Impetuous Youth

I’m still coming to terms with the sudden death of “The Man”, yes, many folks have rallied to carry on the fight, but seriously, how successful would the Jamaican relay team be if Usain Bolt suddenly got hit by a bus?

We heard in his CPAC speech that Andrew was working on some titillating tidbits to be released of Obama’s early college days. This was not much of a hook for me, still remembering my college days and why I could NEVER run for public office, I was expecting something out of The Hangover, dead/naked hookers, a stolen tiger, a kidnapped baby, at least something about his blow habit. But what we got instead (I’m sure more is coming, hopefully it is better stuff then this) is footage of some manhugs with another (ho hum) college radical professor.

I’m not going to link to the video, it is easy to find, and hardly news worthy in and of itself, including that collusion done with the hopes of keeping it hidden.

For my own self, this is not blowing up my skirt. To think that radical/revolutionary/anti capitalist rhetoric could permeate a college campus, no shit Sherlock. And not just any campus but that bastion of socialist thinking right square in the middle of that socialist town called Cambridge.

College campuses are by their very nature anti establishment. Most have diversity clubs up the wahzoo, including Jewish gay blacks who like country music, yes, they got a club. And nothing gets girls wet or impresses college professors more then trotting out some Che/Mao/Hugo quote that embraces workers rights or forwards the cause of the worker (common man) running things. Academia is still the only environment (Maybe add some in the MSM to this) where a socialist utopia, talking to our enemies out of killing us, going back to hunting and gathering (maybe just gathering), doing away with ALL nuclear weapons, hugging Mother Earth, and essentially living in communes, all these things are not only dreamed about but coveted.

Yes, we all know that Obama palled around with radicals, was sired by a radical, broke bread with radicals, emulated radicals and aspired someday to be a radical himself (mission accomplished). Some of his loony ideas he was been disabused of (for our benefit) like croaking terrorists, keeping Gitmo around, and trying these freaks through military tribunals. Others, like his wealth distribution nonsense, his hatred for anything fossil fuel, and his open arms wrt to growing the government and getting it more involved in our lives, he still clings to.

Whatever currency could be had in Obama’s radical past, that was squandered in the last election. McCain decided early on that he was not going that route, so he let alone Obama’s ties with Rev Wright, the Ayers, Resko, Alinsky, that whole Chicago connection, and whatever commie professors he spooned with.

This election, whatever GOP nominee they decide on (God help us), he needs to stay away from Obama’s past (the other day I even saw another piece on how Obama’s birth certificate was proved to be a fake) and focus on the last 4 years, an easy task if you ask me. Bring up gas prices (twice now what it was when Obama started), bring up everything else that has gone up in price (including taxes on those he promised would not see a tax increase) and has hurt working families. Bring up that old tried and true ,”Are you better off now then 4 years ago”, and get one of those portable electric billboards, wear it around your neck, and have it continually scroll the national debt. That $16 trillion and counting is probably the best argument going for why this guy needs to go.

Comments are closed.

  1. Poosh

    Yes, we all know that Obama palled around with radicals, was sired by a radical, broke bread with radicals, emulated radicals and aspired someday to be a radical himself

    No. We don’t. That’s a massive assumption you’ve made that is flat out wrong. And that’s exactly what this video addresses. A pattern of behavior. You’ve interpreted the campus wrong as well. It’s one thing to be subtly manipulated by your left-wing teacher – something that every single student is subject to, and something left-wing theory demands (control the youth, control the culture, control the country: destroy capitalism). It’s another to do what Obama did. And this race theory bullshit really is horrific stuff. The video, like Hannity said last night, just reinforces a pattern of behavior. People simply cannot see the obvious because the obvious is denied a voice. You read conservative blogs etc, and pay attention – that’s why you know some of Obama’s past – but the vast majority do not. I know more about Obama’s past than the average American cousin – and you can take that to the bank.

    And as for the GOP they need to tell the truth – they need to connect Obama’s incompetence not just with his lack of executive experience, but with his EDUCATION, how his mind was formed. And this video – in concert with all the rest – demonstrates that. They need to show the Democrats as well, the truth, that they’ve been hoodwinked, that what was done to Hilary Clinton was shameful, and that you have a Democrat in the white house who is unstable and miles away from the mainstream Democrats.

