fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Of course she refuses. She likes what they are doing. She's a student of Alinsky as well. Remember, if you can't defeat your opponent on the merits of the argument, destroy your opponent.
Newsweek takes a cover page from TIME
- Thread starter fossten
- Start date
They might be thinking that positioning themselves further left might gather in some new readers – I am not on their board Cal, so I really don’t know their strategy here… Would the right ever buy Newsweek – unlikely. So, maybe they are looking to shore up the readership they do have.
And you want me to do something about it? Write a letter? Not buy the magazine?
Actually no, people who want the magazine for the photo – not for the article.
Probably none, you can read it on line – so buying is almost moot – they might buy the glossy cover photo… And come on Cal – you wouldn’t prop up a leftist rag no matter what the article was like inside – would you give your money to them? You probably did like everyone else –read it online.
It gets them media blip right now – and in 2 weeks all this will be forgotten Cal – our memories are short, and our attention span even shorter. Already it is old news. This issue is their reputation is this week - their next issue is their reputation next week.
Well, you and shag can have fun in your fantasy land. It has been a long, long time since the media has actually taken on the task of fairly looking at the candidates – I doubt if they fairly looked at George Washington. Smear has happened in the media since the beginning of this country – it just moves between media now, and so quickly that we are moving away from this 8 hour wonder already.
Asked if she would play a major role in the 2012 presidential election, Palin answered: “If the people will have me, I will.”
Who knows what that statement means – it is political gibbilty goop… it sounds like she would like to run for something – or not. She is looking for that mandate… I think she is running for president. She is doing everything you need to do. Write the book, press the flesh, hit the media.
So, they are bad businessmen – so, it is a free country – if they want to play ideologist rather than capitalist they can. I still think they are hoping to strike a chord with readers, and it will increase their readership – they might not be the best businessmen, but I bet they want to keep their jobs.
It is very difficult to figure out if their ideological stance is causing loss in marketshare – with the economy as it is, everything is off the board right now. This cover shows me they are looking for marketshare – it was a brilliant business move.
Nope – Ben Franklin published hit pieces.
And so there lies the problem – educating Americans about all the evils in the world. It can’t be done, and we are left with the results. Hasn’t changed since the everyday man got the vote. Won’t be removed until you take ‘everyday’ out of the equation, and then you run into other, larger problems. The people vote in whom they want. Our country is a reflection of ‘by the people’. Good, bad and everything in between.
So Cal, why do you believe Evan Thomas can't separate himself from his political leanings but Roger Ailes can? I personally believe that neither can.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Hummm. And here I thought the mulatto was a stupid {fill in the blank}.
Oh, ya. You've probably seen his test scores.
Nope. Grade School records have been lost.
No high school transcripts.
Not a single grade reported at ANY of the colleges he supposedly attended.
So now I sit and ponder what it would be like to think like you do. "No one seems to doubt Obama is an intellectual." LMAO. Give me one piece of anything that would substantiate your statement. ONE!
He's an idiot that used race to get where he is. Period.
Hummm. And here I thought the mulatto was a stupid {fill in the blank}.
Oh, ya. You've probably seen his test scores.
Nope. Grade School records have been lost.
No high school transcripts.
Not a single grade reported at ANY of the colleges he supposedly attended.
So now I sit and ponder what it would be like to think like you do. "No one seems to doubt Obama is an intellectual." LMAO. Give me one piece of anything that would substantiate your statement. ONE!
He's an idiot that used race to get where he is. Period.
You spent a lot(!) of posts calling him a Marxist at length which would make him an intellectual, so there you have it your ONE anything you asked for
I never said he was a particularly smart intellectual.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Backpedaling isn't easy, is it?You spent a lot(!) of posts calling him a Marxist at length which would make him an intellectual, so there you have it your ONE anything you asked for
I never said he was a particularly smart intellectual.
Statement Regarding Barack Obama
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media
The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer."
From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers has high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.
________________________________________________________________
You guys are confusing "intellectual "with "accomplishment"
Other than winning the election Obama hasn't really accomplished anything.
I was just having some fun with Monster.
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media
The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer."
From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers has high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.
________________________________________________________________
You guys are confusing "intellectual "with "accomplishment"
Other than winning the election Obama hasn't really accomplished anything.
I was just having some fun with Monster.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Nobody said Obama couldn't read. But you still haven't furnished any evidence that he's an intellectual.
