OntheEdge's comments are so typical of the regurgitating, misinformed, uneducated citizenry that will stop at nothing to spread the propaganda of hate and idiocy.
I just cannot believe that there are people who are so incredibly warped in this country. Oh wait, yes I can. Bye, bye America, your precious citizens have destroyed your legacy. Greed, stupidity, entitlement, laziness - intellectual and physical (obesity rate at 30% you fat fucks!), corporate slavery, big oil, materialism, consumerism, TV obsessions, celebrity worship, stagnation, stubborn, tired philosophies, have all dismantled the integrity and intelligence in this country.
At least you still have beer, and some good music.
Very true. Just picked up a Saranac Winter Sampler 12 pack. Some decent brews. Got a sixer of Sierra Nevada Celebration Ale, as well. So, I can't complain. I'm still a little upset about the state of American Society though.
Oh yeah. I get to listen to a bunch of Pearl Jam, Radiohead, Pink Floyd, AIC, Soundgarden, and Dylan. Not too bad.
Couldn't have said it better myself. The crock of shit bit. If anyone with a scrap of brains can't see what an absolute disaster the George W. Bush presidency was then I question they deserve the right to vote.
That was a brilliant response there gabbers....You must be a politician :shock:
Godfather.
Sometimes Godfather, the truth hurts. The man was a walking clusterfuck that couldn't piece together a coherent statement - Palin without tits, as it were. He really couldn't do anything right. Unless you were rich and didn't have any family in the military I guess.
Sometimes Godfather, the truth hurts. The man was a walking clusterfuck that couldn't piece together a coherent statement - Palin without tits, as it were. He really couldn't do anything right. Unless you were rich and didn't have any family in the military I guess.
"Palin without tits." Can I use that?
Hilarious.
Glad to put a smile on some faces in the Moving Train.
It's a bastardization of referring to Palin as "Bush with tits". Pretty sure that was a Bill Maher quote. Love ya Bill.
Another Failed Presidency
By Geoffrey P. Hunt
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
I know it was on page 1, but I've just gotten around to reading that article. There was a line towards the end that struck me...
"....His [Obama's] descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience..."
The reason it struck me is that, the whole way through the article, before I reached that line, I found myself thinking of the writer, "....His descriptions of Obama don't make sense and don't correspond with my experience..."
Come to think of it, the same goes for the frankly bizarre characterisation of Bush.
"George Bush Jr didn't fail so much as he was perceived to have been too much of a patrician while being uncomfortable with his more conservative allies... [his] potential was squashed by his own compromise of conservative principles... "
That's it?! I think even the most rudimentary understanding of the Bush presidency is enough to illustrate how far off the mark that is. I don't thinkanyone on either side could seriously say his main problem was being seen to be patrician!
The author of this article is almost comically out of touch. Even if I try to look at this objectively, this article bears no discernable or meaningful relationship to reality from what I can see.
It's not so much that it's bad, or even that it's partisan & I disagree with it.
It's just... well... plain weird. :?
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
Another Failed Presidency
By Geoffrey P. Hunt
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
I know it was on page 1, but I've just gotten around to reading that article. There was a line towards the end that struck me...
"....His [Obama's] descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience..."
The reason it struck me is that, the whole way through the article, before I reached that line, I found myself thinking of the writer, "....His descriptions of Obama don't make sense and don't correspond with my experience..."
Come to think of it, the same goes for the frankly bizarre characterisation of Bush.
"George Bush Jr didn't fail so much as he was perceived to have been too much of a patrician while being uncomfortable with his more conservative allies... [his] potential was squashed by his own compromise of conservative principles... "
That's it?! I think even the most rudimentary understanding of the Bush presidency is enough to illustrate how far off the mark that is. I don't thinkanyone on either side could seriously say his main problem was being seen to be patrician!
The author of this article is almost comically out of touch. Even if I try to look at this objectively, this article bears no discernable or meaningful relationship to reality from what I can see.
It's not so much that it's bad, or even that it's partisan & I disagree with it.
It's just... well... plain weird. :?
I don't know if any of it makes any sense,I only posted it to make a point that there are lots of opinions out there and to people that believe differently than otheres their opinion is just as legit as anybody elses to them and they will argue it to the end...wrong or right, I don't know why ?