    As for what Obama really is, I don’t buy that he’s presently a true radical – I think he’s a narcissist obsessed with power for power’s sake. At some point in his life he realised his education was more a tool, the means, of gaining power – rather than actually wanting to change the world “for the better”.

    Thumb up 2

  2. richtaylor365 *

    Sorry Poosh, but I can’t get worked up over footage of Obama hugging another commie professor, or even saying nice things about him, and if this is the orchestrated strategy that will be adopted by the GOP, to link Obama to radicals like Bell and Ogletree, I say massive fail.

    I would bet that probably 80% of the Harvard student body would have given a similar speech with similar accolades, if they were in his position, this was (And probably still is) the prevailing sentiment.

    No. We don’t. That’s a massive assumption you’ve made that is flat out wrong.

    I don’t think it is. The right knows about all this stuff, and so does the left, this “populism” of his is what endears the left to him, his 99% attitude (before it was cool) shows them that he was clued in even in college. Redistributing the wealth, providing a certain standard of living ( a right, if you will) which includes free college, a good job, a house and lavish healthcare, making the privileged few pay for those not so lucky, making government large enough so that risk portion is removed from capitalism, all this nonsense is the precursor to “hope and change” is what the MSM embraces and it’s what gives Obama credibility with the left leaning folks. This radicalism embracing is not news.

    I get that Hannity and the right wing blogs have latched on to this, like some “gotcha” moment, it will gain little traction. The issues of the day are what’s important, stick with those and they have a fair chance of sending him back to Chicago, get all entangled up in this “Obama was a socialist even back in college” stuff, and it’s back to the wilderness for another 4 years.

    I don’t buy that he’s presently a true radical – I think he’s a narcissist obsessed with power for power’s sake. At some point in his life he realised his education was more a tool, the means, of gaining power – rather than actually wanting to change the world “for the better”

    .

    I guess we’ll never know. Whether he is egomaniacal or driven by some misplaced altruism of creating better world, what’s important is that he be stopped from this ruinous road he has taken.

    Thumb up 2

  3. JimK

    I get that Hannity and the right wing blogs have latched on to this, like some “gotcha” moment, it will gain little traction. The issues of the day are what’s important, stick with those and they have a fair chance of sending him back to Chicago, get all entangled up in this “Obama was a socialist even back in college” stuff, and it’s back to the wilderness for another 4 years.

    This. Specifically and exactly this. The right keeps thinking this shit matters at all.

    We all know all of it already. Those who would care about it already do, those who don’t care will never care. Making this an issue only serves to make the GOP look like dillholes.

    Thumb up 5

  4. Miguelito

    We all know all of it already. Those who would care about it already do, those who don’t care will never care.

    What scares me more then anything is that there are plenty of people that know his past is like this, and I wouldn’t say they don’t care… I’d say they welcome it. There are just far too many people in this country today who are perfectly willing to give up more and more freedoms if it just means more equality of outcome and less actual need to provide for one’s self. That’s why you can get poll numbers of poeple wanting to tax the rich more while at the same time nearly 1/2 those that should be paying tax, aren’t paying any federal income tax.

    Thumb up 1

  5. AlexInCT

    I think that the big story here, what Breibart was working on, is being lost on the people. I understand why the left wants this to go away, that was Breibart’s point: they knew this and not only ignored it, they covered for this guy’s radicalism. And they did that because most of them share these radical beliefs and think they would be part of the ruling oligarchy in the reformed America these collectivists pine for.

    I am sorry, but anyone saying this story is old hat and telling us nothing new, is simply not getting what Breibart was trying to point out when he put this together: the media knew this was what Obama was about, and hid it from the American people. That’s the big story. Questions need to be asked about why they did that. Over and over.

    Their complicity with radicals needs to be underscored. I am sure one or more of the members of the LSM already have accused the people that put this video out of doing it because they are racists too. The leftists have a vested interest in making people yawn and look away, because if people ask why the LSM never figured any of this – and there is more out there, I guarantee you – and reported on it, the story gets ugly.

