didn't have it then, and he has proven that he hasn't acquired them now.
I understand...and continue to argue that today's form of posting requires the establishment of a sarcasm font...it is only fair. While many write in a form the makes it obvious to most, if you have just awakened, your sensitivity to sarcasm might not yet be activated...and we need to make it easy for folks to send the message they want to, and not depend on the awareness or intelligence of readers.
In response to:

Target Joins the Anti-Gun Movement

4Berserker2 Wrote: Jul 03, 2014 8:58 AM
I have never seen any evidence of Mr. Obama proclaiming he is a Muslim. Other than that, I agree with you sentiments...particularly the last comment. The police are fine people, but usually their usefulness is in taking reports on paper for the record.
1 - 10 Next