Porker, to be honest, most people who can afford to go to the Olympics are from visa-waiver countries, and for those who aren't, again, if they can afford it, they can most likely get a visa.

"I suspect 3-4 years ago, LAGuy himself would have casually contemplated assassinating Bush if only he had the means and thought he could get away with it. ;-)"

Obviously, someone here has forgotten about that guy who shoots old men in the face.

Explorer,

Cheney said it was an accident. That's his story and he's sticking to it.

During the last couple of years of the Bush administration, I resisted the urge to sell "Nancy Pelosi for President, by all Means Necessary," bumper stickers, thereby foregoing my best chance to become filthy rich.

I wish the current crop of right-wingers would show similar restraint.

To compensate though, I am now considering selling posters that say "Get a Prenup, or Else You May End up a Political Idiot Like Him" (with a scuzzy picture of IAS under the slogan).

[As some of you may recall, IAS became a Republican to avenge his wife's big divorce settlement, which he blamed on the Democrats--at least that is what I remember. On a similar note, I suspect Beachman, with the same level of justification, blames the Democrats for the fact his family tree is infested with retards].

Actually I blame everything I don't like on Democrats.

---

quote:

Cheney said it was an accident. That's his story and he's sticking to it.

---

Cheney threatened to shoot him AGAIN if he didn't apologize...

To me, what smells like is happening is that we are being set up for civil war, or some grand divide and conquer project, most likely set up by corporate conglomerates that control all politics anyway.

The extremes in points of view; the polarizations of our culture are now hyper-emphazised by these media clowns. FOX with their conservative BS and CNN with liberal nonsense. The conservative party now encompasses the Republician agenda, and in the days of Barry Goldwater good Republicians could always be trusted to protet constitutional liberties; but not anymore.

This is what I believe is going on anyway. Corporate takeover of the planet by the ultra wealthy and powerful few. They need to totally squash our US constitution and all our liberties, and the best way to do that is to get us all fighting amongst ourselves, killing each other and constantly arguing, so that we forget we even have a constitution which binds us all as sovereign Americans............a concept long forgotten here.

If you do not know your rights, you do not have any.

If you do not understand the basic premises of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, you can not possibly hold on to it as a society

It seems like we are pretty fucked as a nation. Very depressing, as growing up I really believed in the American dream and loved this country.

Elim

---

quote:

To me, what smells like is happening is that we are being set up for civil war, or some grand divide and conquer project, most likely set up by corporate conglomerates that control all politics anyway.

---

"but most of all... I wanna get laid."

So, first, let's kill this turd of a thread.

Then let's get out there and do what Beachman hasn't done in at least 5 years--get laid and post a report with some pics.

Obama has just one the Nobel Peace Prize is he still just Famous for being Famous ?

I'd say that is just about as famous for being famous as anyone could possibly be.

I think GWB deserves an "assist" on this honor to Obama. After all, if Bush had not utterly destroyed the US's reputation among the members of the larger community of nations, an act as simple as rejoining those nations in respectful dialogue would not have been perceived as such a noteworthy accomplishment. More than anything, this is a statement on how bad Bush was. Props to Obama and team for beginning to undue the damage. Unfortunately, undoing the damage done to the economy is proving tougher.

Can't wait to watch the Faux News coverage this evening.

BTW, a week without Beachman. It's been pleasant. With other CH members I'd speculate that their silence was due to their being off getting laid by exotic women in exotic lands. We know that's not the case here.

I hear that Bush is furious. He'd believed all along that it was the Nobel War Prize, and was certain he'd done everything possible to win it. He says Dick Cheney told him all about the War Prize.

Wasn't Clinton (B.) rumored to have been actively campaigning hard behind the scenes for a Nobel Peace prize in '98 or so? I'll bet he's the one who really flipped out.

Glen Beck has already gone out and stated that Obama does not deserve the peace prize but the tea party protesters do.

In my view, the only reason why Obama won the prize is his because he is black.