    Those saying that we need to focus on the here and now are just playing into the hands of the left and their mouth pieces running the LSM. Ignoring what they did, or rather didn’t do and why, will ony serve to allow them to do more of that in the coming election. And too many people will take their propaganda as serious news. They need to be discredited, and all the pro-Obama propaganda they are set to peddle, needs to be seen for what it is.

    Thumb up 3

  6. Poosh

    For the record Hannity did not – did not – say this was a “gotcha” moment. He clearly said this is “not a smoking gun”. What it does say is that Obama praised a particular sort of radical (nothing wrong with being radical in and of itself – it’s the specific kind of radicals that Obama was drawn to), a probable racist. Hannity’s main concern was the media etc going out of their way to not vet Obama. One might already know this, but this is the absurd depths to which they sunk. These videos are expressive of trying to level the playing field, that’s all. This was Hannity’s point, and I didn’t want anyone to misunderstand what Hannity said.

    Most people don’t watch ANY news, or read any newspapers – LET ALONE read political blogs. This is standard for any western country. What they are subject to is the entertainment media and the messages the entertainment media/industry subject them to. I’m just sayin’.

    You may say “no shit sherlock” but I would protest that this simply has not sunken in. Your typical Democrat voter may loosely follow liberal/leftist ideals, but they would wholeheartedly REJECT the hard leftism and radical bullshit that Obama absorbed and advocated in his “youth”. When they hear Obama pal’ed around with terrorists they think you’re lying – after all, all he did was sit on a board etc. They think it’s bullshit. This video clearly crosses that line and shows it’s not.

    The GOP should hit on SEVERAL lines, but when it comes to explaining why Obama has made a complete mess of things, you need to espouse an accurate narrative (that is truthful) as to why, and bingo you have it. Plenty of politicians and all sorts from both left and right go through the same education but few end up like Obama. It would, obviously, be stupid to just talk about this. But I’m not entirely sure that’s on the GOP’s plate at any rate. This is one line of multiple attacks your party should be engaged in.

    And showing the depths of the liberal media, and how far they sank, helps to make people mistrust them AND their candidate. Every little helps. The GOP should be partly telling Democrat voters they have been swindled.

    These would be my tactics anyway… moderation on all fronts.

    Thumb up 2

  7. West Virginia Rebel

    Speaking of Breitbart, now that he’s no longer here to defend himself…

    I have to go with Hal on this one. Ultimately, people vote with their wallets, and if the GOP nominee (God help us, indeed) let alone the Republican Party (which seems stuck on stupid these days) can’t make this election about what the next four years under Obama would be like, then we will get four more years of Obama…without a Republican Congress and/or Senate to keep him and his administration in check.

    Thumb up 0

  8. Kimpost

    After a few years in office Obama now has a track record. I would probably attack that, and his future proposals. The radical past card was played last time. Playing it again would probably hurt Republicans more than Obama.

    Thumb up 1

  9. Mississippi Yankee

    I’m too lazy to look it up but I wonder how many of you naysayers thought Breitbart’s release of the first ACORN video was pointless?

    In Andrew’s CPAC speech he stated there would be a series of clips and just as he did with the ACORN ones his people will release them in a specific order, depending on the left”s criticism. My guess is their impact will be measurable.

    Breitbart’s life’s work (and he was a genius) was to attack the media,the MSM, and their narrative™. And the simple fact that ABC,CBS,MSNBC and CNN are still airing and attacking this ought to tell you they know the other shoe hasn’t fallen. Yet.

    CNN’s Starting Point got heated Thursday as Breitbart.com’s Editor-In-Chief Joel Pollak clashed with hostSoledad O’Brein today.

    These stories should be used as just one more weapon in the fight to unseat Obama. To leave this tool on the table just seems foolhardy.

    Oh and JimK, the dillholes in the GOP are letting their proxies at Breitbart. com lead the fight, just as they did when the ACORN ‘thang’ started.

    Thumb up 2

  10. Kimpost

    It’s already being used. Just as some are still using the faked birthcertificate issue, or other huge conspiracies. That’s inevitable. I think that what most people are saying is that the mainstream of the party should leave it alone. I’m not sure that independents would like to see too much focus on matters they regard as either irrelevant or crazy.

