Barry O's resume ??

[Wolfman]

http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=12526" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not much "change" is it ?

[Mikey]

http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=12526

Not much "change" is it ?

Ever had a
coherent thought?

It's awesome when it
"happens". Try it
sometime.

[Cuda]

How the fuck would you know?

Last time you had a coherenet thought Wolfman was a pup

[Tom In VA]

http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=12526

Not much "change" is it ?

Ever had a
coherent thought?

GERIATRIC FIGHT !!!!!!


Mikey, his thought was appropriate within context of the link. It was his opinion on the material. Reading it really does make one come away with "another bullshit politician" - ergo, "not much change is it".

The text makes it sounds like Obama walks into an organization and says "Please move that table over two inches to the left" and in his resume it says "Directed the Organization For Something or Other".

Then moves onto something else like the "Organization For Something Completely Different" comes in and says. I need you to get me a coffee, I need you to copy some files for my upcoming campaign and you over there, my printer is broken. Then that turns into "Co-ordinated efforts at the Organization for Something Completely Different". He moves onto something else.

Quiet as kept when I meet an executive that actually has any kind of hard-line experience in something, I find it refreshing. But the status quo is a bunch of tools who really don't do anything of substance but look the part, speak the part, act the part and move onto something else before they have to get dirty.

That's Obama, it's most politicians = "Not much "change" is it "

[Wolfman]

I think that the Clinton's screwed up big time. If Hillary had waited for a Senate seat to open in her home state, we probably would not be having this internet "conversation". It's hard for me to find a recent candidate for POTUS with such little experience than Barry O. I must admit he is great at spitting out bumper sticker philosophy. So was Forrest Gump.

[Dinsdale]

I think that the Clinton's screwed up big time. If Hillary had waited for a Senate seat to open in her home state, we probably would not be having this internet "conversation". It's hard for me to find a recent candidate for POTUS with such little experience than Barry O. I must admit he is great at spitting out bumper sticker philosophy. So was Forrest Gump.

Dang, you must have been one hell of a teacher.

[Wolfman]

Reminds me of taking Technical Writing in college and having the Prof chide me for using "flowery terminology".
I'll use some here. FUCK YOU !!

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Thanks for the decisive and definitive opinion on Obama from a blog, Wolfshuffle.

Honestly, loosen the velcro tabs on your Depends a little. I think you're cutting off some blood flow to your brain (located in your ass).


At least Cuda entertains. You just turn this place into Bingo Night at the prune juice factory.

[Mikey]

I think that the Clinton's screwed up big time. If Hillary had waited for a Senate seat to open in her home state, we probably would not be having this internet "conversation". It's hard for me to find a recent candidate for POTUS with such little experience than Barry O. I must admit he is great at spitting out bumper sticker philosophy. So was Forrest Gump.

Dang, you must have been one hell of a teacher.

Driver's Ed instructors weren't necessarily supposed to be grammar or spelling experts, or even capable of constructing a coherent sentence, at least where I went to HS.

They were usually gym teachers with an extra period.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Thanks for the decisive and definitive opinion on Obama from a blog, Wolfshuffle.

Are the facts in question? No?

Go fuck yourself.

Dude, don't get all angry. I'm just saying that you could do much better cracking on Obama than
linking to some faggot egghead ballscratcher's blog.

[Tom In VA]

I think that the Clinton's screwed up big time. If Hillary had waited for a Senate seat to open in her home state, we probably would not be having this internet "conversation". It's hard for me to find a recent candidate for POTUS with such little experience than Barry O. I must admit he is great at spitting out bumper sticker philosophy. So was Forrest Gump.

Dang, you must have been one hell of a teacher.

Driver's Ed instructors weren't necessarily supposed to be grammar or spelling experts, or even capable of constructing a coherent sentence, at least where I went to HS.

They were usually gym teachers with an extra period.

Break it down Mikey, what's wrong with the sentence.

[battery chucka' one]

You mean the wrestler who was actually Cowboy Bob Orton's brother? (for real, he was)

Am kidding. Obama is the poster child of cult of personality. He's also going to win the white house because all the legitimate Republican candidates couldn't beat 'the maverick'. Sad. I loved Chris Matthews of that liberal news network skewering an Obama supporter, repeatedly asking him to 'give me one thing that Obama did in congress'. The guy, a senator whose name I should know, after two minutes of hemming and hawing, said that he couldn't name anything that Barrack has done. After dismissing the esteemed bumblebee man, they went to a two shot with Matthews and Craiger's former sidekick. That's when the tape ended. I wish I could have heard a bit more of that.