I don't know if any of it makes any sense,I only posted it to make a point that there are lots of opinions out there and to people that believe differently than otheres their opinion is just as legit as anybody elses to them and they will argue it to the end...wrong or right, I don't know why ?
Godfather.
another book you might want to read is Trust Us, We're Experts
it's about the use of PR and Lobbyists to sway public opinion ...
yes, there are different opinions on things but the reality is that big corporations are willing to pay PR firms to launch aggressive campaigns that use myths, lies and innuendo to sway public opinion ... so, often when you get articles written like the one you posted - it often reeks of lies and misconceptions ...
it's one thing when someone objectively posts a bunch of crap but it's far more insidious when its a carefully crafted piece funded by special interests knowing that they can reach a specific target audience ...
Another Failed Presidency
By Geoffrey P. Hunt
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
I know it was on page 1, but I've just gotten around to reading that article. There was a line towards the end that struck me...
"....His [Obama's] descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience..."
The reason it struck me is that, the whole way through the article, before I reached that line, I found myself thinking of the writer, "....His descriptions of Obama don't make sense and don't correspond with my experience..."
Come to think of it, the same goes for the frankly bizarre characterisation of Bush.
"George Bush Jr didn't fail so much as he was perceived to have been too much of a patrician while being uncomfortable with his more conservative allies... [his] potential was squashed by his own compromise of conservative principles... "
That's it?! I think even the most rudimentary understanding of the Bush presidency is enough to illustrate how far off the mark that is. I don't thinkanyone on either side could seriously say his main problem was being seen to be patrician!
The author of this article is almost comically out of touch. Even if I try to look at this objectively, this article bears no discernable or meaningful relationship to reality from what I can see.
It's not so much that it's bad, or even that it's partisan & I disagree with it.
It's just... well... plain weird. :?
I don't know if any of it makes any sense,I only posted it to make a point that there are lots of opinions out there and to people that believe differently than otheres their opinion is just as legit as anybody elses to them and they will argue it to the end...wrong or right, I don't know why ?
Godfather.
Yes, there are lots of opinions out there. There are lots of uneducated opinions out there and there are a lot of mentally unbalanced people out there. Why use that as your backup? Yikes. I'd be embarrassed.
24 years old, mid-life crisis
nowadays hits you when you're young
AllNiteThing,there are all kinds of different people out there is there something that makes you better than them ? thinking so would be more of an embarrassment in my opinion.
Another Failed Presidency
By Geoffrey P. Hunt
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
But, Barack Obama is failing. Failing big. Failing fast. And failing everywhere: foreign policy, domestic initiatives, and most importantly, in forging connections with the American people. The incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal put her finger on it: He is failing because he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them.
All I can say on the matter is that when a person voices their opinion and says things like this about the president:
"...he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them."
I start to lose the ability to take them seriously.
I'm not a huge fan of Obama, but what this author said here is... well, :roll: :crazy:
Another Failed Presidency
By Geoffrey P. Hunt
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
But, Barack Obama is failing. Failing big. Failing fast. And failing everywhere: foreign policy, domestic initiatives, and most importantly, in forging connections with the American people. The incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal put her finger on it: He is failing because he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them.
All I can say on the matter is that when a person voices their opinion and says things like this about the president:
"...he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them."
I start to lose the ability to take them seriously.
I'm not a huge fan of Obama, but what this author said here is... well, :roll: :crazy:
now that you mention it it does read like "where the buffalo roam" by Hunter S Thompson.
I don't know if any of it makes any sense,I only posted it to make a point that there are lots of opinions out there and to people that believe differently than otheres their opinion is just as legit as anybody elses to them and they will argue it to the end...wrong or right, I don't know why ?
Godfather.
I'm not criticising you for posting it. Yes, there are plenty of differing opinions out there. All I'm saying is that i find this one so bizarre. I don't undertand where the writer's ideas are coming from.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
now that you mention it it does read like "where the buffalo roam" by Hunter S Thompson.
Godfather.
'Where the Buffalo Roam' wasn't by Hunter S. Thompson. It was a movie. Hunter S. Thompson was a writer and journalist, not a movie driector, or an actor.