    Thumb up 0

  11. Poosh

    Hannity also said that there IS a smoking gun when it comes to taking down Obama … the past three years. Which is plainly correct, so I don’t think Hannity, specifically, is out of sinc with any of you guys.

    I do find it fascinating anyway.

    Thumb up 1

  12. richtaylor365 *

    Hannity also said that there IS a smoking gun when it comes to taking down Obama … the past three years. Which is plainly correct, so I don’t think Hannity, specifically, is out of sinc with any of you guys

    .

    And that was exactly my point all along, why go digging for treasure in your back yard, when there is money lying right on the floor, ready to be picked up?

    I’m too lazy to look it up but I wonder how many of you naysayers thought Breitbart’s release of the first ACORN video was pointless?

    This “naysayer” thinks your comparison pretty weak. I knew very little about ACORN before, but those video’s did reveal a smoking gun, some clear and definable wrong doing, and something newsworthy. This video showing Obama hugging a radical (something btw that 80% of the student body at that college would have done) somehow gives you wood? Really? Like Obama palling around with radicals in his past is new?

    In Andrew’s CPAC speech he stated there would be a series of clips and just as he did with the ACORN ones his people will release them in a specific order, depending on the left”s criticism. My guess is their impact will be measurable.

    I would think that you would lead off with your strongest punch, this was a whiff. If something with more meat comes down the pike (a video of Obama blowing Jesse Jackson, or a story of Michelle being a crack whore who turned tricks for Obama to pay for his Harvard education) then we can certainly put it on the scale then.

    Thumb up 1

  13. Hal_10000

    I liked National Review’s take on this. The 90’s were a time when colleges were extremely radical. The radical was mainstream. As the first black editor of law review, it was unthinkable that Obama would not make an appearance at this rally. His speech is typical Obama — non-commital, say nice things, be positive. And really, this is what gets to the heart of who and what Obama is:

    My reading of Barack Obama’s political biography is pretty simple: He’s not so much a liberal radical as a member of the liberal mainstream of whatever community he inhabits. In that video, he was doing no more and no less than what most politically engaged leftist law students were doing — supporting the radical race and gender politics that dominated campus. When he went to Chicago and met Bill Ayers, he was fitting within a second, and slightly different, liberal culture. He shifted again in Washington and then again in the White House. But radical, “conviction” politicians don’t decry Gitmo then keep it open, promise to end the wars then reinforce the troops, express outrage at Bush war tactics then maintain rendition and triple the number of drone strikes.

    I agree 100% with Jim. This is pointless. If we get bogged down in what Obama did or said 21 years ago, we’ll get hammered in the election. As I said on Twitter, his hugging of Bell in 1991 is not as much of a concern to me as the way he gives tongue to entire industries in 2012.

    Thumb up 0

  14. Mississippi Yankee

    I would think that you would lead off with your strongest punch, this was a whiff.

    And did you notice I said the “first” ACORN video?

    Breitbard’s method was always about the build up. He was a guerrilla warrior against a Leviathan. Did you pay any attention to how he parried and thrust through-out the ACORN ordeal?

    Breitbard – 1… with assist from James O’Keefe Left – 0

    Also his handling of Sherry Sherrod, it was never about the initial captured sound bite he posted. It was all about her and her husband making millions off of the phony “Pigford” lawsuits. In the end enough of the right people became familiar with it that even an apology from the president and a job offer couldn’t coax her out of retirement.
    And if you’re unfamiliar with Pigford google it. It was an absolute judicial cluster-fuck. And BTW Mr. Pigford, for his part, only made a pittance.

    Breitbard – 1 Left – 0

    Andrew Breitbard was a master of the subtle build up. Subtlety, on the other hand, seems to be lost on most part time pundits. Deriding a maneuver before it’s completion could leave you with egg on your face.

    Thumb up 1

  15. richtaylor365 *

    And did you notice I said the “first” ACORN video?

    And did you notice that I wasn’t even talking about the ACORN videos?

    Subtlety, on the other hand, seems to be lost on most part time pundits.

    You mean those same pundits who did not go into fainting spells over a video of a young radical hugging an older one? Is the next video going to show Obama smoking a doobie? More newsworthy totally unknown stuff like that?