Actually, it was Kirk Watson (D-TX) who was torn asunder. And on this video, there are some comments by Mrs. Kilburn. Rather useless, but they're there.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=jj4VK9wVAi0

[Wolfman]

Notice---no one has come here and explained why Barry O is better qualified to be our next President than John McCain. I'm thinking it is because they can't ! I continue to wait for more information than "change we can believe in" !!
FYI--I have Permanent Teaching Licenses in NY State for Biology/General Science and Health. I have a BS in Agriculture from the University of Maine and a Master's in Education form SUNY Oneonta. If you do not care for my posts---
don't FUCKING read them !! It's that simple---simpletons.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Nothing wrong with bloggers. They are no more or less reliable than lamestream media and many cases they blow corporate media out of the water.

Yeah, rumor and innuendo, the pillars of journalistic integrity...



At least when McCain wins, the latte-chino sipping, Mac Book Pro pounding "New Right" lady-boys will dry up and blow away.
That's one thing about Mac, he doesn't seem to cater to the frilly cuffed "Campus Watch" fruitcups with the soft hands and doughy chins.

[Dinsdale]

Break it down Mikey, what's wrong with the sentence.

For one, the alleged "teacher" made multiple punctuation errors.

Then again, why am I explaining this to a guy who doesn't understand the difference between a period and a question mark?

[Dinsdale]

Notice---no one has come here and explained why Barry O is better qualified to be our next President than John McCain.

Because Odoucha has much less of a track record for selling legislation and government favors to the highest bidder.

[Mister Bushice]

They were usually gym teachers with an extra period.

I think he's past the age where he has periods.

[Tom In VA]

Break it down Mikey, what's wrong with the sentence.

For one, the alleged "teacher" made multiple punctuation errors.

Then again, why am I explaining this to a guy who doesn't understand the difference between a period and a question mark?

Red handed too.

[Dinsdale]

"Oh fuck... you mean you guys are pissed off about me taking favors such as vacations and trips on private jets that belong to the people who brought about the junk bond scandal that cost the American taxpayer over 100 billion dollars, while I decided to take up for my boy rather than John Q Public?"


"Oh, sorry -- I didn't know I wasn't supposed to do that. You have MY WORD that if you give me a second chance, I'll never do anything like that again."


"Oh hey, Vicki Iseman... why sure, I'll try to ramrod legislation through and pull some strings for you... you did donate heavily, after all... but it is going to cost you a free vacation and some free rides on the private jet."



What part of this are any of you struggling with?

Do you need it explained further?

He took vacations and private jets in return for political favors. When busted for it, he promised that it would never happen again.

It happened again.


Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, and you people are fucking idiots.


His commitment to corruption has been unwavering. The man is dirty to the core.


He lied to you. No ifs, ans, or buts. He was accused of inappropriate conduct, confessed to said conduct, and swore on his word it wouldn't be repeated.


Guess what? It's been repeated... his record of selling favors to the highest bidder is as prevalent as it is disgusting.


McCain's aides actually had to take steps to get McRipoff to stop persuing a personal relationship with a lobbyist.


Just a foul POS.

[Wolfman]

I won't fight him. He just kicked Charles Darwin's ass, so I'm guessing he'd make easy work of me --

Must be OK to the English/punctuation policeman here to finish a sentence with dashes !

[Dinsdale]

Nuh-uh.

No way.

That did NOT just happen.


Wolfuckingtard DID NOT just go digging through other threads to find some (out of context) punctuation error I may or may not have made, in an effort to excuse/justify his own butchering of American English?


Please tell me that didn't just happen?


Nice work, you senile fucking neverwas.

[Dinsdale]

The New York Times story on John McCain and the lobbyist has brought out the conspiracy theorists in full force. While the Times is catching flak from no shortage of directions, one of the lines of attack has focused on the timing of the story.


Why didn't the Times publish the story in December, when the inevitable Matt Drudge first alluded to it? Must be, say some of the critics on the right, that the Times was holding it to allow McCain to sew up the Republican nomination, and then published it to soften up the GOP standard-bearer and make him easier prey for a liberal Democrat. (Of course, to inflict maximum damage, the Times should have run the piece as an October surprise.)


The McCain camp speculates that the Times rushed the story into print because The New Republic was preparing a piece on the brutal internal skirmishing over the McCain blockbuster.


