Barack Obama, about him

[Finale]

I bet there are a lot of idiots out there that wish they could graduate magna cum laude from Harvard Law.

Actually, there is a new type of idiot.. it's the type that thinks an honorary degree handed over from a liberal institution to it's "guy" is somehow earned off merit. It's the same kind of idiot that thinks a Nobel peace prize means something when it's awarded to someone that keeps the 2011 and 2012 candidate in jail (Bradley Manning)... or thinks his healthcare bill is so awesome yet exempts himself on page 144, line 22.

Nice thing about forums is they expose you to a new kind of idiot... one incompatible with the popular, magazine and news channel one they hand to you to believe... but only take a few tidbits of facts or reality to discover.

[Scapegrace]

Actually, there is a new type of idiot.. it's the type that thinks an honorary degree handed over from a liberal institution to it's "guy" is somehow earned off merit. It's the same kind of idiot that thinks a Nobel peace prize means something when it's awarded to someone that keeps the 2011 and 2012 candidate in jail (Bradley Manning)... or thinks his healthcare bill is so awesome yet exempts himself on 144, line 22.

Nice thing about forums is they expose you to a new kind of idiot... one incompatible with the popular, magazine and news channel one they hand to you to believe... but only take a few tidbits of facts or reality to discover.

Fuck. Who can I get in touch with at Harvard that will give me an honorary degree without putting forth any effort? I'm sick of working hard. I don't want to do my exams this week. If they gave one to Obama who was a complete nobody they can give one to me too, right? I just have to know the right people.

[Kim]

What I know is:
1) He's a pussy.
2) He's a liar.
3) He's selfish.

What does that make him type-wise?

OOps, forgot:

4) He's a fucking idiot.

Enneagram-wise, I would guess him as a 3.

Yeah, I always had a hard time figuring out George Bush's type myself...

[Finale]

I just have to know the right people.

Actually, it's more about how well you bullshit people. If you can lay it on so thick, that you can make (some) people you are bending over think you're actually doing a colon exam in their best interests, you're pretty much in.

[Finale]

Yeah, I always had a hard time figuring out George Bush's type myself...

Best part about that is you don't even need to specify Jr or Sr. The same applies to them all.

[jet city woman]

Actually, there is a new type of idiot.. it's the type that thinks an honorary degree handed over from a liberal institution to it's "guy" is somehow earned off merit. It's the same kind of idiot that thinks a Nobel peace prize means something when it's awarded to someone that keeps the 2011 and 2012 candidate in jail (Bradley Manning)... or thinks his healthcare bill is so awesome yet exempts himself on page 144, line 22.

Nice thing about forums is they expose you to a new kind of idiot... one incompatible with the popular, magazine and news channel one they hand to you to believe... but only take a few tidbits of facts or reality to discover.

Not to mention that there are quite a few examples I can think of of people with degrees from outstanding universities who have completely insane belief and value systems, and make horrible mistakes and decisions. A degree does not mean you are competent at running your own life or making good, healthy decisions, or being a good problem solver, or especially, that you contain emotional intelligence or truly give a fuck about other people. A degree does not denote sanity vs. insanity.

[Kim]

Best part about that is you don't even need to specify Jr or Sr. The same applies to them all.

True!

However, the healthcare exemption you claim is a misinterpretation:
http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/con...m-health-bill/

[Scapegrace]

Actually, it's more about how well you bullshit people. If you can lay it on so thick, that you can make (some) people you are bending over think you're actually doing a colon exam in their best interests, you're pretty much in.

I have six years experience as a student at Harvard and I'm friends with a lot of faculty including department heads. I know you want Obama to be stupid, but I'm sorry he just isn't. That shit does not fly at Harvard.

[Scapegrace]

Not to mention that there are quite a few examples I can think of of people with degrees from outstanding universities who have completely insane belief and value systems, and make horrible mistakes and decisions. A degree does not mean you are competent at running your own life or making good, healthy decisions, or being a good problem solver, or especially, that you contain emotional intelligence or truly give a fuck about other people. A degree does not denote sanity vs. insanity.

Sure, but insane beliefs do not an idiot make. I know a lot of extremely bright people who are say... Christians.

[Finale]

I have six years experience as a student at Harvard and I'm friends with a lot of faculty including department heads.

Then you'd have a firm understanding how the elite alumni have nothing to do with merit, but are a shoe-in from family or powerful "friends in high places."

I know you want Obama to be stupid, but I'm sorry he just isn't.

