Barack Obama has an infantile mentality.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Ummmm, I tried my best to answer your question. Your either not paying attention or you don't care. But if you think it's ok for him to basically call all white people intollerant rednecks or racists thats fine, but I don't. And I most certainly take it as a negative attack against white people. So do you agree that the typical white person is intollerant of blacks like he was clearly implying? And yes ofcourse, without a doubt smoking is an indication of his intelligence because of what we now know about it, unless you think increasing your risk of cancer by 20x isn't foolish? I have now come to realize BO supporters are nutters with out a real grasp of reality, I first thought that we all must be taking crazy pills for a man of this caliber to be takin seriously but now I see it is just you people taking them crazy pills.

This video alone is enough to show that Obama has a naive and infantile mentality.

Seriously, does he really think that eliminating the U.S. nuclear deterrent would be wise? It's infantile to suggest that the U.S. could trust Russia to comply with a complete disarmament treaty, or that every other enemy of the U.S. will not pose ten times the threat if the U.S. totally disarms.

It is frightening that Obama has come as far as he has with these types of infantile positions:

Originally posted by jamie83
This video alone is enough to show that Obama has a naive and infantile mentality.

Seriously, does he really think that eliminating the U.S. nuclear deterrent would be wise? It's infantile to suggest that the U.S. could trust Russia to comply with a complete disarmament treaty, or that every other enemy of the U.S. will not pose ten times the threat if the U.S. totally disarms.

It is frightening that Obama has come as far as he has with these types of infantile positions:

F*ck our nuclear deterrant. We almost accidentally started WWIII several times during the cold war, and intentionally once. Do you really think that if we dropped our nukes, Russia would be all like, "NOW, COMRADES, WHILE THEIR DEFENSES ARE DOWN, FOR LENIN!!!!" There are still other countries in this world, a nuclear strike is NOT going to be tolerated. America needs to be a leader in something other than weapons. Sh!t's getting old.

reply to post by jamie83


I was actually impressed with that video. The military industrial complex has our government by the short hairs and is raking in Billions of dollars annually on large projects that fail miserably or go nowhere. We already have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world many times over and for the billions upon billions of dollars that our tax dollars pay to the military industrial complex I am not so impressed with our most recent military outing in Iraq. Heck yes reign in the deluge of tax dollars that these massive military contractors recieve each year. Yes, increase oversight. No bid contracts and outright stealing and fraud by military contractors has become the standard with our current administration. Just google around. By some estimates as much as 30% of our billions of tax dollars that have gone to military contractors during the Iraq war is either unaccounted for or went toward fraudlulant and non delivered services and supplies. It's a level of racketeering that makes the Mob look like a candy store operation. We need to be better at military execution and stop spending billions of dollars on useless military projects simply to line the pockets of billionaires and power brokers. Try to stop nuclear proliferation in the world....geez, you think these are infantile goals?

On a side note has anyone mentioned that McCain didn't stop smoking until he was 44? And that is if you belive him. He says he still has cravings and said there was situations where he would consider lighting up. How old is Obama? He has quit, yes recently, but at a much younger age then when McCain. It is a dumb issue to begin with. The whole discussion of smoking in light of what issues this country faces right now is infantile.

Ya'll want some Obama lies - read here .

One of my more favorite lies/pandering moments came when he claimed that the Kennedys and Selma were responsible for his being born. Only problem is that all that happened years and years AFTER he was born and therefore had nothing to do with his being procreated.

The one about his grandmother being a Christian, 'and always has been a christian' is a hoot as well. Especially considering she is one of 14 wives to his grandpappy (something christians do not do) and she says her muslim prayers every morning.

Just google Obama lies ... plenty to be had.

[edit on 5/30/2008 by FlyersFan]

reply to post by maybereal11


Ummm, that would have been in 1980 when McCain quit smoking, it wasn't untill the 80's when people really starting taking the risk serious and not untill the 90's when any of the companies first admit it. Again.....mooooooot! The point was it shows he's a moron and thats the truth, I'm sorry to you smokers but it's the truth. It's not infantile either, it shows a lot about him. But your right, it's not that important by it self, but we are examining these people inside and out and you want to take him for face value....pshhhh, thats pathetic.

Originally posted by '___'eviant

F*ck our nuclear deterrant. We almost accidentally started WWIII several times during the cold war, and intentionally once. Do you really think that if we dropped our nukes, Russia would be all like, "NOW, COMRADES, WHILE THEIR DEFENSES ARE DOWN, FOR LENIN!!!!"

