- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 51,719
- Reaction score
- 35,498
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Pffft. You're so loopy on the matter, it would be utterly pointless to try to have a rational discussion with you.
But, please do carry on. :spin: :rofl :2wave:
RightinNYC is a lawyer? Is there a projectile vomit smiley?
j/k.
sort of.
He is pretty OK for a lawyer though. Admittedly, that is probably damning him with faint praise, but hey.
I mostly agree with your assessment, except the part about being highly intelligent. If he were highly intelligent, his understanding of economics would be better than a teenage stoner in a Che Guevarra T-shirt. Unfortunately it's not.
If Obama were not intelligent, then how did he not only get a law degree from Harvard, but become editor of the Harvard Law Review as well? There is plenty to bash Obama on, but when I see posts like this, then I have to recognize that it is only hate fueling the argument of that post, not critical thinking.
What Obama said: "I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests or, worse, by foreign entities. "
That is an outright lie, that the constitutional scholar Obama should konw. Corporations can not "bank roll" elections for individuals. The ruling over turned a facet of the law prohibiting corporations from running advertisements with money from their general funds rather than from a PAC. What is DOESN'T overturn is a different part of the law that keeps corporations from directly financing a campaign.
America's "most powerful interests" can not "bank roll" any election, not based simply on this ruling. Its ludicrous and flat out misrepresentation that I can not fathom such a "Incredibly intelligent" constitutional laywer like Obama did not realize.
Affirmative action?If Obama were not intelligent, then how did he not only get a law degree from Harvard, but become editor of the Harvard Law Review as well?
Yet, just one more example the President is in fact a contemporary Progressive, aka Left-wing. Certainly not a mere liberal.Justice Alito mouths 'not true' - POLITICO Live - POLITICO.com
Obama yacks about bipartisanship and then hurls a beanball at the Supreme Court. He speaks out of every side of every orifice this twit.
But... if you want the Democrats to go asunder like a balsa wood boat in a hurricane... he's doing it... for this speech, except for its incessantly nagging tone, will be forgotten, as his hundred plus other appearances in the past year.
The speech will be remembered... for its grating nature.
Can't wait for November; he just screwed a whole lot of Democrats.
.
If Obama were not intelligent, then how did he not only get a law degree from Harvard, but become editor of the Harvard Law Review as well? There is plenty to bash Obama on, but when I see posts like this, then I have to recognize that it is only hate fueling the argument of that post, not critical thinking.
:funny:2funny:Here...is the State of the Union Address, you don't take swipes at the Court in front of you. Your not knowing this doesn't excuse Obama's clownish antics.
Obama is an inexperienced mental midget.
Indeed, the legal experts we spoke to after Obama's radio address said that the president was overstating the immediate impact of the opinion. They said Obama was correct that the ruling could open the door to foreign companies spending on American campaigns, given the general direction of the majority's opinion. But because the majority justices didn't actually strike down the existing barriers on foreign companies -- in fact, they explicitly wrote that it fell beyond the boundaries of their decision -- our experts agreed that Obama erred by suggesting that the issue is settled law. Until test cases proceed and further rulings are handed down, Obama's claim about foreign campaign spending is a reasonable interpretation, and nothing more.
Affirmative action?
And there was no "debate" going on. There was a person in the audiance commenting privately to another person and it got picked up on a TV camera. Your statement about it not being a debate forum makes it seem that Alito jumped forward to counter the President. He didn't. The President of the United States just used the SOTU address to take a pot shot at the Supreme Court by using a lie, and amazed as this breech of decorum and class he made a comment to someone. Yet somehow Alito is the only one worthy of scorn.
That's hardly "classless" in my book. Perhaps a break of decorum? Maybe.
But no more so than Obama's break in Decorum by lying about the ramifications of a surpreme court decision and attacking said decision in the SOTU addressed, which has not been done in over 3 decades apparently.
I don't think it's a non-event. If the president thinks it's OK to try to influence the Supreme Court through embarassment and intimidation on national television, then that's a pretty good reason why he shouldn't be president anymore.
But then, I already knew he shouldn't be president anymore, so maybe in that sense it is a non-event.
Hopefully it changes some other people's minds though.
I don't know why you're so up in arms about my opinion. While what Obama did was not common, I don't think saying he disagrees with a Supreme Court decision is rude. Is it rude if Obama is sitting in the Supeme Court and a Justice reads the ruling on a decision that finds a law Obama passed unconstitutional? It would be one thing if he insulted a particular Justice or Justices. While he misrepresented the ruling, I don't believe it was intentional.
You're kidding right. You continue to slam him for being "classless" while continuing to ignore that Obama broke decorum and ettiquite as well, doing something that hasn't been done since Ford so you're talking, what, at least 32 SOTU's? And on top of that the swipe he took that broke decorum was arguably a lie.
But you have NO negative words for Obama, NO words speaking of his behavior, his "classlessness".
But you have an issue with a person sitting in the audiance talking to someone during a speech privately that happened to be caught on camera speaking his displeasure?
You've never attended an event that you've commented on the speech quietly, privately, to a person you're attending it with before?
If this was like the recent one and he jumped up and said "You Lie!" I'd agree with you, just as I agreed then. But he didn't, he didn't make a big spectacle, he made a small private comment that got caught on camera.
Yet he's classless and worthy of all codemnation while you completely ignore Obama.
With all that said, Alito has to be aware of the world we live in now a days. If you want to comment lean over to the person and cover your mouth because we live in the digital age and every movement of the eyes, lips, or hands is going to be disected in a thing like this.
It is difficult to understand the level of anger against Alito here.
Alito is and always has been a Bush flunky. He is a robed politician who should never have been appointed to the SCOTUS.
Doesn't explain the top 10% grades
I find interesting how conservatives will attack Obama for sneezing and call it "disgraceful" or "uncontionable"; however, those same people never say a negative word about the dispiciable actions of their own.
But was he at the BOTTOM of that top 10%? Please don't answer that. I am on a fishing expedition. :mrgreen:
I blame two things:I find it extremely disappointing that half the country lacks the basic common sense to realize that taking money from profitable businesses and giving it to failing businesses on net is not going to "create" jobs.
I'm not that impressed with a Harvard resume to be honest, what was once a very respectable school has become nothing more than a grandiose groupthink session.If Obama were not intelligent, then how did he not only get a law degree from Harvard, but become editor of the Harvard Law Review as well? There is plenty to bash Obama on, but when I see posts like this, then I have to recognize that it is only hate fueling the argument of that post, not critical thinking.
I find it odd that most of the times you only post when it suits your political agenda and who you want to hit at a specific time...
Specifically because you target conservatives when frankly BOTH sides have routinely attacked the other for doing something miniscule but will say next to nothing, or immedietely excuse, the actions of their owns.
This is not a right or left issue, its just a people issue. People typically when segregated into "teams", "groups", or any sort of collection will have a number who fall into group think and will seek to defend "Theirs" and attack "others".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?