Why can't Dumbass Obama answer a simple question?
- Thread starter MILF Man
- Start date
larss
I'm watching some specialist videos
He's a politician.
Translation: He's a black man, and even if he would pull a Michael Jackson he will always be black, in his BLOOD.
Say, Will E, I noticed someone put the tag "monkey" on this thread. Wonder who that was???
I answered your question, at least regarding the baseball question and Obama's response that got your panties in such a wad. See #51, at the top of this page. Also, if you're looking for a "blabbering ramble of nothingness", you needn't look any further than this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGRYPYuFZLk
Is he still thinking how he's going to solve the problems the U.S. ic currently facing when's he's filling out his basketball brackets?
Well, would he be able to think about how he's going to solve the problems the US is currently facing if he spent more time mulling over his favorite baseball players and other such things?
So, is your problem that he spends too MUCH time thinking about sports, or NOT ENOUGH?
I think you're not listening. Many have said they don't frankly care how he answers a question about baseball. After all, he wasn't elected because he could give a reasonable response about the White Sox. He was elected because when it came time in countless interviews and debates he expressed his positions on the issues facing the country.:hatsoff:
Exactly - and sometimes MILF man, the best answers are complicated and can't be put into sound-bite/bumper sticker form... So, there might be a long, circuitous response sometimes.
None of which is to say that I think Obama is giving the best answer, only that his answers are credible and logical.
All George Bush Jnr cared about was war, every time he was on TV he was scare mongering saying new attacks were imminant and that another country needed to be taken out (yet he never mentioned oil buddy Saudi Arabia where most of the 9/11 bombers came from) . He rattled on with his confusing statements about insurgents/terrorists in the hope of convincing the public that Iraq was full of terrorists that were responsible for 9/11 (when the WMD thing didn't pan out) eventhough Afghanistan was the war on terror and Saddam and Bin Laden actually hated one another. The truth hit home when Hurricane Katrina struck and us outside the US saw a nation so obsessed with it's foreign policy it couldn't even look after it's people when disaster struct on home soil. For Shame. Imagine what an intellient righteous politician like Obama could have done with the trillions of $ spent on the war(s) and still being spent, the guy has no money to work with so he's fighting a losing battle, just like Brown is over here.
lol...I always thought Jorge was a chimp...
What does "irregardless" mean?
Probably something similar to "I could care less."
:dunno:
larss
I'm watching some specialist videos
The difference is that Brown along with Blair is to blame for the lack of funds. This country is worse off now that it was 13 years ago. Labour swept to power in 1997 on the back of the Euro and the Tory's saying that no decision could be made at the time. What did Blair say once he was PM when asked about the Euro - "No decision can be made at this time".
Bloody politicians, they are all in it for themselves. They never answer a straight question with a straight answer, and if you do manage to get an answer out of them, half the time it's a lie, or at best a half truth. Who am I going to vote for come May? Monster Raving Looney party - they have more sense than the rest of them put together :jester:
Ace Boobtoucher
Founder and Captain of the Douchepatrol
Frank Thomas, bitches!
Problem with people in the UK is they are scared of the Euro and European Union, with the right wing media claiming that joining would somehow tarnish the memory of all those who died in WWII. It needs to be tweaked so that all member states should benefit from the EU whilst still retaining certain national/cultural identities. We've kept the £ but it's so weak now compared to other currencies yet prices here (houses/food/travel/goods/services) just keep on rising. Most politicians are liars (they have to to get elected) and propose grand policies which they can ultimately never deliver once in power. I try not to listen to them although the few times I've heard Sir Menzies Campbell speak I see someone who would make a ideal leader for a country of this stature. As least he refrains from all the bitching all the other politicians seem to do.
Facetious
Moderated
No need to address the choir, I'm right here in flesh and blood :thumbsup:
- TO HIS LEFT, huh ? Maoist ? :dunno:
Thanks for your candidness anyway.