Intellectual
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An intellectual is a person who uses intelligence (thought and reason) and analytical thinking, either in a professional or a personal capacity.
__________________________________________________________________
By his previous law profession Obama fits the description.
You can continue to split hairs here
but Sarah's now doing her trailblazing so lets watch that spectacle.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An intellectual is a person who uses intelligence (thought and reason) and analytical thinking, either in a professional or a personal capacity.
__________________________________________________________________
By his previous law profession Obama fits the description.
You can continue to split hairs here
but Sarah's now doing her trailblazing so lets watch that spectacle.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Er...have you ever heard Obama without a TelePROMPTer?
Community organizing does not automatically make one an intellectual. He's nothing more than an agitator.
You can fixate on Sarah all you want, but the real lightweight is Obama, your state of denial notwithstanding.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Back to the intellectual comment... I wasn't finished...just getting started...
At least Foss and I aren't the only ones that think this guy is brain-dead...
American Buffoon
By Andrew Cline on 11.18.09 @ 6:09AM
Barack Obama was supposed to be America's answer to the suave, European head of state. A debonair gentleman of the world, he would charm even the most sophisticated foreign leaders and prove, finally, that the United States is developed culturally, not just economically.
Then he gave some DVDs.
Ian Drury of London's Daily Mail wrote on March 8, "As he headed back home from Washington, Gordon Brown must have rummaged through his party bag with disappointment.
"Because all he got was a set of DVDs. Barack Obama, a box set of 25 classic American films -- a gift about as exciting as a pair of socks."
Brown had given Obama a set of pens made from part of the HMS Gannet, a Victorian-era anti-slave ship. A desk that has sat in the Oval Office since 1880 was made from the timbers of the HMS Resolute, the Gannet's sister ship. It was a stunningly thoughtful and unique gift left unreciprocated.
But even worse, Obama refused to hold a joint press conference with Brown or invite him for an official White House dinner. And to top it all off, he sent back a bust of Churchill that was lent to the White House after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Russia Today wrote that week, "Despite Barack Obama's eloquent elocution, ivy school credentials and electric charisma, there is talk that he lacks the most crucial element of any great leader: judgment."
Since March, Obama's social gaffes have continued. In April he bowed to the Saudi king; in July he was photographed staring at the rear end of a 16-year-old girl and suggested that Cambridge Police Officer James Crowley was stupid; in October he refused to meet with the Dalai Lama; in September he refused five requests from Gordon Brown for a one-on-one meeting but found time to fly to Copenhagen to promote Chicago's Olympic bid; and this month he sent Hillary Clinton to attend the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, then topped it all with an obsequious bow to the emperor of Japan.
Obama cannot even blame the Japan bow on proper protocol. It was anything but proper. It was so inappropriate that it even offended the Japanese.
President Bush supposedly offended the rest of the world with his cowboy chauvinism, but at least he followed proper etiquette while telling the leaders of other countries that America was going to go its own way. Obama doesn't even know to invite the Prime Minister of Great Britain to a state dinner. He doesn't even bother to learn the proper way to greet kings and emperors.
For all of George W. Bush's swagger, it is Barack Obama who has systematically offended three major allies -- Britain, Germany and Japan -- in the span of nine months, needlessly straining important relationships and making his country look simultaneously backward and arrogant.
The reason for this is simple and obvious: Obama's singular arrogance. Only arrogance can explain the way Obama has treated Gordon Brown. Only arrogance can explain the president's snubbing of Germany and repeated refusal to learn the proper protocol for greeting other world leaders.
Obama might be cultivating world opinion by insulting his own country in speech after speech and undermining its interests with his foreign policy, but the joke is on him. For his transparent disdain for other world leaders and customs is making him every bit the image of the buffoonish American president he tries so hard to convince the world he is not.
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/1...erican-buffoon
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Obama gave DVDs to Gordon Brown? Isn't Brown blind?
Talk about insulting.
Talk about insulting.
He has vision problems, but not blind.
But he still couldn't see them.
Besides just being a thoughtless or contemptuous gift, they were formatted wrong and wouldn't work on European DVD players..
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Good point. I bought Earth Final Conflict Season 1 from amazon.com.uk and I can only watch them on my PC.
Obama should have laid his Messianic hands on the DVDs before giving them to Brown. Then they would have worked.