I never said he was stupid. In fact, he's quite brilliant relative to the population. He's got the majority of Americans believing he is in their best interests when he's got more Wall St. in his administration than any GOP president, killed more people in war yet hailed a Peace Prize winner, and continues to raise taxes higher than any president (cleverly hidden in the form of inflation) and with unemployment in record breaking, increasing numbers.. all while having his ass kissed in places out and about (as well as here).

No idiot can do those kinds of things. It takes a very clever, borderline brilliant narcissist to pat his own back while lying about the terrible crimes he commits on his country/people daily... but that's what modern presidents are bred to do these days.

[Finale]

True!

However, the healthcare exemption you claim is a misinterpretation:
http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/con...m-health-bill/

False!

You do know that factcheck.org is a biased site that provides even more misinformation to convince you that the dick you feel in your ass is actually Obama doing a colon check, right?

Factcheck.org is a misleading, propaganda engine (not unlike 'mediamatters' and the droves of others) that is funded by the democratic party bias, in this case the Annenberg Foundation. When Walter Annenberg died, it was taken over by left-wing extremists such as Bill Ayers, which has direct ties to Barack Obama. More important, Ayers was the key founder of Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which Obama was the board chairman and president of that organization in the mid 90's. Also keep in mind that funding for CAC (Ayers/Annenberg) was approved by none other than Barack Obama.

A few googles and some research will show you how convenient it is to put up something called "FactCheck" when in reality, it's nothing more than a funded propaganda machine. If the GOP is smart, they would create a "truth.com" or "truthcheck.org" to counter... but FactCheck and other such sites are already becoming obsolete as more people become informed and start to see our government officials for what they are vs. what they say.

[Scapegrace]

Then you'd have a firm understanding how the elite alumni have nothing to do with merit, but are a shoe-in from family or powerful "friends in high places."


I never said he was stupid. In fact, he's quite brilliant relative to the population. He's got the majority of Americans believing he is in their best interests when he's got more Wall St. in his administration than any GOP president, killed more people in war yet hailed a Peace Prize winner, and continues to raise taxes higher than any president (cleverly hidden in the form of inflation) and with unemployment in record breaking, increasing numbers.. all while having his ass kissed in places out and about (as well as here).

No idiot can do those kinds of things. It takes a very clever, borderline brilliant narcissist to pat his own back while lying about the terrible crimes he commits on his country/people daily... but that's what modern presidents are bred to do these days.

Jet said he is an idiot and you seem to be backing her up.


Yes, you're talking about "legacy students" Dubya is one of those. Obama, however, was not.

[Drommel]

You're right, Obama's worse than that: He was an affirmative-action enrollment.

[717495]

I have six years experience as a student at Harvard and I'm friends with a lot of faculty including department heads. I know you want Obama to be stupid, but I'm sorry he just isn't. That shit does not fly at Harvard.

That's hot. So why you hangin' 'round 'ere?

[Scapegrace]

That's hot. So why you hangin' 'round 'ere?

What are you suggesting? Why are you hanging around here?

I've been using this forum since I was 15. It has the nostalgia factor going for it.

[InvisibleJim]

False!

We have similar bodies of Quangos in the UK who invent statistics when required to justify government positions on either the right or the left.

These politically funded bodies are responsible for as much mal-decision making as the influence of corporations or unions.

[Kim]

False!

You do know that factcheck.org is a biased site that provides even more misinformation to convince you that the dick you feel in your ass is actually Obama doing a colon check, right?

Factcheck.org is a misleading, propaganda engine (not unlike 'mediamatters' and the droves of others) that is funded by the democratic party bias, in this case the Annenberg Foundation. When Walter Annenberg died, it was taken over by left-wing extremists such as Bill Ayers, which has direct ties to Barack Obama. More important, Ayers was the key founder of Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which Obama was the board chairman and president of that organization in the mid 90's. Also keep in mind that funding for CAC (Ayers/Annenberg) was approved by none other than Barack Obama.

A few googles and some research will show you how convenient it is to put up something called "FactCheck" when in reality, it's nothing more than a funded propaganda machine. If the GOP is smart, they would create a "truth.com" or "truthcheck.org" to counter... but FactCheck and other such sites are already becoming obsolete as more people become informed and start to see our government officials for what they are vs. what they say.

I don't see it on page 114, line 22 of the current bill -> Untitled.jpg
Care to share where you got your information?

[717495]

What are you suggesting? Why are you hanging around here?

Idk, because someone from Harvard is talking to me. I feel special quite.

[jet city woman]

Sure, but insane beliefs do not an idiot make. I know a lot of extremely bright people who are say... Christians.

