Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » The latest on Obama (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: The latest on Obama
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Like I've told you, unless Obama were to take a strong position in favor of the marriage defense amendment, there's no way I could support him until such an amendment passes.

But politics aside, this crap is just unfair:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16443180/

I think we were right to forgive this sort of stuff in Bush's history. Like Bush, Obama's obviously moved beyond this error of youth, and unlike Bush, Obama's own public confession is the only evidence that we have that this ever happened.

I'll be very dissapointed and angry if more than a handful of isolated Republicans try to milk this.
quote:
Rhodes Cook, a independent political analyst, said that Democratic primary voters, who are typically more liberal, would be more understanding of his drug use -- "and if he makes it to a general election, it will be old news."
I don't recall the Republicans making much hay of allegations of Bush's drug use, or of Clinton's pot use. They justifiably made more fun of Clinton's "didn't inhale" line than the actual pot use.

quote:
In an interview during his Senate race two years ago, Obama said he admitted using drugs because he thought it was important for "young people who are already in circumstances that are far more difficult than mine to know that you can make mistakes and still recover.

"I think that, at this stage, my life is an open book, literally and figuratively," he said. "Voters can make a judgment as to whether dumb things that I did when I was a teenager are relevant to the work that I've done since that time."


Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think that part I bolded is really strong. What sort of message do you send when someone's screwed for life and can't be trusted despite decades of leaving the mistake behind? That's certainly not a Christian message. Why should kids in trouble change their ways if they see that those that do change, still get crucified?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sharpshin
Member
Member # 3175

 - posted      Profile for sharpshin   Email sharpshin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I doubt as well that anybody cared about Clinton's experimentation with pot. It was the hemming and hawing that looked bad. He didn't inhale.... riiiight. Same with Bush's obfuscation about his own alleged experimentation with cocaine.

Obama has already said, in some interview or another, that sure, he inhaled, and isn't that the point?

There is not a single other candidate out there as fast on his feet as Obama, whose candor is in direct opposition to the claims of most politicians that they've been Sweet Polly Purehearts from the cradle. The public isn't as dumb as those politicians think.

[ January 03, 2007, 06:13 AM: Message edited by: sharpshin ]

Posts: 318 | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Eric
Member
Member # 2699

 - posted      Profile for Eric   Email Eric       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Politicians being what they are, some of his opponents will try to use this against him. He should be thanked for his candor, not pilloried for admitting to what he did in high school.
Posts: 448 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LoverOfJoy
Member
Member # 157

 - posted      Profile for LoverOfJoy   Email LoverOfJoy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think it's a no brainer that a few people will try to make hay of it but to the extent that people try to blow it out of proportion it will end up hurting republicans and helping him.

The fact that it happened in his early youth makes it much less of a big deal. If it had happened a couple years ago, or even just before he got into politics, it'd be a different matter

Posts: 3639 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Pixiest
Member
Member # 869

 - posted      Profile for The Pixiest     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So now can we call him "Obama, Sin Laden?"
Posts: 385 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hmm. Alternately, someone might make some obscure remark, and the Dems might blow that out of proportion, like they did with that one dimwit Republican's proposal to make illegal immigration a felony. There's a big political trap here, and the Republicans had better police their own.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ssci
Member
Member # 1053

 - posted      Profile for ssci   Email ssci   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pixiest ... that's pretty funny.

LOJ ... I agree. Smart republicans will leave it alone.

Posts: 442 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Eric
Member
Member # 2699

 - posted      Profile for Eric   Email Eric       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
So now can we call him "Obama, Sin Laden?"
From Spanish, that translates to English as "Obama, without Laden". Hmmm....and "Laden" translates from German to English as "load".

(Looking for a coded message here.)

Posts: 448 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Pixiest
Member
Member # 869

 - posted      Profile for The Pixiest     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
In english it means loaded with sin.

The message isn't that coded.

Posts: 385 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bah. This is just a simple case of political immunization for the 2k8 campaign.

From QandO:

quote:
Forget all the punditry about whether or not Barak Obama's recent revelations of use of marijuana and cocaine are going to hurt him.

They're not.

Say hello to the old Clintonian tactic of introducing bad news into the game when it can least hurt you and letting people get used to it, rationalize it and dismiss it.