Unfortunately I don't have the time I use to have to read the comedy that is the praise of Obama. This thread happened to quickly catch my eye so I will comment that
Obama plain and simple
does not deserve the coveted Nobel Peace prize given for real peace action not perceived peace.
Obama also has done little to fulfill promises made to the fools who believed his impossible lies and has done even less to deserve the Nobel Peace prize.
Obama winning the Nobel Peace prize is just tragic and another sign of how the world just continues to spiral downward in mediocrity.

Bluestraveller:

Have you become so careless that you post without using your alter-ego name "Beachman"? Shame on you Beachman, uhhhhh, I mean Bluestraveller.

And by the way, if you are correct Beachman, I mean Bluestraveller, that Obama only won the Nobel Peace Prize because he is black, how do you explain that Amos n' Andy didn't win the Nobel Peace Prize?

Gotcha, didn't I? It feels oh so good!!

No Beachman, but fortunately one of our former TJ mongers, our in-house Opus Dei monger, has chimed in on the "comedy". Thanks for filling in for Beachman!

Cat
Apparently I am not the only one that considers Obama's Nobel Peace Prize comedy
http://tv.yahoo.com/saturday-night-live/show/194/news/tv.tvguide.com/latenight-comedians-turning-obama-20091011

No, but your first post on ClubHombre in forever is a political one, you're on the same path as Beachman there.

You guys with your noses (and most other body parts) up Obama's ass just don't get it. He was elected for one very simple reason. He was not Bush. Bush set the bar so low on Foreign Policy who couldn't improve on it. Right direction? You bet. Nobel Prize? Get real.

Obama is not a great leader, he is not a great intellect, he, as lampooned in the recent SNL skit, has accomplished NOTHING. Like several posters here, he is all talk. Even the media is finally catching on.

Maybe if Oprah doesn't hand pick the next President like she is picking the book of the month or fitness or psycho-babble guru, we might get someone worthwhile. However, I won't be holding my breath.

"Obama . . . is not a great intellect."

I guess frivolous statements such the above is the result of our constitutional right to "freedom of typing."

So Mr. Exec give us a list of the 20th or 21st Century President with an intellect superior to Obama's.

My list is Woodrow Wilson before his stroke.

(Message edited by laguy on October 13, 2009)

I meant 20th or 21st Presidents, not President. However, I only came up with one.

From numerous sites on the internet some seem credible.......

George W. Bush's SAT score of 1206 has been widely reported. The SAT score (if taken prior to 1995) can be used to estimate IQ, to compare to the general population, and to compare to occupational averages and popular figures in history. Using such estimates, President Bush's IQ is between 125 and 130 which ranks him as more intelligent than over 95% of the population, more intelligent than most college professors and medical doctors, and similar to Abraham Lincoln, Rousseau and Thackeray (comparative IQs of 128).

I dont believe Obama has released any of his numbers. So its a guessing game whether he is exceptionally bright or just an incredible reader of a teleprompter. That being said graduating magna cum laude at Harvard suggests pretty good grades unless he took basket weaving.

Obama is clearly charismatic but I am shocked by how the left and joe public view him as a super man when his achievements prior to the presidential election are underwhelming. There are perhaps a dozen people in the world that can run the world (an impossible job). I do not believe Obama or George Bush are within that dozen.

For the record i am center right and the above was taken from the internet and i can not verify. Lefts feel free to attack that point.

I only post today because i see many picking on the few.. its like the playground

I miss Carioca's..

Out of curiosity Luckybiegs, give us your list of the 12 or so people who are qualified to lead the world. Hopefully, we will see it soon, along with Exectalent's list of 20th and 21st century Presidents with superior intellects.