If neither side had real plans to use the weapons why would we need arms talks to discuss eliminating them? We could unilaterally disarm the day after Obama gets elected. Why would he need to discuss a mutual disarmament with Russia?

Your position is as infantile as BO's, and is internally contradictory.

There are still other countries in this world, a nuclear strike is NOT going to be tolerated. America needs to be a leader in something other than weapons. Sh!t's getting old.

And exactly HOW would the theoretical nuclear strike NOT be tolerated? Would the U.N. pass a resolution condemning the attack?

And by mentioning that there are still other countries in the world, and that America needs to be a leader, you are clearly implying that not only should the U.S. eliminate all nuclear weapons, but that America should go first, and be the ONLY country to eliminate such weapons.

This is not just infantile thinking, it's pathetically infantile.

Originally posted by maybereal11
I was actually impressed with that video.

You might want to watch it again and pay closer attention.

I am not so impressed with our most recent military outing in Iraq.

So after not being impressed with the military outing in Iraq the solution is to cut back on the development of military technology. This makes no sense.

Try to stop nuclear proliferation in the world....geez, you think these are infantile goals?

This is why I said you should watch the video again. Obama's goal isn't to stop proliferation, it's to totally eliminate the entire U.S. nuclear arsenal based on reaching an agreement with Russia to do the same. This is either simply empty rhetoric to pander to an anti-war group, incredibly stupid, or very infantile thinking.

He has quit, yes recently, but at a much younger age then when McCain. It is a dumb issue to begin with. The whole discussion of smoking in light of what issues this country faces right now is infantile.

I don't think the smoking issue is infantile at all in terms of Obama's incessent rantings about "leadership" and how America has to lead the way, etc. It's a symbol of Obama's own failure to lead by example. Leading means to go first. It's hypocritical to tell others they need to stop polluting the environment when he can't even stop himself from polluting his immediate environment.

The image of Obama with the cigarette in his mouth simply exemplifies his do as I say, not as I do approach. Real leaders are congruent. They walk their talk.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


That is my opinion of the truth. Nobody knows what the truth is about anything, even the people closest to the subject or even the subject in question. The accuracy of our ability to know the truth depends on our perspective. My perspective about the truth of Obama's relationship with WRight has been clearly laid out, if you want to disagree with it, you should develop an accurate perspective of your own, which you have not done.

Wow, well looks like Obama will lose the conspiracy theory nutjob vote. ( and yes I can say that because even though I am on this site, I don't swallow every alien/ghost/illumanati conspiracy/) Let me guess most of you are Ron Paul supporters. Before you talk about Obama look at Paul more closely and you will find a lot more flaws ( racist newsletter, nafta highway). Whats infantile about Obama. Majority of quotes are jokes he made, how does making jokes make you infantile. In regards to his smoking he has quit and I mean really come on, the man has flaws we all do. He is not winning because of white guilt. He is winning because hes a newcomer to washington and people of tired of the mass corruption in washington and want an outsider to bring new ideas to our government. I heard all of these things about Obama before and trust me in november theres going to be about 55 million people who will disagree with all of you.

Originally posted by obamafan14
He is not winning because of white guilt. He is winning because hes a newcomer to washington and people of tired of the mass corruption in washington and want an outsider to bring new ideas to our government. I heard all of these things about Obama before and trust me in november theres going to be about 55 million people who will disagree with all of you.

All you need to do is change the name Obama to Bush and change the year to 2000 and everything you said still applies.

By the way, here's a thread I started to find out which specific policy issues swayed Obama supporters to vote for Obama over Hillary. Feel free to contribute your input:

Why You Support Obama

[edit on 30-5-2008 by jamie83]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I have given up trying to explain why Wright and Obama are not racist - Many people on ATS cannot hear about the Black experience in the U.S. without attacking the speaker and it seems no amount of historical evidence, personal experience and such like will convince them...but good luck

Originally posted by obamafan14
Wow, well looks like Obama will lose the conspiracy theory nutjob vote.

Wow, well looks like Obama will get at least one glassey-eyed obamatron vote in November.

He is winning because hes a newcomer to washington and people of tired of the mass corruption in washington and want an outsider to bring new ideas to our government.

Anyone who wants that should definately NOT vote for Obama. He lies. He's corrupt. He's racist. He is sexist. Oh ... did I mention he lies?

There are only two reasons why anyone would vote for the guy -
1 - The voter is casting a vote based upon race - not ability.
2 - The voter has been BAMBOOZLED and has no clue about all the lies and corruption that come along with Obamas inexperience.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
There are only two reasons why anyone would vote for the guy -
1 - The voter is casting a vote based upon race - not ability.
2 - The voter has been BAMBOOZLED and has no clue about all the lies and corruption that come along with Obamas inexperience.