"I think that, at this stage, my life is an open book, literally and figuratively," he said. "Voters can make a judgment as to whether dumb things that I did when I was a teenager are relevant to the work that I've done since that time."

And they will and have plenty of time in which to do it. Then, when it is brought up in any subsequent campaign 2, 4 or 6 years from now, he simply says: "phaaaa, that's 'old news', the public has dealt with that and it's no longer worth talking about. Let's move on".

Political immunization ... that's what's going on here.

Brilliant.


Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Considering he made the revelation 11 years ago, extremely brilliant. That's the kind of long-term planner I'd like to see in the White House. [Wink] [Big Grin]
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Makes sense. I've done some things in life that I'd want cleared away before I tried to do something public and important. Why hide, and why let someone make political hay out of something you'd fully acknowledge anyway?

It just gets rid of some of the more disgusting aspects of mudslinging politics so the focus can return to the actual issues.

Imagine that.

Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
LoL! That is funny. Funny thing is, I initially read sin as the spanish word; didn't even click in english.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dave at Work
Member
Member # 1906

 - posted      Profile for Dave at Work   Email Dave at Work   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'd be more worried about the other Democratic candidates trying to use it to keep him from running away with the nomination.

I want to see Obama as the Democratic candidate so that I will be able to say that I voted for someone rather than against someone like I did in the last two elections. I believe that I could vote for Obama and know that I was voting for someone I respect and think could do a good job as President. I can't see myself doing that for any of the other Democratic candidates. I haven't really looked at the potential Republican candidates, but I am not hopefull about finding a similar candidate there this time around.

Posts: 1928 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by canadian:
Makes sense. I've done some things in life that I'd want cleared away before I tried to do something public and important. Why hide, and why let someone make political hay out of something you'd fully acknowledge anyway?

It just gets rid of some of the more disgusting aspects of mudslinging politics so the focus can return to the actual issues.

Imagine that.

Yeah, well in my book, it depends on what mud is being slung.

If the politician had "youthful indiscretions" of the Michael Jackson at Neverland variety, I don't care how long ago that was, I'd like to know about it before I cast my vote....

But Obama smoking dope and snorting blow when he was a teen? Whoopdeedoo.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LoverOfJoy
Member
Member # 157

 - posted      Profile for LoverOfJoy   Email LoverOfJoy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There's nothing particularly brilliant about it. It's simple public relations 101. He's not exactly new to politics. What's more amazing is how many politicians DON'T do what he did.
Posts: 3639 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dave at Work
Member
Member # 1906

 - posted      Profile for Dave at Work   Email Dave at Work   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I absolutely agree with you there LOJ.
Posts: 1928 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sharpshin
Member
Member # 3175

 - posted      Profile for sharpshin   Email sharpshin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LoverOfJoy:
What's more amazing is how many politicians DON'T do what he did.

Yep.
Posts: 318 | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"There's nothing particularly brilliant about it. It's simple public relations 101. He's not exactly new to politics. What's more amazing is how many politicians DON'T do what he did."

While defying conventional wisdom within your field certainly doesn't mean you are brilliant, it does mean you are able to examine commonly accepted "knowledge" to see whether it makes sense, or is even accurate.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LoverOfJoy:
There's nothing particularly brilliant about it. It's simple public relations 101. He's not exactly new to politics. What's more amazing is how many politicians DON'T do what he did.

They might try it now that they've seen how it works. Politics attracts a certain type of personality that might not be amenable to this kind of behavior, no matter how obvious it might seem to the saner part of the population.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sharpshin
Member
Member # 3175

 - posted      Profile for sharpshin   Email sharpshin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Obama may not really be anything new, or brilliant, but he has already succeeded in being perceived as something different. In this case it isn't so much the fact that he fessed up to his youthful indiscretions that counts, it's the unflappable way in which he did so. If he really and truly is not the type to blow his cool even when people are trying to sandbag him for using blow when he was a kid, I feel sorry for his opponents in both parties. Because he's gonna kick their butts into the middle of next week without having to kick their butts at all. They'll do it for him.

[ January 03, 2007, 06:55 PM: Message edited by: sharpshin ]

Posts: 318 | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Daruma28:
quote:
Originally posted by canadian:
Makes sense. I've done some things in life that I'd want cleared away before I tried to do something public and important. Why hide, and why let someone make political hay out of something you'd fully acknowledge anyway?