You need to familiarize yourself with Marxism. "intellectual" and "elitist" are not the same thing.
Sophistry, is someone is good at it, can seem intellectual, even though the arguments are specious.
So, simply having a law degree automatically means that person is using intelligence and analytical thinking? They might not simply be more adept at rationalizing the irrational?
...he's an intelligent.
Wrong, but a smart guy.
I know people who have known him.
One of my best friends even had him as a lecturer at University of Chicago.
I've heard many things said about him, never that he was "stupid."
With that said, prior to his becoming a worshiped figure, I never heard anyone say he was the smartest guy in the room either.
Wrong, but a smart guy.
I know people who have known him.
One of my best friends even had him as a lecturer at University of Chicago.
I've heard many things said about him, never that he was "stupid."
With that said, prior to his becoming a worshiped figure, I never heard anyone say he was the smartest guy in the room either.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
No. Obama is clever, but not smart. There's a difference. He has no wisdom. His strings are being pulled by Soros and Ayers and Wright.
I would agree on the wisdom thing. Arrogance inhibits wisdom, in my view, and he seems to be quite arrogant. As to the "strategizing" behind his moves, politically, I am not too sure how much involvement he has in that. He is well educated, very charismatic and exceedingly articulate. Seems to be smart, but without wisdom, IMO.
And all this means, calling him stupid is as stupid as the morons on the left who spent 8 years calling Bush stupid. And 8 years calling Reagan stupid. And 4 years calling Ford stupid. And 8 years calling Eisenhower stupid. And 6 years calling Coolidge stupid. And 4 years calling G.HW.Bush a cowardly wimp, despite the fact he was a war hero and head of the CIA.
Point is. He's not stupid.
He's wrong.
He's not being manipulated, he believes in the stuff he's doing and he knows what he's doing.
So challenging his intelligence is a mistake.
Parsing the word 1000 different ways is pointless.
The man is intelligent, educated, indoctrinated, and understands political manipulation. None of that makes him stupid. I'd argue it makes him wrong. And he's making mistakes as President that can are often attributed to "inexperience" but that's a mistake too. Every President is "inexperienced" at being President of the U.S.A. He's making mistake because his world view and philosophy is flawed. But that's not because of a lack of intelligence, or lack of study, but bad influences and wrong ideology.
Point is. He's not stupid.
He's wrong.
He's not being manipulated, he believes in the stuff he's doing and he knows what he's doing.
So challenging his intelligence is a mistake.
Parsing the word 1000 different ways is pointless.
The man is intelligent, educated, indoctrinated, and understands political manipulation. None of that makes him stupid. I'd argue it makes him wrong. And he's making mistakes as President that can are often attributed to "inexperience" but that's a mistake too. Every President is "inexperienced" at being President of the U.S.A. He's making mistake because his world view and philosophy is flawed. But that's not because of a lack of intelligence, or lack of study, but bad influences and wrong ideology.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Point of order, Cal...
Please show me where I said Obama is stupid. I never said or even implied such a thing. I said he was clever.
I called him a lightweight, but if you take that in context it's obvious that I meant it in context of his job qualifications and experience. And I was simply countering the canard that Obama is this intellectual. He's not. He was editor of Harvard Law Review DESPITE never writing one article. He's been handed every position he's had despite not being qualified for any of them.
He's an empty suit, full of platitudes and a 'groovy' manner of speaking.
Please show me where I said Obama is stupid. I never said or even implied such a thing. I said he was clever.
I called him a lightweight, but if you take that in context it's obvious that I meant it in context of his job qualifications and experience. And I was simply countering the canard that Obama is this intellectual. He's not. He was editor of Harvard Law Review DESPITE never writing one article. He's been handed every position he's had despite not being qualified for any of them.
He's an empty suit, full of platitudes and a 'groovy' manner of speaking.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
:dancefool :bash: :bash: :bash:
Ding, Ding, Ding,
Explains the Obama phenomenon to a 'T".
He's never done anything of consequence except run for office, and he used his race to obtain all his objectives.
You just described most elites. They are very smart, but that doesn't mean they are intellectual. Often, they buy into emotionally appealing rhetoric and then use their intelligence to make clever rationalizations.
They have the capacity to be intellectual, and in certain circumstances definitely are very intellectual, but using intelligence to rationalize the irrational is far different then using intelligence to figure out the truth.