Lol, I think that insane beliefs do make an idiot, so I think it's definition of "idiot" that we simply disagree on. In general, I think being a Christian at all would make you an idiot, because you're being foolish. If they weren't an idiot or at least acting like one, then they wouldn't be making stupid decisions like choosing Christianity. They would rethink it and come up with a different answer.

Jet said he is an idiot and you seem to be backing her up.

Finale and I are two separate people who often disagree. Try not to combine our thoughts into one. We also have different ways of determining "idiocy".

I have six years experience as a student at Harvard and I'm friends with a lot of faculty including department heads

This is about as believable as the sky falling on me right now.

[jet city woman]

I don't see it on page 114, line 22 of the current bill -> Untitled.jpg
Care to share where you got your information?

Uhhh, he said page 144, not page 114......

[Words]

Lol, I think that insane beliefs do make an idiot, so I think it's definition of "idiot" that we simply disagree on. In general, I think being a Christian at all would make you an idiot, because you're being foolish. If they weren't an idiot or at least acting like one, then they wouldn't be making stupid decisions like choosing Christianity. They would rethink it and come up with a different answer.

Time and time again studies have shown that Christians are on average happier, more successful and feel they live more satisfying lives than non believers. How exactly does that make them an idiot (according to you)?

[jet city woman]

Time and time again studies have shown that Christians are on average happier, more successful and feel they live more satisfying lives than non believers. How exactly does that make them an idiot (according to you)?

I generally don't believe most studies are pertinent as a resource. I think they can be a starting point but, you've gotta come up with your own ideas in life. Following other's ideas completely will generally get you manipulated and used.

[Kim]

Uhhh, he said page 144, not page 114......

My bad. However, it's not on page 144 either...Untitled.jpg

[mu4]

Hey guys, I hear Fox News is fair and balanced.... /sarcasm

I think Obama is pretty smart but not ludicrously smart. Smart enough to know and deal with people smarter than him, and smart enough to relate with people who are less so. Which basically makes him suited for his position in life.

[Finale]

My bad. However, it's not on page 144 either...

The 114 is a common mis-reference, but not as common as 144, so my apologies for trying to go off memory. The wording is very subtle in the form of a "should" vs "will" to give congress a get-out-of-aca-free card, which is much simpler to research if Congress is on the plans as outlined, where any amount of simple research will verify that no, they are not (still on the fantastic FEHB), therefore exempt and still on their kushy, federal custom plan vs. the "gold" plan sold to the rest of the country in the ACA.

Further evidence can be found by the simple fact that amendments to directly stipulate Congress/President be forced to use these plans for themselves and their families were removed by congressional democrats. Again, a very small amount of research will verify the amendments placed into the ACA by Senators Susan Collins and Kelly Ayotte were struck out of the final law, thus sealing Congress to opt out of what they decided for the rest of Americans (Edit: ok, here are a few of these: here, here and here).

The good news is, the exemption DOES expire in 2014 (again, easy to find reference with rudimentary searches), but my guess is they may find a way to once more exempt themselves through last hour legislation or possibly executive order.

We have similar bodies of Quangos in the UK who invent statistics when required to justify government positions on either the right or the left.

These politically funded bodies are responsible for as much mal-decision making as the influence of corporations or unions.

It's gotten out of control. Sometimes it seems that there really aren't ANY unbiased sources of information left any more. It's even more scary when you start to find that the many 1000's of radio, television and newspaper organizations globally almost always funnel up to about 3-5 individual organization's control in one way or another. Almost time for my tin foil hat.

[Kim]

The 114 is a common mis-reference, but not as common as 144, so my apologies for trying to go off memory. The wording is very subtle in the form of a "should" vs "will" to give congress a get-out-of-aca-free card,

Can you direct me to the wording that you reference above (page whatever/line 22)? I cannot find it.

I am also curious as to what exactly it is that congress is supposedly exempt from.

[Leader]

No

LSI

Maritsa...he is SEE. Point Blank.

[Leader]

Obama is merely a bandage used to cover the big ass wound the U.S. has, or whatever the fuck is going on.

He is SEE, all about appearance and all for show. Talk a big game, can't back it up. They lack the -real volition-, or real skills and power to back it up (although im not saying SEEs are bad, even if a lot of them are slimy snakes). America wanted "change", "hope", Obama was put in place for the very reason of helping provide that "inspiration or promise of change" with his sweet talking although as many of you cannot see even still today, he lacks the real influence to achieve this.