It just gets rid of some of the more disgusting aspects of mudslinging politics so the focus can return to the actual issues.

Imagine that.

Yeah, well in my book, it depends on what mud is being slung.

If the politician had "youthful indiscretions" of the Michael Jackson at Neverland variety, I don't care how long ago that was, I'd like to know about it before I cast my vote....

But Obama smoking dope and snorting blow when he was a teen? Whoopdeedoo.

I fail to see how that pertains to what I said.

?

Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You realize that most of us old timers on Ornery are unelectable simply by virtue of having so many opinions and ideas out on the web where the Carvilles of this world can take them out of context for a public with the attention span of a sound bite?

[ January 03, 2007, 07:28 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by canadian:
quote:
Originally posted by Daruma28:
quote:
Originally posted by canadian:
Makes sense. I've done some things in life that I'd want cleared away before I tried to do something public and important. Why hide, and why let someone make political hay out of something you'd fully acknowledge anyway?

It just gets rid of some of the more disgusting aspects of mudslinging politics so the focus can return to the actual issues.

Imagine that.

Yeah, well in my book, it depends on what mud is being slung.

If the politician had "youthful indiscretions" of the Michael Jackson at Neverland variety, I don't care how long ago that was, I'd like to know about it before I cast my vote....

But Obama smoking dope and snorting blow when he was a teen? Whoopdeedoo.

I fail to see how that pertains to what I said.

?

Sorry Canuck. I meant to take a part of your quote out of context and respond to it...

"It just gets rid of some of the more disgusting aspects of mudslinging politics so the focus can return to the actual issues."

I was trying to talk to the sentiment that some people often state, you know, the "I wish there were no more mudslinging in politics" rather than respond explicitly to your statement.

If it's youthful indescretions about normal sex, drugs or rock and roll, than I agree...but really bad Mud? I hope such bad character flaws for politicians would definitely come to light BEFORE people go to the polls.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete, you are unelectable simply because you are a mormon... [Wink]
Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete's not a moron!
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But he was once!

[Wink]

Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Once ? [Wink]

Hey, Pete?

You know the Pres isn't part of the Ammendment process, right? [Big Grin]

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The prez isn't part of the process, but negotiation's a big deal. Since we've got a democratic majority in the Senate, the only hope for the MFA to pass is with a prez that's willing to negotiate, trade favors to get it passed.

Even more importantly, a presidential candidate sets the agenda for the whole party that election. If a Democratic presidential candidate ran for president on an MFA platform, and had a Democratic party majority in the senate, he or she would have no fragging excuse for failing to pass it. The whole party would suffer in the next election if their own members were the ones that blocked it.

[ January 05, 2007, 12:22 AM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete?

The Democratic Party isn't going to take a Pro-MFA stance. Even if Romney gets to top the ticket.

The "radicals" who want to ban SSM, have written an Amendment that would kill off easily 1/3rd of Democrats at home, and make life less than easy for most of the other 2/3rds.

Republicans have promised to "overturn RoevWade" for how long? They aren't going to deliver on this one either, they just want the issue out there to drag their voters to the polls.

*This* ammendment, as worded, has no hope of ever passing, and no Democrat who supports it can even hope to win in the General.

I have to ask you, in all seriousness, whether it's more important to have a canidate that supports THIS exact ammendment, which cannot be reasonably expect to fufill any of your goals because it will not pass, or to have a candidate that is at least open to the possibility of discussing a comprimise that combines a Bill which ensures that Life Partnerships will be subject to the Full Faith and Credit clause with an Ammendment which exempts the States from being required to recognize SSMs?

I have a suggestion. You're an excellent writer, and intelligent and compasionate guy, and a Law Student. Why don't you draft at least an out line of YOUR ideal compromise and mail it to every Democratic Candidate?

Edited to add-

Ok, it's on the other thread, just found it.

[ January 05, 2007, 03:48 PM: Message edited by: Jesse ]

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Obama says he "tried cocaine" but using it for several years (from high school until in college) is more than just trying it. I'd call it using it. I don't so much care that he was young and stupid back in the day when he was young and stupid. I'm comfortable with him having been tempted and then cleaning up his life as far as drug abuse providing he really has quit using drugs. I'm not 100% certain he has, we know too little about him to be certain that he's been 100% drug free since college. One thing I do know about drug abusers is that they will lie to anyone to conceal it and can frequently get away with it for years. How long since his last drug test? Should he take one to prove he's "clean"?