    Deriding a maneuver before it’s completion could leave you with egg on your face.

    I’ll risk it. This particular maneuver (this video) revealed nothing new about Obama, nothing provocative, salacious, or even controversial. There was nothing “there” there. Hopefully the next one will have more bite to it.

    Thumb up 2

  16. Poosh

    There you go, Thomas Sowell – who knows a thing or two – linked this video and its implications with Obama’s appointment of Eric Holder and the Black Panther insanity. BINGO.

    btw when you see the word “critical” in an academic subject it’s a cover-up-word for “marxism”.

    Thumb up 0

  17. Poosh

    *I will take the more probable truth that Obama is always merely appealing to where he thinks the conduit to power lies. It’s less ideology and rather: “which ideology suits the situation”. However, I do think he has some deep racial issues, and probably is a racist himself – despite being a halfcaste. It’s one thing to shrug off what you’ve seen in this video as his expediency-in-the-moment, but when placed next to a series of things Obama has done (and that fact that he remained friends, apparently, with this extremists/racist professor until his death last year < facts need checking mind you) then we have a deeper understanding of Obama. We understand why he a c*nt to us Brits, we have a method to the madness. We even understand why he simply does not care about strengthening America, we even understand why he seems to desire to make America subservient to international law.

    Of course, the might matter little in an election, people generally aren't interested in causal factors (which is sad, as that would help them avoid a great deal of pain). But for those that are fascinated by the Obama presidency debacle, it's all adding details to the picture.

    Thumb up 1

  18. Kimpost

    What exactly is that argument MY (or Poosh)? Is it that Obama used to pal around with radicals and that a video of Obama having praised yet another one during his Harvard years, adds to that pile? What would that matter when it’s already been established in absurdum. I’m sorry, but I hope that the next Breitbart tape is ten million times more potent, because this is just a big yawn.

    I think that rich has articulated very well, why this amounts to nothing, in his opinion. I would suggest reading it again, with an open minded willingness to understand what (liberal) politics look like on any campus. Any liberal with political ambitions would have done the same thing in college. They still do it. Young people are generally regarded as more radical (from both wings), and at college that’s at full display. I seriously doubt that you would succeed politically if you didn’t pal around with some of these people.

    Thumb up 0

  19. Mississippi Yankee

    Annnd…. Q.E.D. Thank you too Kimmy

    More on topic is that rich believes (as I understand it) Breitbart shouldn’t have wasted time pointing out BHO’s radical past. But because he did Breitbart should have “lead off with your strongest punch”.

    My argument is that:
    1) Andrew ALWAYS had a part 2, 3 and sometimes part 4
    2) Andrew was that master of the build-up. He probed their weaknesses and NEVER lead with his best shot.
    3) Andrew Breitbart perfectly understood this was a war never a skirmish.

    That being said, Are you a can not or a will not Kim?

    One more question sweddy; did you read Poosh’s comment? And with an open mind?

    Thumb up 0

  20. Kimpost

    I read it but didn’t get much out of it, which is why asked. I read things like this:

    I will take the more probable truth that Obama is always merely appealing to where he thinks the conduit to power lies. It’s less ideology and rather: “which ideology suits the situation”.

    Ok, fine, but then the very next sentence was:

    However, I do think he has some deep racial issues, and probably is a racist himself – despite being a halfcaste.

    Ideology or not ideology, which is it? I must admit that it’s somewhat confusing.

    Anyway, the gist of his comment was, IMO, this:

    It’s one thing to shrug off what you’ve seen in this video as his expediency-in-the-moment, but when placed next to a series of things Obama has done (and that fact that he remained friends, apparently, with this extremists/racist professor until his death last year < facts need checking mind you) then we have a deeper understanding of Obama.

    Which basically is the same as: “We need to know more about Obama’s radical college connections, because we don’t yet know enough.”. I just disagree with that. We are over that. He’s got a three-years-in-office track record now. Focus on that. I’m not saying that as an Obama supporter, I’m saying that because I think that would be the smart thing to do for Republicans.

    If Breitbart indeed had this planned with a part 2, 3 and 4, then I hope those parts are much more potent. Obama lending praise to a radical or two (or three or twenty) just isn’t enough.