Or all of the above.

And don't forget, he makes people feel good when they listen to his soaring rhetoric. This is really troublesome, but the prospect of Obama being POTUS makes me long for the days when it was thought Clinton was inevitable.

reply to post by jamie83


While I think we could pull back defense spending, the idea that we can put the nuclear genie back in the bottle is naive idealism. In addition, there is absolutely no reason why we should scale back military weapons research. Guess what, the more advanced weapons we have, the less likely our enemies are to attack us in any ways or means, and the more of our soldiers lives are kept from harm. In addition, most military research usually winds up advancing technology in the commercial world, and more than pays our nation back by creating whole new markets, like say, the internet.

Obama makes these grand claims like he is running for emperor. The way Obama tries to come off as going to be the man who changes everything, the less he looks like he is capable of doing the job. I think the growing number of people who keep pointing out how much Obama is like GW have it right. Obama seems like the same naive inexperienced leader who, like GW, will be willing to do anything to get things his way, or in other words, he is another fanatic.

reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation


Your single minded tunneling of the debate won't fly with SteveR! There are balls you haven't hit yet.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
In 4 out of 5 of these, he wasn't lying. They're just twisted to make it look like he was. I don't know if you know, but that's a big difference.

Whoa! First you say Obama never lied and you want to see the proof. Second you accept a lie occured and start defending and excusing it. Absolutely pathetic.

One lie you forgot to include Jamie:

Mr. Obama scolded Exelon and federal regulators for inaction and introduced a bill to require all plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail, telling a crowd in Iowa in December that it was "the only nuclear legislation that I've passed." "I just did that last year," he said to murmurs of approval.

The bill in question, did NOT pass. So, either Barack was high again.. or he point blank lied about his acheivements.

source

Interesting video about the nuclear technology. He seeks a global ban on the production of fissile material? He doesn't even understand what that means. No more nuclear power!

Moron.

Originally posted by drwizardphd
I don't see how any of those quotes, or any of his wife's quotes, or any pictures of him talking on the phone or smoking a cigarette would lead one to beleive that Barack Obama has an "infantile mentality".

It's almost as if you have nothing to attack him on, so you attack him on things that no one would ever attack anyone on.

What I mean to say is, looking at those quotes, there's nothing there! Nothing that would be even remotely close to a character defaming slip-up. You can poke around and find funny out-of-context quotes from any politician.

Stop taking shots in the dark, and challenge the man on the issues and not some dumb quotes.

You are right. He doesn't have an "infantile mentality". But he is lacking in maturity and only appears to think from a socialist mindset.

Doesn't anyone get it?
Obama is a political tool groomed for this job by his directors/supporters and their political agendas; he is well trained monkey (not a racial reference) working for his feed. Go read where his money cames from. Nope, I can not vote for him.
Poor Hillary is a long time student of personal self entitlement with much more experience at deception than Obama. This woman was proven to actually get away with a crime which should have landed her in prison along with her ridiculous husband. She too is a tool, she also is a monkey or maybe a shark who is also working for her feed. Hey, how about that Chinese connection? And, nope, I can not vote for her.
Cheney, no way! I am a republican, or was. This deciever cheated his comrades at arms during his luxury stay in Hanoi during the Vietnam ridiculum. He allowed his father's political clout to afford him friendly treatment as a POW. Yes, he was beaten badly after he crashed his 5th airplane and taken as a prisoner. He is clearly a traitor; go to the library and look around on the internet and you will agree. He let folks like my father, and the rest of the real men and women in 'Nam who served loyally and with honor, down. Do your research and you will agree that he is not a person that is electable as well.
So who do we vote for? OK, you go vote for Obama based on "the issues". And you go vote for a loud and semi-criminal "experienced" woman who has a chip on her shoulder the size of Texas, no really, go ahead. And those of you who vote for the traitor and have not done the research, well, then shame on you.
Hmmm!

I like him more than Clinton or McCain, but like all contemporary politicians, he's definitely one of those charming actor/entertainer types who is very good at acting intelligent and competent at key moments for a key demographic.

His demographic is very different from that of Bush Jr's though, so this time it's mostly Republicans saying "What the hell? He just doesn't seem that bright!", while the Dems are lapping it up. I remember when the shoe was on the other foot, and Bush won two elections. I'm not taking sides. The whole thing is a very sad phenomenon.