I'm more concerned about what else he may have done. Drug use is seldom done in some kind of vacuum where the only illegal acts were snorting a few lines. Obama says, "maybe a little blow when you could afford it ...". Did he have to steal to get the money to afford it? Exactly how did he get the money? Ask yourself, what do other drug abusers do to get money?

A few years in the drug subculture, as Obama was, could have left some serious issues behind him ranging from the humiliating to the illegal. This period of his life should go under a microscope now to see if there are any events "of the Michael Jackson at Neverland" caliber that occurred in Obama's pursuit of his next fix.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jesse:
Pete?

The Democratic Party isn't going to take a Pro-MFA stance. Even if Romney gets to top the ticket.

The "radicals" who want to ban SSM, have written an Amendment that would kill off easily 1/3rd of Democrats at home, and make life less than easy for most of the other 2/3rds.

I don't need them to support *that* MFA. I'd be much happier if they'd write their own MFA, or used mine.

That's what I'm after, Jesse. I'm in the dominant plurality. Give us the chance, and we'll vote for ssus as well as protecting marriage.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Drug use is seldom done in some kind of vacuum where the only illegal acts were snorting a few lines.
I'd have to disagree there. Most the people that I've known who have used drugs, including my own brother, have managed to do so with their normal wages. Amongst the kids that are not already members of a high-crime demographic, it's only the most severely addicted junkie types that can't afford to keep up their habit on a legal income.

quote:
Ask yourself, what do other drug abusers do to get money?
My brother worked at a service station.

quote:
This period of his life should go under a microscope now to see if there are any events "of the Michael Jackson at Neverland" caliber that occurred in Obama's pursuit of his next fix.
I don't know about the *should* part, but I'm sure it will be under the microscope if he turns out to be a serious contender for the presidency.

By the reasoning that drug users will lie to cover up their actions, shouldn't EVERY candidate have this sort of scrutiny since denying the use of drugs is part of the drug user's M.O.?

Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Drug use is seldom done in some kind of vacuum where the only illegal acts were snorting a few lines."

You are wrong. Many people try drugs for the first time at a party where they did not even know that drugs would be there.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I appreciate that most drug abusers you've know have led relatively crime free lives but, you anecdotal evidence aside, there is a clear link between drug abuse abuse and crime. Maybe Obama could afford his habit, I don't know. Do you?

And every candidate today does undergo this type of scrutiny anyway, whether they deny it or not. However, Obama is not denying it instead he confirms his drug abuse. Given the correlation to crime and drug abuse, hasn't Obama earned a little more intense look than Bush or Clinton got? Actually, I'm not sure it gets any more intense than the look Bush got ...

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
"Drug use is seldom done in some kind of vacuum where the only illegal acts were snorting a few lines."

You are wrong. Many people try drugs for the first time at a party where they did not even know that drugs would be there.

And you're not responding to what I said. Obama didn't just try it at a party, he used it for years. He was in the drug subculture to some extent (how deeply we don't know) for several years, not just a few hours at a party one night. Equating one random night if experimentation with several years of deliberate abuse is misleading.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Pixiest
Member
Member # 869

 - posted      Profile for The Pixiest     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I strongly dislike Obama but I find his drug abuse irrelevant.

Just like I find it irrelevant in GWB, Clinton and Rush Limbaugh.

Posts: 385 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Given the correlation to crime and drug abuse, hasn't Obama earned a little more intense look than Bush or Clinton got?
He's earned because he's fessed up, while Bush and Clinton had earned less scrutiny because they were more circumspect?
Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ditto, Pixiest, thought I can't help but notice who of that bunch were honest about it, and who weren't (and who was forced to fess up after being outed by his dealer [Big Grin] ).

Hypothetically, why would drug use concern us in a potential president?

1. He could have turned his brain to mush, and be unable to perform his duties competantly

2. He could be the type of person who has a wanton disregard for societies rules.

And possibly other reasons. With Obama, the first is clearly not the case, he's sharp as a tack. The latter doesn't seem to be the case at all either, though I don't know him well enough to fully judge that. Am I missing anything?

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1