What all of this disregards is the way newspapers work. A "story" is not a completed, off-the-assembly-line product, an immutable narrative etched in granite. There's a long distance between initial tip and above-the-fold scoop on a story of this nature and magnitude, particularly one which a high-powered Washington criminal lawyer, not to mention a presidential candidate, is mau-mauing editors to kill. The amount of scrutiny and debate is often staggering.


In more than 26 years at six newspapers and one wire service as a reporter and editor, I can't tell you how many times I've known reporters, excellent reporters, who were convinced that a piece was ready to roll, totally nailed down, only to be told that they needed to do more reporting. Or that the article needed to be rewritten or reorganized or broadened.


It's a tense, intense, conflict-laden process, as that New Republic piece, published on the Web today, makes clear it was in this instance.


Most of the time, all of the massaging makes for a better world. But sometimes the end product is watered down, and sometimes it says more than it establishes. As the great Peter Binzen, my boss at the late Philadelphia Bulletin, often told me when I was fulminating about this or that screw-up, "Newspapering is a very inexact science."


When I was at the Washington Post, we had a story about some of the damage caused by a Soviet spy named Ronald Pelton. Week after week, we thought it was ready to go, only to have someone from the government come up to see Ben Bradlee with national security concerns. Ultimately Bradlee thought the story had reached the point that it could be published without endangering the future of the republic, and it was.


So what about this one? Admittedly, it's not the most airtight piece ever published. There's no smoking gun. There are no documents. There are enough anonymous sources to make Bob Woodward happy. And both the senator and the lobbyist deny that they had an affair.


But the Times doesn't assert that McCain and telecom lobbyist Vicki Iseman had an affair. What it does say is that his top associates were very concerned about his close relationship with someone lobbying about issues before his committee, feared it may have become romantic and actually staged an intervention to break it up. In a rare on-the-record moment, it quotes John Weaver, long a close McCain associate, describing a meeting in which Weaver said he asked Iseman to stay away from the senator.


So who cares? Here's the point: McCain, who nearly blew up his career with his involvement in the Keating Five scandal long ago, has for years portrayed himself as a reformer, an implacable foe of lobbyists, an unfailing crusader against the dreaded earmarks. To have such a high-profile relationship with a lobbyist on issues over which he has jurisdiction, replete with a trip on her client's corporate jet, is an appalling lapse of judgment, regardless of whether the two were sleeping together or spending all of their time playing chess or discussing the works of Hegel and Nietzsche. No wonder his staff was so upset.


(Interestingly, the Washington Post moved quickly to follow the Times' lead with a similar piece — it had been in the works for some time — without citing the possibility of a sexual relationship.)


And, most important, the Iseman episode is not portrayed in a vacuum. While the Times piece led and concluded with the, er, sexiest part of the saga, it was just a part of a pattern of ethical blind spots shown over the years by McCain. To me, that's the power of the piece.

[Dinsdale]

http://www.usvetdsp.com/nov07/mccain_deceit.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tom In VA]

Please tell me that didn't just happen?

That did not just happen.

[Dinsdale]

This whole “presumptive nominee” thing must be serious, because the New York Times just dumped a million-word “investigative report” on how John McCain is the sleaziest sack of scum since, uh, all the other Republicans who already dropped out of the race. Also: Did he have a Dirty Sex Affair with some lobbyist broad who looks suspiciously like his current wife? Let’s find out!Under a grainy black-and-white 1970s-looking mafia photograph of McCain as he “conferred with his lawyers before testifying in January 1991 before the Senate Ethics Committee regarding his involvement with Charles Keating and the Lincoln Savings and Loan,” the NYT samples from the rich trove of Corrupt McCain evidence and comes up with this pretty good initial batch of sleaze:

