It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Palin says she couldn’t get away with crying like Boehner

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Are you suggesting that Obama isn't an idiot? Just curious.




posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Are you suggesting that Obama isn't an idiot? Just curious.


Even the most breathless anti-liberal hate monkey will not call Obama an idiot in any serious tone...the guy is exceptionally smart.

Actually, some would say far too smart and this causes intellectual stagnation considering he spends more time considering than showing strength in what he stands for.

Ron Paul: Smart (I don't agree with him)
Rove: Smart (the guy needs to be shot)
Palin: Dimwit
Biden: smart but with senility tendencies and cronic foot in mouth disease
Gingrech: Crafty and mediocre
Pelosi: Smart
Chris Matthews: Dimwit
Hannity: knuckle dragging twit
Beck: Smart in his paranoia and lies
Olberman: brilliant and annoying
Oreilly: Smartish and very brute
Bush: lol
Clinton:somewhat smart. (jedi wisdom)
Huckabee: Smart (and boring)
etc...
and finally:
Obama: Highly intelligent.

etc.

Your acceptance of his policys has little to do with if a person is intelligent or not.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


Well.. I wasn't suggesting anything except that anyone can luck into what Palin has (she lucked into the Vice Prez bid, just like reality t.v. stars luck into their gigs)

But if you need an answer yes Obama is likely a very intelligent person.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Debatable....to say the least. He claimed:





Sen. Obama, who has taught courses in constitutional law at the University of Chicago, has regularly referred to himself as "a constitutional law professor," most famously at a March 30, 2007, fundraiser when he said, "I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution."




For someone who has done anything he can against the constitution, though he claims to be Constitutional law professor, sounds a little idiotic to me?



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


That might make him a liar, still doesn't make him stupid.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
For someone who has done anything he can against the constitution, though he claims to be Constitutional law professor, sounds a little idiotic to me?


Only according to right wing propaganda that relies on ignorance of the constitution and the amendments of course.

the right wing enjoys the worldview that anything past the 17th amendment simply never happened...and that the bits they don't like in the constitution doesn't exist.

Now, I will admit that the progressives do take lots of liberties with interpretation, but there are some pretty good articles out there by constitutional professions that have crawled through and concluded that nothing actually breaks the constitution/amendments overall. Bends to be sure...but nothing fully against it.

The patriot act I think is the closest snapping point, however, since we are in a state of (eternal?) war, there are a bunch of provisions that allow for such measures.

There are criminal acts of course that should be prosecuted...but the criminal acts are not actually legislation...its just crooks being crooks (thanks Bush/Cheney)



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Sarah Palin is one more example of the insane having taken over the assylum. She is very devious and cunning and slippery and hateful, and very, very ambitious - but quite mad, imo.
edit on 17-12-2010 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Are you honestly trying to suggest that the Current Administration hasn't exceeded the limits per Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution? Your kidding right?



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Debatable....to say the least. He claimed:





Sen. Obama, who has taught courses in constitutional law at the University of Chicago, has regularly referred to himself as "a constitutional law professor," most famously at a March 30, 2007, fundraiser when he said, "I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution."




For someone who has done anything he can against the constitution, though he claims to be Constitutional law professor, sounds a little idiotic to me?


I've read that he has 'embroidered' the details of his past positions, and that he wasn't a constitutional law professor but something far less impressive.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Correct:

A spokesman for the Republican National Committee immediately took exception to Obama’s remarks, pointing out that Obama’s title at the University of Chicago was "senior lecturer" and not "professor."



But the mere suggestion out of his mouth to the contrary is what I find laughable!


That's like saying Bill Clinton was honest!



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Correct:

A spokesman for the Republican National Committee immediately took exception to Obama’s remarks, pointing out that Obama’s title at the University of Chicago was "senior lecturer" and not "professor."



But the mere suggestion out of his mouth to the contrary is what I find laughable!


That's like saying Bill Clinton was honest!


I think even 'senior lecturer' is putting a gloss on it!



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Are you honestly trying to suggest that the Current Administration hasn't exceeded the limits per Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution? Your kidding right?


I am suggesting that, yes...along with several judges so far

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States and with the Indian Tribes;



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Ok then we agree then. I was beginning to think you were " patting " the Current Admin on the back? Cleared up thanks~



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Ok then we agree then. I was beginning to think you were " patting " the Current Admin on the back? Cleared up thanks~


Actually, your question I answered had some funky wording. let me clarify.

The administration has not overstepped their boundries in a technical sense. They have regulated commerce via the insurance agencies.
The point of contention is the required health care purchasing or be fined...however, the way it is worded is that it is not a fine, rather, they will not get a credit if they choose to not purchase health care...which in laymens terms means a fine, but technically it is not.

they could do this for almost anything if they want...aka, we are raising taxes for everyone, but will give a big tax credit should you purchase a automobile, etc. This is constitutional...it may not be ethical, but thats a different matter. Just being a bookworm about it.

As far as patting him on the back for it. I have some opinions on the matter that are pretty neutral as to how it turned out. I preferred a public option, which is far more gray than this point.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 05:19 PM
link   
I wonder what would happen if Boehner, Glen Beck and Dick Vermeil all got together and watched Steel Magnolias?



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:02 AM
link   
Sarah Palin plays the feminist when it suits her and then also pretends to be a "traditional" wife and mother when that is politically advisable. She is easily offended by any personal attacks on her and so any enemy is either anti-woman or a dangerous leftist or both.

You have to give it to her for versatility. She has achieved a sort of "super woman" persona which is a hard role for any flesh and blood woman to portray. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, doesn't even try to fill both roles and is content to be a feminist. She is a real one. Clinton is far superior to Palin in brains, accomplishment, experience and strategy.

Palin is a good actor, and it's true that Reagan was also a good actor, and both were/are successful in creating a role for themselves, but acting ability is not enough to make a great leader.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by spinalremain
I wonder what would happen if Boehner, Glen Beck and Dick Vermeil all got together and watched Steel Magnolias?


ROFLMAO. Let me know if that happens, I'd buy stock in Kleenex.

Very funny, thanks!



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Sestias
 


It is concise, erudite wisdom like your assessment that keeps me coming back to ATS.



Thanks!



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join