Even using Michelle Obama as an example, who supposedly shops at target and thrift stores because she wants to appear as if she represents the struggling middle class. Its all subtle manipulation through appearance, or how they want to be perceived.

Now im pretty young and currently uninterested in politics, so im not caught up in the news as much, but its always been obvious to me from the very first moment I saw him, I saw right through it all. People just eat out of his hand, not even knowing they're being played.

Now again im not saying these are bad people, but its really plain to see that they are pretty phony.

SEEs are the type of leaders who work for the higher ups, they are diplomats. They smooth the situation out, with warm promising words (Fi), temporarily for the moment (Se).

[Leader]

Yeah, I always had a hard time figuring out George Bush's type myself...

Type 9, ISTj.

[jet city woman]

Can you direct me to the wording that you reference above (page whatever/line 22)? I cannot find it.

I am also curious as to what exactly it is that congress is supposedly exempt from.

Why can't you look it up and research it like I did? None of us can think FOR you. You have to figure it out for yourself at some point. He gave you several links.... go fucking explore them!

He just handed you a plethora of answers, and certainly a helluva lot more than I've gotten when I've asked questions in this forum. If you can't figure out the answers from there, then I don't know how to guide you. I don't think it's possible for you to understand. I'm just handing you back merely what you handed me initially..... except more. There is at least a minute explanation there.

I'm simply telling the truth, not meaning to be offensive.

[Kim]

He mentioned a specific part of the healthcare bill that exempts certain groups. I looked up the page he mentioned and can't find the wording, so I think it's fair to ask him to please show me the passage. He criticized me for using a biased source (fair enough), so the best way to settle this is the bill. He claims the provision is in there and I can't find, so I ask him to show it to me. Fair?

[strangeling]

He mentioned a specific part of the healthcare bill that exempts certain groups. I looked up the page he mentioned and can't find the wording, so I think it's fair to ask him to please show me the passage. He criticized me for using a biased source (fair enough), so the best way to settle this is the bill. He claims the provision is in there and I can't find, so I ask him to show it to me. Fair?

He already presented his trump card

...
It's gotten out of control. Sometimes it seems that there really aren't ANY unbiased sources of information left any more. It's even more scary when you start to find that the many 1000's of radio, television and newspaper organizations globally almost always funnel up to about 3-5 individual organization's control in one way or another. Almost time for my tin foil hat.

If everything is wrong, then nothing can be right; by not playing, he doesn't win, but you lose.

TOOT TOOT

[Finale]

He already presented his trump card


If everything is wrong, then nothing can be right; by not playing, he doesn't win, but you lose.

TOOT TOOT

Nah, I just expect common sense... which I quickly realize this forum seems to completely lack.

That and the fact I didnt get a quote/notification on this thread and quite frankly forgot about it! Your quote did trigger one, so thanks for that. :-)

Obamacare (more correctly termed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or as I've been referencing it, ACA) created federally mandated state exchanges as well as defined policies from which healthcare is to be purchased.

I made it clear that much of Congress (and the president/vice president) is exempt from this and we can either go through the 906 pages and go over the loosely termed exemptions (as I said, are in very misleading and stretched terminology in the spirit of your legalese "should" vs. "will" style nonsense, and in multiple places), or we can conclude this is a pointless effort for people that cannot even grasp that Congress is not only exempt with a couple searches, but has also been given multiple links (and many more can be found) of how Senators tried to also stipulate regardless of other terms, amendments that would force Congress & The President into using the plans or exchanges that they lobbied were so f-ing good for the American people, but fought so valiantly to stay out of themselves.

Only a rudimentary few searches of *any* source you choose will verify that Congress and the President are still on the kushy FEHB plans, as they were prior to Obamacare/ACA going into place. Not one, not a dozen, but EVERY source will confirm that Congress and the President still are insured through the FEHB. This is a fact and not some opinion or biased propaganda.

Congress is exempt from these exchanges and the evidence is that they are still on the FEHB plans. If someone can't fathom or look-up that simple fact, then its likely a foolish pursuit to try and walk them through the loopholes and legalese of the ACA to get the point.

In a nutshell, you can't lead someone across the Mohave desert if they are unable/unwilling to first get on the camel... and I don't see recognition of the simple fact that Congress is still on FEHB (i.e. my form of "get on the camel").

Like I said though, the good news is- word is (possibly unreliable, but most sources regardless of bias seem to agree) they will be forced in 2014 to use plans/exchanges from the ACA they so strongly lobbied to stay out of in the first place, banning themselves from and canning any amendments that were added to put them in there. I'm betting there will be some emergency legislation in the final hour though to keep them in the FEHB, mark my words. Perhaps in 2014 we can come back here and I can do a "I told you so" ... and that will suddenly be some trump card.

