Obama Without a Teleprompter!

C

cindy CD/TV

Guest
No teleprompter? C'mon, really? He can't even speak to his kids over dinner w/o a teleprompter at the kitchen table.
 
So? He has done plenty of intelligent speeches without making any mistakes teleprompter or not. People want fucking perfectionism out of a president now? Bush did get tortured for being a dumbass because he was one all the time teleprompter or not. You wanna pick on the mans policys go ahead but in the mean time grow up and get off websites with names so stupid I think trident created the domain.
 
So? He has done plenty of intelligent speeches without making any mistakes teleprompter or not. People want fucking perfectionism out of a president now? Bush did get tortured for being a dumbass because he was one all the time teleprompter or not. You wanna pick on the mans policys go ahead but in the mean time grow up and get off websites with names so stupid I think trident created the domain.

Ha!
 
C

cindy CD/TV

Guest
Obama says there are 57 states in the United States. That would qualify for the "dumbass" category. Just sayin'
 
Anybody who still makes this empty assertion is only exhibiting their own lack of awareness. As rockerx mentioned he has shown over and over and over again that he's not teleprompter dependent.
Have a problem with his policies? Fine. But this teleprompter stupidity is just that - stupidity.
 
Obama is the only politician to use a teleprompter. using a teleprompter when giving speeches means you're dumb





aaaaaaaand with this line of thinking its no wonder the Republican candidates are a bunch of non-evolution, non-global warming, anti- gay marriage, drill baby drill, down syndrome having empty rhetoric reactionary bunch of idiots
(are people really this dumb to buy bullshit like the OP?)
 
:elaugh:

attachment.php


[Please Note: the attachment in this post has been deleted by moderator Supadupafly]
[Read more about the board rules: here]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ban-one

Works for panties

Yes, everyone uses telepromters and notes, even Republicans.

However, not every politician uses them seemingly all the time like Obama does, and you can tell he has to have it because when he gets interrupted or loses his place, he starts stammering. Most politicians know what they believe enough, and have a good enough idea of what their speech is about (because many wrote their own speeches), to ab lib and be close enough. He can't even do that, and when he does go off-script, he has a tendency to say things that a lot of people don't agree with.
 

Supafly

Retired Mod
Bronze Member
I think you rendered ragingcau's argument invalid :clap:
 
Yes, everyone uses telepromters and notes, even Republicans.

However, not every politician uses them seemingly all the time like Obama does, and you can tell he has to have it because when he gets interrupted or loses his place, he starts stammering. Most politicians know what they believe enough, and have a good enough idea of what their speech is about (because many wrote their own speeches), to ab lib and be close enough. He can't even do that, and when he does go off-script, he has a tendency to say things that a lot of people don't agree with.

Then how do you explain this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1-jasxb7NY

And that was for 86 minutes straight.
 
Obama says there are 57 states in the United States. That would qualify for the "dumbass" category. Just sayin'

The difference being that if Palin had said the same then her supporters would end up editing the wiki page and arguing for a whole week that there are indeed 57 states.
 

Rey C.

Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
I once called my girlfriend of two years "Linda". Problem is, her name ain't Linda. But I had just gotten off the phone, after having a rather intense conversation, with a "Linda" - so she accepted that. Whether it's Palin, Bachmann or anyone else, we all make occasional gaffes. But not having a basic command of the facts is what I object to. Whether he is right or wrong on policy, I have no doubt that Obama has a basic command of the facts. His conclusions, now those are sometimes debatable.

But I saw Obama at the luncheon with the GOP members about five months ago. He had no teleprompter and he seemed to do just fine. I would challenge any of you to face Obama without a teleprompter. And at the same time I will face (both) Palin and Bachmann. Not because I think I'm so smart - just that I think they're so dumb. But I fully believe I could completely destroy the Idiot Queens (even after a night of heavy drinking). But I don't think anyone here could take on Obama. Especially not some of you who I've called out in the past for taking email chains that you've gotten from your right wing brothers & sisters... and reposted them as factoids. Do I need to name names, ladies & germs? ;)

This teleprompter thing is about like the Birther thing: just another lame, childish exercise in mud slinging by the feeble minded, paranoid schizo radical right.
 

ban-one

Works for panties
Obama is the only politician to use a teleprompter. using a teleprompter when giving speeches means you're dumb





aaaaaaaand with this line of thinking its no wonder the Republican candidates are a bunch of non-evolution, non-global warming, anti- gay marriage, drill baby drill, down syndrome having empty rhetoric reactionary bunch of idiots
(are people really this dumb to buy bullshit like the OP?)

1 - I've never heard of anyone saying Obama is the only politician to use a telepromter.

2 - Not all the Republican candidates are "non-evolution, non-global warming, anti- gay marriage, drill baby drill, down syndrome having empty rhetoric reactionary bunch of idiots" as you put it.

A-What's wrong with not fully and wholeheartedly subscribing to the theory of evolution?

B-A few believe in the theory of what is now called 'man-made climate change' and not 'global warming' because it waffled back and forth over the decades as to whether it would be warming or cooling, so no matter what happens, if anything, they can say, "Ah-ha! We were right!" (No, you weren't.)

C-Saying only men should marry women, and women should only marry men. Yeah, that's a horrible thing isn't it? Besides, they can still be together and be domestic partners. Try that in the Middle East.

D-I guess you don't subscribe to supply and demand? More oil, means more gas, means prices drop. Less oil, means less gas, means higher prices. It's simple economics.

E-I wasn't aware Sarah Palin had announced that she was running. I assume that's who your little jab is aimed at.

F-While those one the left with their higher learnin' and fancy degrees may appear to be the intelligent ones, they have a tendency to act on feelings, and believe and not even question what they are told, 'man-made climate change' case in point. They also seem to have hard times defending their points of view, because they can't logically, so they result to name calling instead, again, case in point from your quote. Where as those on the right, who are constantly challenged by the people on the left and in the media for their 'stupid and out-of-touch views,' are always checking to see if what they really believe is true, so they have conviction in what they say and believe, and don't just resort to name calling, and use logic and reasoning in the finding of their beliefs.

And by any chance, are you a fan of the "Ragin' Cajun" James Carville? 'Cause it would explain alot.
 

ban-one

Works for panties
The difference being that if Palin had said the same then her supporters would end up editing the wiki page and arguing for a whole week that there are indeed 57 states.

Um, no. That's what the people on the left do whenever something they don't like gets out. They scrub the record, destroy/'lose' tapes, and disavow any knowledge of it ever happening.

Besides, even if people on the right did do that, there's still the media to harp on it, and we all know they would.
 
Um, no. That's what the people on the left do whenever something they don't like gets out. They scrub the record, destroy/'lose' tapes, and disavow any knowledge of it ever happening.

Besides, even if people on the right did do that, there's still the media to harp on it, and we all know they would.

Right.

While Sarah Palin has refused to admit that her account of Paul Revere’s famous ride may have been wrong, some Palin fans have taken it upon themselves to make it right. Over the weekend, as the story played out on political talkshows, a mini war was brewing on the battlefields of Wikipedia as people attempted to alter the text on Revere’s Wikipedia page to match Palin’s account while other editors tried to shut them down. George Orwell would be so proud. Or, y’know, horrified.

The Palin editors attempted to add Palin’s quote as well as make mention of a “disputed account” while the opposing side fought to prove that Palin was not a “reliable source.” Thanks to the always entertaining Wikipedia Talk Page for the article, we can see the strikes made by each group. Here’s a sample of the fight:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/doub...eres-wikipedia-page-to-match-her-description/


Now please point out a similar instance where the 'left' did the same.
 
Top