    Annnd…. Q.E.D. Thank you too Kimmy

    If I agree with some who generally are on your side, then you regard that as proof of them being wrong? :) Funny…

    Thumb up 0

  21. richtaylor365 *

    (as I understand it)

    No, you don’t understand

    I was not criticizing Breitbart for releasing the video, I was criticizing all you fainters, you people who said, “See, we told you he was a socialist, looky here”, like you found the Holy Grail. Honestly, I view you guys with as much curiosity as those Obama fainters at one of his speeches. You seem to think that you found something, you found nothing.

    My argument is that:
    1) Andrew ALWAYS had a part 2, 3 and sometimes part 4
    2) Andrew was that master of the build-up. He probed their weaknesses and NEVER lead with his best shot.
    3) Andrew Breitbart perfectly understood this was a war never a skirmish.

    Fine, you want to think that this is like some elaborate chess match, I am saying the first move did nothing to further the cause of checkmate. If something else comes down the pike later, something more newsworthy, then we can discuss it then, but moving this one pawn one space forward did not in any way make me think the opponent threatened.

    Are you a can not or a will not

    I guess I’m a ,”Come back when you actually have something worth discussing, cause right now you got jack”.

    There you go, Thomas Sowell – who knows a thing or two – linked this video and its implications with Obama’s appointment of Eric Holder and the Black Panther insanity. BINGO.

    It took some searching but I finally found what you were referring to.

    I still did not see anything new here. Hannity himself ticked off the radicals on his list one by one, it is common knowlege that Obama palled around with these shady characters, now we have one more shady character to add to the list, and this somehow gets the heart palpitating?

    . It’s one thing to shrug off what you’ve seen in this video as his expediency-in-the-moment, but when placed next to a series of things Obama has done (and that fact that he remained friends, apparently, with this extremists/racist professor until his death last year < facts need checking mind you) then we have a deeper understanding of Obama.

    How so? How do we have a deeper understanding? You said yourself ,”placed next to a series of things”, we already knew he liked hanging with radicals, so you add one more, and this one more gives us a deeper understanding?

    If you know anything at all about Charles Ogletree, his beliefs and his ties to Obama, this is much more troubling then any man hug with Bell. But again, we already knew about Ogletree, just like Rev. Wright, the Ayers, and the other cast of characters.

    If I agree with some who generally are on your side, then you regard that as proof of them being wrong? :) Funny…

    What’s even funnier is that I’ll be accused of being a stealth conservative and in the tank for Obama.

    Thumb up 0

  22. Kimpost

    What’s even funnier is that I’ll be accused of being a stealth conservative and in the tank for Obama.

    Well, you did work for the government’s tool for harassing law abiding Americans, i.e. you were a cop. ;)

    Thumb up 0

  23. Mississippi Yankee

    I guess I’m a ,”Come back when you actually have something worth discussing, cause right now you got jack”.

    Lemme see if I’ve got your drift. Is it because it’s your post that you feel a need to answer questions a ask another commentator? And if I happen to not agree with your rather narrow-minded view of “how” thing should be done I need to shut up and sit down?

    Ya know ricky, since you’ve come on board I see less people visit this site, fewer people comment here and an ever decreasing amount of post too. Some days none at all. Yet stifling opinion here seems, to you, the the smartest course of action. Color me surprised!

    You might wanna’ think about JimK, his not infinite patience, the insurance paid for new motorcycle, and springtime in Connecticut before you drive anyone else away from this once dynamic blog. Remember he does this all for free.

    Oh, and I’d never, ever accuse you of being a conservative. OTOH the present regime will fight to maintain your pension fund no matter how broke California is. /justsayin’ bro/

    Thumb up 0

  24. richtaylor365 *

    Lemme see if I’ve got your drift

    I think that has been your problem all along, your ability to glean drifts. When I first came on board you told me that my posts were boring, fair enough, yet you comment on most of them. Gee, If I find someone boring, I don’t read their stuff, life is too short, yet you read my stuff and comment on it, curious. A few months ago I wrote a Cain post, which you misinterpreted as being somehow an endorsement for Romney, maybe it is your comprehension ability. And now you say I’m telling you to shut up, somehow stifling your free speech, no, I’m saying that in my opinion this Obama/Bell video reveals nothing new of substance.