And despite this, there's still absolutely no comparison between that movie and that article you posted above.
AllNiteThing,there are all kinds of different people out there is there something that makes you better than them ? thinking so would be more of an embarrassment in my opinion.
Godfather.
Who said anything about thinking you are better than someone else?! That makes no sense whatsoever.
My point is that you are backing up your points with someone who is using distorted/falsified 'facts' and is clearly mentally ill. It's not a judgement, just an observation. I can't see how someone would feel comfortable backing their opinion up with something that is so clearly biased and baseless. I wouldn't say I'm a better 'person', but my opinions are certainly much more grounded in reality and fact.
24 years old, mid-life crisis
nowadays hits you when you're young
now that you mention it it does read like "where the buffalo roam" by Hunter S Thompson.
Godfather.
'Where the Buffalo Roam' wasn't by Hunter S. Thompson. It was a movie. Hunter S. Thompson was a writer and journalist, not a movie driector, or an actor.
And despite this, there's still absolutely no comparison between that movie and that article you posted above.
There are a few bizarre people posting here. Coincidence they are all Bush apologists?
24 years old, mid-life crisis
nowadays hits you when you're young
now that you mention it it does read like "where the buffalo roam" by Hunter S Thompson.
Godfather.
'Where the Buffalo Roam' wasn't by Hunter S. Thompson. It was a movie. Hunter S. Thompson was a writer and journalist, not a movie driector, or an actor.
And despite this, there's still absolutely no comparison between that movie and that article you posted above.
There are a few bizarre people posting here. Coincidence they are all Bush apologists?
In all fairness, I think he was just pointing out that the article he posted was a bit 'wacky', and that this wackiness was somehow comparable to Bill Murray's performance in 'Where The Buffalo Roam'. It was just an analogy, albeit a pretty poor one.
now that you mention it it does read like "where the buffalo roam" by Hunter S Thompson.
Godfather.
'Where the Buffalo Roam' wasn't by Hunter S. Thompson. It was a movie. Hunter S. Thompson was a writer and journalist, not a movie driector, or an actor.
And despite this, there's still absolutely no comparison between that movie and that article you posted above.
Another Failed Presidency
By Geoffrey P. Hunt
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
I know it was on page 1, but I've just gotten around to reading that article. There was a line towards the end that struck me...
"....His [Obama's] descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience..."
The reason it struck me is that, the whole way through the article, before I reached that line, I found myself thinking of the writer, "....His descriptions of Obama don't make sense and don't correspond with my experience..."
Come to think of it, the same goes for the frankly bizarre characterisation of Bush.
"George Bush Jr didn't fail so much as he was perceived to have been too much of a patrician while being uncomfortable with his more conservative allies... [his] potential was squashed by his own compromise of conservative principles... "
That's it?! I think even the most rudimentary understanding of the Bush presidency is enough to illustrate how far off the mark that is. I don't thinkanyone on either side could seriously say his main problem was being seen to be patrician!
The author of this article is almost comically out of touch. Even if I try to look at this objectively, this article bears no discernable or meaningful relationship to reality from what I can see.
It's not so much that it's bad, or even that it's partisan & I disagree with it.
It's just... well... plain weird. :?
Obama's perceptions of the world are "out of touch" because he is not an uneducated, warmongering imperialist. How un-American!! Shame on you Barack!!
Another Failed Presidency
By Geoffrey P. Hunt
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
I know it was on page 1, but I've just gotten around to reading that article. There was a line towards the end that struck me...
"....His [Obama's] descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience..."
The reason it struck me is that, the whole way through the article, before I reached that line, I found myself thinking of the writer, "....His descriptions of Obama don't make sense and don't correspond with my experience..."
Come to think of it, the same goes for the frankly bizarre characterisation of Bush.
"George Bush Jr didn't fail so much as he was perceived to have been too much of a patrician while being uncomfortable with his more conservative allies... [his] potential was squashed by his own compromise of conservative principles... "
That's it?! I think even the most rudimentary understanding of the Bush presidency is enough to illustrate how far off the mark that is. I don't thinkanyone on either side could seriously say his main problem was being seen to be patrician!