[Finale]

But.. since Im a glutton for punishment, and Kim did ask nicely.. I spent a few minutes looking up the page, which as I said I erroneously recalled as 144 but is actually 158.

I've done my best to try and forget this nonsense due to the anger it causes me, since every major poll showed the majority of Americans were against this bill, yet congress passed it anyways (republic lost, anyone?). Of course, lots of FactCheck and ObamaAssKiss type propaganda sources calmed the sheep with misleading polls such as "The majority of Americans want healthcare reform!" which was DUH! but that isn't what ACA is nor was the poll ABOUT ACA.

Anyways, the exemption on page 158, states

"The only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are — (I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or (II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act)."

... which later goes on to state ...

"The term 'Member of Congress' means any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate... The term 'congressional staff' means all full-time and part-time employees employed by the official office of a Member of Congress, whether in Washington, DC or outside of Washington, DC."

The problem? The definition of "congressional staff" excludes higher-paid committee aides and leadership aides. All "committee and leadership" staff is thereby excluded and this was done over several versions of this portion of the ACA when it was merged with original versions that had a single payer option.

In fact, a report from Congressional Research Service in 2009 states ( (link to the report):

"It appears possible to argue that the definition of 'congressional staff' used . . . excludes any staff not directly affiliated with a Member’s individual or personal office. Should this interpretation be adopted by an implementing body or a court, it would appear that it would exclude professional committee staff, joint committee staff, some shared staff, as well as potentially those staff employed by leadership offices including, but not limited to, the Speaker of the House, Majority Leader of the Senate, Minority Leader of the House, Minority Leader of the Senate, as well as the Whip offices in both the House and Senate. Moreover, this interpretation would arguably exclude other congressional employees, for example, those employed by the Office of the House Clerk, House Parliamentarian, House Historian, Secretary of the Senate, Senate Legal Counsel, House and Senate Legislative Counsel offices."

If you do a little more homework, you'll discover that Sen. Tom Coburn and Charles Grassley also consumed much time trying to expand the definition of "congressional staff" to include all congress, as well as the president and vice president, but they were all overpowered by the democratics. (you can look this up yourself as well for more info). And as I also stated (with links above) Collins and Ayotte tried pretty much the same thing with amendments that stipulated the requirement directly, but these were also fought against and removed by the democrats.

There is more in two other areas with even more tricky loopholes.. but this is the easiest to see, along with the simple fact they are STILL on FEHB vs. ACA plans/exchanges to this day.

A little arbitrary footwork will conclude to any rational person that Congressional Democrats wanted out of their own plans/exchanges desperately and did everything they could to stay on their current/kushy FEHB plan. I hope after a few googles, you will see the same thing. GOP efforts to expose this went undocumented but there are some sources that document these efforts, especially those of Coburn, Grassley and Collins and Ayotte.

Had to throw this in, albeit unrelated to this discussion, but maybe of interest to those still trying to type this cock sucker Obama:



There are a LOT of people that bad mouth Bush (as they should- he's no different from the rest of the corporate cronies over the past 30-40 years) but LOVE Obama. He's a bigger sellout than Bush ever was, he's just better at lying to people about it (like Clinton).

Hope you guys enjoy his increased war spending, more drone/war killing than Bush, higher deficits and unemployment, one-upping Bush with even more auto bailouts, and now the Monsanto Protection Act so as big business can poison you and your family dead while he gets a new yacht.

[jet city woman]

He already presented his trump card




If everything is wrong, then nothing can be right; by not playing, he doesn't win, but you lose.

TOOT TOOT

That's not a trumpcard.... it's the truth. He's simply telling the unbiased truth in that case.

[Not A Communist Shill]

I thought this series was a good overview of Obama's presidency. While it clearly wasn't intent on offering a critique on Obama (merely covering Obama's narrative of events, essentially), it is possibly useful for typing purposes and refreshing your memory of events (it possibly doesn't really go into the interpersonal dynamics so much though). The way it was narrated, it was though it was narrated by the raised eyebrow of an European commenting on American politics (and thus almost sympathizing with Obama's frustration).

Inside Obama’s White House
1. 100 Days
2. Obamacare
3. Don't Screw It Up
4. The Arc of History

[hexagram]

IEE is more than likely, I think Biden is his dual

[Djangr]

ESE