    Is it because it’s your post that you feel a need to answer questions a ask another commentator?

    I thought we could comment on all posted comments, besides, you used that phrase before in direct reference to me, or are you adding new rules to the blogging game?

    Ya know ricky, since you’ve come on board I see less people visit this site, fewer people comment here and an ever decreasing amount of post too.

    Oh, so now you are complaining because I don’t write more posts? You argue just like a liberal, ducking the substance of the argument and bringing up ancillary shit. The subject at hand was this video and why it brought nothing to the table, but instead of trying to convince me otherwise, you accuse me of scaring away commenters, then bring up my pension, I thought only that clown that got booted pulled duplicitous pedestrian shit like that.

    And that JimK pander, how embarrassing and shameless.

    Look M.Y., I’m a pretty easy going guy and got no beef with you. I would bet that we are even pretty much ideologically aligned with MOST things political, but when you make a comment on a post then find yourself having difficulty defending it when challenged, don’t go sniveling to the administrator, or bringing up other unrelated stuff. If you want to show me where I am wrong on this issue, have at it.

    Thumb up 1

  25. Poosh

    He’s got a three-years-in-office track record now. Focus on that.

    I think it would be pretty stupid not to. But that doesn’t mean some people shouldn’t devote a bit of their time on other issues. As I said above or elsewhere Obama’s past explains his present failures.

    Basic racism isn’t an ideology.

    Anyway, unless I’m mistaken, which I could be, Obama was 27 years old in this video. Hardly “youth”, and certainly not youth in terms of academic worth. Many conservatives were socialists and marxists, sure – when they were 18 or very early 20s. I might have his age wrong though, I just wiki’d it quickly.

    This all does give me a deeper understanding, every little helps! I don’t think people accept that Obama has a shady past – the assume it’s Republican deceptions, and clearly it isn’t. I don’t believe Democrats support this either – however they simply don’t believe a word of it.

    But this is causing stupid arguments over something which – I agree – is low on the list of things to be noting. If there is something terrible Obama has been recorded saying – that is easy for a common person to understand – then you can bet your bottom dollar (correct phrase?) that it’s been destroyed.

    As I said, this is all causing silly arguments and this makes baby angels cry.

    Thumb up 1

  26. Mississippi Yankee

    If you want to show me where I am wrong on this issue, have at it.

    Although I’ve pointed this out several times in this post let me try one more time.

    rich, you do not understand what Breitbart did for a living. Because you didn’t understand his work you also do not understand what his tactics were.

    Couple just those two items with your, in my opinion, short-sighted view of 21st century American politics and we find ourselves disagreeing… again.

    but when you make a comment on a post then find yourself having difficulty defending it when challenged, don’t go sniveling to the administrator,

    Exactly where do you feel I’m having difficulty defending my belief you don’t get Andrew Breitbart? As for “don’t go sniveling to the administrator”,

    Allinsky Nigga, Please!

    And for the record, listing facts about this blog is not pandering to JimK. Secondly. I don’t comment on your boring post (almost no one does) I comment on your <again IMO, wrong-headed post. Lumping them together seems to me as yet another aspect of your M.O. -that's cop talk, geddit-

    Thumb up 0

  27. richtaylor365 *

    Although I’ve pointed this out several times in this post let me try one more time.

    And round and round you go, still not grasping the simple fact that I was not criticizing Breitbart, I was criticizing you for doing hand stands and cart wheels, high fiving all your Order Of The Buffalo lodge buddies because you got to see Obama hugging a radical, like that really meant something.

    And for the record, listing facts about this blog is not pandering to JimK.

    Of course not ,”You better watch it buddy because the administrator, a man of ” not infinite patience”, is not going to like you driving away all the commenters”, really? You gonna stick with that?

    I don’t comment on your boring post

    Good, that will make it easier for me, I won’t have to explain everything to you.

    Thumb up 0

  28. Mississippi Yankee

    I’m not even gonna ask if you understand the meaning of pandering. You continue to declare victory and I’ll continue to chuckle at your irrelevance.

    Are you done CM jr? Because this has become boring.

    Thumb up 0