But moving to the substance of your post they don't have a course on basket weaving at Harvard Law School. LOL. For more about the school, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Law_School, which includes statistics on the qualifications of its current students (I doubt such statistics have changed much since Obama graduated); note although one might speculate (without knowing) about the possibility that Obama's qualifications on entering HLS were lower than the average owing to affirmative action, the stats included in that article describe the students Obama competed against in order to achieve magna cum laude. For further reference, if ones LSAT score is 172 (which appears to be about the median for Harvard Law School students), you are in the top one percent of LSAT takers, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSAT; and LSAT takers are students set to graduate from college or university, a more select group than SAT takers.

The point being that Obama competed extremely well against a group of (on average) intellectual heavy weights, not only by graduating magna cum laude, but also by becoming President of the highly prestigious Harvard Law Review. He also later became a senior lecturer on constitutional law (and was offered a tenure-track position which he chose to decline) at the University of Chicago Law School, one of the most prestigious (and therefore difficult to get a teaching position at) in the country.

To the extent one wishes to base a judgment about his intellect on some concrete measures, he fares well. It also would behoove someone who wishes to evaluate Obama's intellect to read his two books, which make for first-class reading.

OTOH, if one wishes instead to base a judgment about Obama's intellect on how much smoke someone can blow out his ass, Exectalent's comments would be an appropriate reference point.

(Message edited by laguy on October 14, 2009)

LA,

The list would have numerous CH members

The presidency is an impossible job and there are probably only a dozen people in the world with the experience, political know-how and intellect to do it well. Most will "fake it till they make it". Most are judged by whether the economy and job grwth did well on their watch which in the past had more to do with the predecessors policies (things move so much faster today than even a decade ago). Frankly i prefer a business man who at least knows how to run an intl company and profitably. One who has integrity and compassion for those who are less fortunate. Someone who is already wealthy who will not play to special interests who funded his campaign and and is not in this to sell books and enrich themselves on the speaking circuit thereafter. That probably gets us down to 12.

I think Obama is clearly a very bright man. I wont speculate about his SAT scores, or IQ or LSAT scores because only he and the keepers of those documents know. Saying he is smarter than George Bush appears likely on paper but might not be true.
I'd like Obama to stop campaigning for 2012 and focus on getting this country back on the right path. I miss Carioca's.

LB

So, are the Birthers now morphing into SATGate? Do you guys want copies of his 4th grade report card? What place he finished in his 9th grade science fair?

I simply love people who quote Wikipedia as some kind of definitive reference. You do know that anyone can edit the entries, right?

I also know the relevant facts in the Wikipedia article independently (to an approximation), but they are all presented in the Wikipedia articles I cited so I don't think there is anything wrong with citing to them.

I suppose you also know that just because something is in Wikipedia does not automatically mean it is false.

If you believe the facts I cited are wrong, tell me which ones and provide the evidence.

(Message edited by laguy on October 14, 2009)

I have heard that Psychology Researchers have generally found that when a person is presented with incontrovertible proof that a "core belief" which backups a "core value" is not true, the fervor in which the belief is held only increases with the believer engaging in increasingly erratic defense of the "core belief". The strength of this reaction seems to have an inverse correlation with the measured intelligence of the believer.

Obama haters, therefore, must be dumb as dirt.

Hate. Who said anything about hating Obama? That is as absurd as saying because you do not think Obama was a good choice for president that you must be a Bush lover or that you are a racist. Ask the resident shyster, that would be assuming facts not in evidence.

Some of us have had the good fortune of knowing real world-class intellects and inspiring leaders. Obama is neither. There are guys in the world who talk. And, there are guys in the world who get it done. Obama is a talker. A good one based upon how many people were and are gullible enough to believe he might be a doer.

While it was ludicrous for the Nobel Committee to award Obama the Peace Prize based upon his accomplishments, I understand totally why they did it. Dale Carnegie felt that to win people to your way of thinking you should throw down a challenge. What better way to call a bullshitter on his bullshit (especially when that bullshitter is in the position of President of the US) than to effectively say – you say all these wonderful things, now let’s see you do some of them.

Hate Obama. No. Think he is full of shit. Oh yeah.

