The Regents will decide that, not a bunch of drooling keyboard jocks...I am inclined to agree that the Saudi thing might have legs, but they probably stretch to Washington DC and a bank or two...until then, Engstom is the guy signing the checks and if that is not acceptable, then it is time to move on...moose/squirrel said:
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
No Athletic Director/Tinkle
- Thread starter Unwrittengriz
- Start date
Not that I'm fan of his, but I would take Obama over Clinton any day of the week. Clinton embarrassed the position of President of the United States on an International level.....not sure that position has fully recovered. IMO for that reason alone, Clinton is the worse we've ever had.
montanatarheel
Well-known member
Growler1 said:
uuummm... no. that would be george w bush.
Look at the flaming "progressives" line up to play the blame game again. At least if if we have an Obamanation for another 4 years, he will have another four years to blame Bush.
Perhaps you should read an article about your boy Obama published in the most liberal newspaper in the nation. Right on the money, telling why he is the worst president in history.
The Washington Post actually printed this about Obama....
Obama: The Affirmative Action President by Matt Patterson(columnist - Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass
hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they
will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so
many into thinking he could manage the world ' s largest economy, direct the world ' s most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama ' s pre-presidential life:
ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and
test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer"; a
brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and
in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present") ;
and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the
entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no
academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator.
And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama 's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama ' s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?
Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz
addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal:
To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an
outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant
terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr.
Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have
hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they
were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.
Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass -- held to a lower standard --
because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues:
And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so
articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all
of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president
and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?
Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama
phenomenon -- affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But
certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws
and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and
especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.
Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves
on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they
are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor
performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if
these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the
emotional devastation and deflated self esteem resulting from the racist
policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist.
Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his
skin -- that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism,
then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama.
True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for
Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was
good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois ; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every
time Obama speaks?
In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people -- conservatives included -- ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that's when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all.***Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth -- it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.*
And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and
everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited
this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise
his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But
really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for
anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the
temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. *When you understand
that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of
liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with
such a man in the Oval Office.*
Perhaps you should read an article about your boy Obama published in the most liberal newspaper in the nation. Right on the money, telling why he is the worst president in history.
The Washington Post actually printed this about Obama....
Obama: The Affirmative Action President by Matt Patterson(columnist - Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass
hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they
will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so
many into thinking he could manage the world ' s largest economy, direct the world ' s most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama ' s pre-presidential life:
ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and
test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer"; a
brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and
in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present") ;
and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the
entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no
academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator.
And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama 's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama ' s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?
Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz
addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal:
To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an
outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant
terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr.
Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have
hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they
were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.
Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass -- held to a lower standard --
because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues:
And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so
articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all
of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president
and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?
Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama
phenomenon -- affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But
certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws
and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and
especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.
Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves
on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they
are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor
performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if
these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the
emotional devastation and deflated self esteem resulting from the racist
policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist.
Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his
skin -- that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism,
then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama.
True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for
Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was
good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois ; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every
time Obama speaks?
In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people -- conservatives included -- ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that's when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all.***Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth -- it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.*
And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and
everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited
this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise
his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But
really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for
anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the
temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. *When you understand
that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of
liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with
such a man in the Oval Office.*
EnlightenedDespot
Member
George Bush was apocraphyl. He made Obama look like Barry Goldwater.
first quarter this year, stocks turned in their biggest gain in 14 years. the market is up 60% since obama took office. last month the economy added 227,000 jobs--versus the 700,000 that were lost the month bush left office. don't be a dummy sunny, follow the money!
general motors is alive, bin laden is dead. we're finally out of iraq--no more fibs and ad libs, blam blam and flim flam but no plan man, no plan. after months of publicly televised lies, distortions and slanders on obama's record and person, he still wins against the robotic flip-flopper who's signed off on both sides of a paycheck and both sides of every issue you can name. oh, and obama's campaign headquarters in chicago features a life-size cutout of him wearing a university of montana jersey. my man!
general motors is alive, bin laden is dead. we're finally out of iraq--no more fibs and ad libs, blam blam and flim flam but no plan man, no plan. after months of publicly televised lies, distortions and slanders on obama's record and person, he still wins against the robotic flip-flopper who's signed off on both sides of a paycheck and both sides of every issue you can name. oh, and obama's campaign headquarters in chicago features a life-size cutout of him wearing a university of montana jersey. my man!
Potomac Griz
Well-known member
Growler1 said:
So you dig up an article by Rudy Ghouliani's policy communications coordinator that he contributed to the Washington Post...and imply that it was written by a liberal... bravo... :thumb:
I'm guessing that guy was still a little butthurt over the fact Rudy didn't exactly do so well in the republican primaries... I'm sure he was shocked as hell that chanting 9/11 over and over for every answer didn't go as well as expected! Poor Rudy...
Potomac Griz said:
What does it matter who wrote the article? The article is filled with facts. Please dispute any one of them for us. Oh, you can't.
Obama is also a confirmed Muslim. If you have the guts, watch this 10 minute video, proving without any doubt, that Obama is a Muslim, and has been lying all along about this fact.
http://www.youtube.com/watch_pop" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; up?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28
GrizMusician
Well-known member
Wait, why does it matter what religion Obama is?
Potomac Griz
Well-known member
Growler1 said:
Well...because you tried to pass it off like it was some liberal who wrote it (since it was in the Washington Post). Got called on your bullshit, and now you pull out the "OMG He's a muslim!" card? Guess what, he isn't, and if he was, who gives a flying fuck?
The Muslim religion shouldn't be judged based on the handful of insane fuckwads in it, just like Christianity shouldn't be judged based on people like Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church... Every religion has their fair share of insane extremists in it.
Your racist hatred of everything not white and christian is really pathetic Stevie...
GrizWhiz said:
Another good one: "You're the most intellegent moron I know".