WADR, to the left of obama ? :dunno:
It helps to reassure the people that our president, in fact, has a pulse, if you will. Presidents like to talk the talk about how they're everyday people, well, let's play ball, Mr President !
He's the president, presidents are often questioned, it just seems like obama is CYA all the way, just give 'em the answer that best appeases everybody, truth or facts be damned !
No, I think that he's too sensitive about hurting feelings or leaving others out of the picture. It's easier to be vague and let it go with that - at least that's how I interpret the man.
-
And having said that, he should at least answer some hoops questions . . is all we ask !
:glugglug:
While I have no problem with anyone's opinions here, I think we should seriously consider showing a bit more respect to the office of the presidency of the United States. Go ahead, and flame the government all you want, but to call Mr. Obama a Dumbass and a shit hole is just a bad idea.
It is possible to have a similar discussion without the flaming rhetoric. Why not simply ask the question, "Why can the current president not even answer a simple damn question about [fill in the blank]?"
Really, does it have to include name calling to the highest position in the US?
/end rant/
It is possible to have a similar discussion without the flaming rhetoric. Why not simply ask the question, "Why can the current president not even answer a simple damn question about [fill in the blank]?"
Really, does it have to include name calling to the highest position in the US?
/end rant/
Oh, now, don't say THAT. You know that's just gonna stir up the TeaBaggers, who are on CONSTANT alert, 24/7/365, that they're being victimized, that they're being "silenced" (See Palin, Beck, and the rest of 'em)
But ASKING them to have a seat and (temporarily) shut their traps is fair and reasonable at some point. They're like kids who lose a game and then just start whining that it wasn't fair or that you cheated (when neither one is the least bit true), and just keep whining and shouting about things, thinking if they keep it up, they'll get their way - that they SHOULD get their way. That, because they're so SURE of themselves, that they're entitled to get their way.
Well, as so many of them were quick to point out during the Bush years (and honestly, it was one of the most reasonable things they had to say then), ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. They just can't handle that reality now, though, obviously. Let's see what they can offer later this year and in 2012.
I have to chuckle at this.
Why? Just because you agree with him?
I submit that John McCain is very qualified to be POTUS based upon his service to his country , the fact that he was a Naval Officer and Congressman and Senator.
GWB was a twice elected governor of the second largest state in the Union, and held positions in the private sector as well as running his own businesses before becoming President.
If you want to compare resumes, I think Obama compares to Palin the most being that he never really had a job other than public office and being employed part time as a college professor. His community organizer positions were basically that of volunteer .
You do realize that the law firm he worked for was the one where Michelle Obama worked right? You also should know that Obama had problems gaining employment with other firms because the very issue of his birth certificate was an obstacle for him.
You are making such a ludicrous statement because you perceive him to be the most intelligent man to ever hold the office.
He may be one of the most gifted speakers, but Ronald Reagan could have given him a run for his money.
As partisan as I can be at times, I would never make such an absurd statement based on political loyalties.
Two Presidents that I disagreed with vehemently, Clinton and Carter were qualified to hold the office.
All Sarah Palin needs is 600 + days as a US Senator and she will be every bit as qualified as BHO, if not more.
Is this the same Sarah Palin that fired Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan when he refused her demands to fire her ex-brother-in-law, Alaska State Trooper Mike Wooten who was involved in a child custody battle with her (Palin’s) sister after a bitter divorce? The same Sarah Palin that spent $150000! of campaign money on clothes, hair styling and makeup? The same Sarah Palin that claimed to be a committed Christian and said that her pregnant daughter (conceived and born out of wedlock) would marry the babys father yet she didn't.
She's abused her position as head of Governor of Alaska to carry out a personal vendetta and she'll do it again, do you really want someone like that in the sacred office of President Of The United States, I wouldn't.
Would you prefer that Levi was to be forced to marry Bristol shotgun wedding style?
Now, that said, the post I made was about qualifications on the face of it. Not particular events surrounding their time in office.
Obama has a few questions he could answer himself.