Exectalent

Was Obama the best choice for President out of over 300 million Americans? undoubtedly no.

Was he the best choice out of the contestants put forward by the major political parties? Possibly.

Was he the best choice then it came down to the vote. Sadly yes.

I am a firm believer that anyone who wants the to be President of the United States should be excluded from any chance of getting the Job. I also feel very strongly that there are too many lawyers in government and far too few farmers, plummers and waitresses and that goes not just for the USA.

Mester EX
You take my post very seriously.
Thank you.
All of my life, I've soooo wanted to be taken seriously, but NO
I am now fulfilled.

Let us see.....unemployment over 10%, a terrorist killing soldiers on a American military base, trying self confessed terrorists in Federal Court in New York, Obama bowing to the Emperor of Japan and blowing off human rights talks in China. The IRS wanting money back from 15 million tax payers who got "stimulus money.


GM saying they a going to start paying back money borrowed when they loss 1.4 billion. The post office lost another 3.5 billion dollars. There is so much more..................

No wonder the Democrats lost both Virginia and New Jersey.....

Does any one really believe Obama knows what he is doing??????????????

It's been a year.

Obama's accomplishments so far include socializing banking, socializing the auto industry and a (hopefully) failed attempt at socializing health care.

The result of his agenda? Losing the Mass senate seat held by Kennedy to a new Republican.

I've always maintained that Obama is not a Democrat, he's a Marxist socialist, and his agenda this year proves the point far more than my words ever could.

Now is the time for all who supported Obama to come forward and defend their comrade. Let's hear it. Come forward and gush over what a great liberal he is!

DG: What about forcing people to purchase insurance from private insurance companies constitutes "socializing health care." Do you also call the requirement that people buy car insurance "socialism"?

And have you forgotten that the banks and auto industry were just about toast when Obama took over? I'd rather have the government loan them money and take a temporary stake in them than to have them all go bankrupt thereby forcing a nationwide depression.

But if it makes you and your kind happy, just keep using terms that these days have lost all meaning except as vacuous vitriol. Socialist this, socialist that. Total crap the use of which only illustrates a lack of any substance.

Dongringo....

Don't even waste your time with the Kool-Aid drinkers they will all go down with Obama before they will admit they were wrong!


The auto industry and the banks are still "toast" only they are just being "buttered" by taxpayers money decades into the future.

Deeg,

I love you, bro, but you've fucked up by restarting this thread and bringing BM out from under the rock that fell on him, He'd only posted once since 10/2, so many of us had our hopes up...

BD

Hmmm...Let's assume one of the goal's of the President is to win a second term.

Option A) Govt spends tons to bailout and keep the ecomomy from potentially crashing FAST

Option B) Letting AIG, all those banks, GM and Chrysler file bankruptcy..stock market crashes...lots of people (more than option A) lose their jobs.

Both options are crappy, but I'm pretty sure the President is guaranteed to fail to win a second term if option B were pursued. He has some chance (however slim if things keep going they way they are) of a second term with option A.

Wish there was a window to peak into the US Bizarro world if Option B was taken...Could there have been any chance things would be better than they are now?

(Message edited by solid808 on January 27, 2010)

"One of the goals" ?? What else is there?

Option B would have almost certainly meant a disaster, another great depression.

In fact, option b is how the great depression all started when the goverment refused to bail-out the big banks in trouble and luckily for us those who understood and knew history made the right chose.

Thirty years ago when Chrylser was going under after Carter let interest rates soar, Regan didn't 'bail out' anyone - the Fed lent money to Chrysler with no strings attached.

Now GM is on the skids and Ford isn't. GM's cars are substandard and the company run very inefficiently. Guess what. Let GM fail.

Some banks are on the rocks for writing bad mortgages while others are still solvent. Guess what. Let them fail and use the FDIC as it was intended.