* While Grandpa Straight Talk was running for the presidency in 2000, all his aides were going nuts because he was constantly traveling with a good-looking lobbyist gal who was, at the time, in her early thirties.
* Whether or not McCain and Vicki Iseman were having sexytime on the corporate jets he used to fly around the country, McCain did do the bidding of Iseman’s clients.
* At this point, he had barely cleared his name from the Keating Five Savings & Loan scandal.
* In one of his few acknowledgments that the Arizona senator has ever been to Arizona, McCain made a point of not flying direct from National Airport to Phoenix because he had some part in opening up that commercial air route — but because he always flies in luxury private jets provided by the Corporates, it didn’t much inconvenience him.
* McCain helped launch some campaign-ethics group, but the group ended up doing the exact same corrupt things it was supposedly against, so he quit in shame.
* Corrupt banker/developer Charles Keating was, obviously, an immediate supporter of McCain’s long congressional career. Keating showered dirty money and fancy vacations on McCain, who loves all that shit.
* Then McCain tried to get the government off the back of Keating’s failing corrupt Lincoln Savings and Loan, because McCain really wants to get government off the backs of his corrupt millionaire friends.
* McCain got caught, but somehow clung to his senate seat.
* But McCain can still pretend to “wince” at the memory of getting caught, so who cares if the bailout cost American taxpayers $3.4 billion?
* He also got caught having a big lobbyist fund-raising deluxe luxury fancy party in 2000. So he ran and hid like a little girl.
* Lobbyists control his entire miserable, corrupt life.
* He loves lobbyists, both in the figurative and literal sense, because he was probably screwing that one lobbyist.
* And when the lobbyists need a quick letter to the FCC or whatever to help their clients, John Maverick McCain is always quick to help, the end.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Please tell me that didn't just happen?

That did not just happen.

RACK you, Tom.

BTW, here's some extra punctuation, in case you need it...

? , . ? ? " ; : . . - " , '

[Dinsdale]

John Mccain, YHKYOA... badly, might I add.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

President GiantBabyHead and The Beer Princess move into the White House next January. Count on it.

[Tom In VA]

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/ob ... g_off_into" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If his resume doesn't support it, at least working on playing the part.

[smackaholic]

I think that the Clinton's screwed up big time. If Hillary had waited for a Senate seat to open in her home state, we probably would not be having this internet "conversation". It's hard for me to find a recent candidate for POTUS with such little experience than Barry O. I must admit he is great at spitting out bumper sticker philosophy. So was Forrest Gump.

rack!

hillary carpetbagged her fat ass up to NY because it looked like a good place to launch her bid for president from.

had she sat still for a few years and stepped into the illinois job, she would have eliminated that pesky colored boy.

that's fukking karma, right there.

[Mikey]

When was the last time she lived in Illinois?

I was under the impression, for some reason, that she'd been in Arkansas for a while before moving to DC.

[Cuda]

Hitlery was born and raised in Illinois, fucktwiddle

[Wolfman]

When was the last time she lived in Illinois?
I was under the impression, for some reason, that she'd been in Arkansas for a while before moving to DC.

Be patient--Mikey will have a "coherent thought" soon.

[Mikey]

When was the last time she lived in Illinois?
I was under the impression, for some reason, that she'd been in Arkansas for a while before moving to DC.

Be patient--Mikey will have a "coherent thought" soon.
When was the last time she lived in Illinois?
I was under the impression, for some reason, that she'd been in Arkansas for a while before moving to DC.

Be patient--Mikey will have a "coherent thought" soon.

Hitlery was born and raised in Illinois, fucktwiddle

No shit.

I guess Obama should have run from Hawaii and McCain from the Panama Canal Zone - their "home states". Then this would all be moot, right?

Stupid fucks.

[Tom In VA]

There's some question as to whether or not Obama is even from Hawaii.

He says he is. But Hawaii is not compelled to release birth records for examination.


If somehow it comes out that he wasn't actually BORN in Hawaii. Guess what ?

[Mikey]

What?

[Goober McTuber]

Guess.

[Mikey]

Guess what ?

Chicken butt?

[Tom In VA]

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

1. Anyone born inside the United States
2. Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
3. Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
4. Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
5. Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
6. Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
7. Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
8. A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

1. If it cannot be proven that he was born in Hawaii - GRASPING
2. He's not an Eskimo or Indian -no issue
3. His father is not a citizen of the United States. - no issue
4. His father is not a U.S. National. - no issue
5. If it cannot be proven that he was born in Hawaii - Was he born in a U.S. possession ? - GRASPING
6. We know who his parents are. - no issue
7. If he was not born in a possession or in the U.S. but on foreign soil, I believe the five year requirement is after 16 or 18- GRASPING


I've read some people on other sites discussing the contitutionality of a Obama presidency and they raised these concerns. I seriously doubt anything will come of it - Hillary would have mentioned by now.

Basically, just adding to the din.



Personally, I think it's a lock. He's the next President. I think he'll do a good job. I also think he'll help get some Republicans back into the house and senate.

[War Wagon]

Personally, I think it's a lock. He's the next President. I think he'll do a good job.

Stifle yourself, dingbat.