Obama has the entire financial world ready to give up on the financial solvency of the US dollar. I will be amazed if the dollar survives the next three years of his presidency, assuming that Obama even wants it to survive. The best way for him to bring in sweeping socialistic reforms will be to allow US capitalism to collapse.

Who would have thought DG would go completely over the deep end? Does he even realize that the near-financial collapse that occurred under Bush's watch makes the situation with the Chrysler bailout seem like peanuts in comparison to what Obama faced when he took office?

I REALLY hate to say this, but given that Obama's policies have been exceedingly moderate to say the least (although it is true he had to deal with the greatest threat to our economic wellbeing since the great depression, namely the near-meltdown of our financial system brought about by Bush economics), is there any reason to call him a Socialist other than the fact he is black and has a foreign sounding name? I have tried to find some other explanation for the socialist namecalling that has been coming from the far right, but I just can't.

DG...if it were only those extreme risk taking corporations that failed without a ripple effect against companies that managed prudently, I would definitely agree to let them fail. Like the GM example, a complete infrastructure of other companies just in the supplier network alone would fail, too. And here we are today, the origin of why Big Goverment is trying to avoid companies from being "too big to fail" and at the same time sending a very anti capitalist message.

Hey El...its been a long time since Rio. Hope you're doing well.

I bought Ford at 2.62 and have not looked back. Does Beachman understand that Ford Motors is part of the US auto industry. They received no government money, which might have even put them at a disadvantage. Regardless, having to defend Obama for Bush disasters is silly. I would bet that 80% of these gold hoarding, gun stockpiling bunker dwellers think that Obama is responsible for TARP.

No gold Mitchee. Diversified currency portfolio is where it's at. And you know very well I sold my place with the bunker. It's true that ever since Obama won the election - there has been a complete shortage of ammunition in this country due to people hoarding.

LAGuy while I believe Bush is the idiot everyone says, the economic meltdown occured due to these primary factors:

1. Tax Reform Act 10/97 which made the sale of residential real estate a tax FREE event after you owned it for 2+ years, and began the trend of people speculating with homes!
Bush wasn't president then - Clinton was.

2. Four years later, after two tax-free ownership cycles the real estate market heated up in 2002, the Fed LOWERED interest rates. Huge mistake.

3. In 2004 when poor people with bad credit (aka Obama's core constituency) were being left behind in the real estate boom, what does Congress do? Passes a law REQUIRING banks to lend to these high risk people, fueling another 2 years of speculation. Huge mistake, as virtually all of these loans have defaulted.

Bailing these factors out is one thing, but why does Obama then pursue healthcare reform with such reckless abandon? Cuz he's a socialist, and he wants to socialize whatever he can and pay for it later.

Americans don't want huge tax increases right now, but Obama has to raise taxes just to pay for the bailouts. What the world is wondering is why this black president is bankrupting the dollar by spending so much without raising taxes to pay for it. You can only print money for so long, unless you're a socialist who wants to bring in sweeping reform to 'fix' capitalism.

There. I said it. It's in print now. So let's just watch what the next three years brings.

And I suppose the reason Obama spent his first year being attacked for being too cozy with Wall Street was a ruse to allow him to enact his socialist agenda, using Geitner, Summers, and now Volker as the lead closet socialists.

By the way, who was in control of the Congress and Presidency when they passed that law in 2004 catering to Obama's supposed core constituency, poor people with bad credit? And who controlled both houses of Congress in 1997, assuming that is when Tax Reform Act 10/97 was passed?

But believe it or not, there is one thing I don't know. Is DG serious or is his last inane post some sort of lame joke to bait the rest of us?

Somehow reminds me of our long lost friend Bammer. I'm expecting to see him here any day now.

duplicate post

(Message edited by LAguy on January 29, 2010)

DeeG-

Your analysis only catches part of the story. I highly recommend Joe Stiglitz's book, Freefall. It gives the best analysis I've seen yet for the cause of the "Great Recession," and also gives a fair critique of the Bush and Obama responses. The guy is a Nobel award winner, and writes well.