The author of this article is almost comically out of touch. Even if I try to look at this objectively, this article bears no discernable or meaningful relationship to reality from what I can see.
It's not so much that it's bad, or even that it's partisan & I disagree with it.
It's just... well... plain weird. :?
Obama's perceptions of the world are "out of touch" because he is not an uneducated, warmongering imperialist. How un-American!! Shame on you Barack!!
all righty then....he's a warmonger he's just starting to learn,he'll get better at it just give him time.
I know it was on page 1, but I've just gotten around to reading that article. There was a line towards the end that struck me...
"....His [Obama's] descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience..."
The reason it struck me is that, the whole way through the article, before I reached that line, I found myself thinking of the writer, "....His descriptions of Obama don't make sense and don't correspond with my experience..."
Come to think of it, the same goes for the frankly bizarre characterisation of Bush.
"George Bush Jr didn't fail so much as he was perceived to have been too much of a patrician while being uncomfortable with his more conservative allies... [his] potential was squashed by his own compromise of conservative principles... "
That's it?! I think even the most rudimentary understanding of the Bush presidency is enough to illustrate how far off the mark that is. I don't thinkanyone on either side could seriously say his main problem was being seen to be patrician!
The author of this article is almost comically out of touch. Even if I try to look at this objectively, this article bears no discernable or meaningful relationship to reality from what I can see.
It's not so much that it's bad, or even that it's partisan & I disagree with it.
It's just... well... plain weird. :?
Obama's perceptions of the world are "out of touch" because he is not an uneducated, warmongering imperialist. How un-American!! Shame on you Barack!!
all righty then....he's a warmonger he's just starting to learn,he'll get better at it just give him time.
Godfather.
But don't you think that if it were 100% up to him he would withdraw all troops? Obviously, as we all know, the backlash from the right, the military, and possibly some international leaders (?), would be like nothing we have seen in decades. Obama has learned that what he wants to do is secondary to what he will be allowed to do - allowed by Big Oil, Corporate America, the Right, etc.
don't get excited man it's just an article on failed presidents,it's important to understand that there are different views and ideas about presidents and politics, we're all in this together believe it or not.
Godfather.
Any article that tries to gloss over the crimes and corruption of Nixon, Reagan, and Bush Sr. really is a crock of shit.
don't get excited man it's just an article on failed presidents,it's important to understand that there are different views and ideas about presidents and politics, we're all in this together believe it or not.
Godfather.
Any article that tries to gloss over the crimes and corruption of Nixon, Reagan, and Bush Sr. really is a crock of shit.
Maybe some feel the same way about your article.
It isn't an article. It's a list of statements of fact.
Any article that tries to gloss over the crimes and corruption of Nixon, Reagan, and Bush Sr. really is a crock of shit.
Maybe some feel the same way about your article.
It isn't an article. It's a list of statements of fact.
might be nit picking here, but is this really a fact
* First president in US history to have all 50 states of the Union simultaneously go bankrupt?
Also, a few are opinion, it would be nice if the orginator(?) of this list had put links under each point to the accompanying evidence...might make some less likely to throw out everything because just a couple may be overstatements or opinion...
But that list certainly corresponds well with what we already know, GW was not a great president by almost anyone's measure...
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I'm guessing more liberals buy this book then conservatives. After 2 years of not being able to bash GWB, this is the equivalent of Zeppelin reuniting! Good times
Another Failed Presidency
By Geoffrey P. Hunt
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson.
In the modern era, we've seen several failed presidencies--led by Jimmy Carter and LBJ. Failed presidents have one strong common trait-- they are repudiated, in the vernacular, spat out. Of course, LBJ wisely took the exit ramp early, avoiding a shove into oncoming traffic by his own party. Richard Nixon indeed resigned in disgrace, yet his reputation as a statesman has been partially restored by his triumphant overture to China.
George Bush Jr didn't fail so much as he was perceived to have been too much of a patrician while being uncomfortable with his more conservative allies. Yet George Bush Sr is still perceived as a man of uncommon decency, loyal to the enduring American character of rugged self-determination, free markets, and generosity. George W will eventually be treated more kindly by historians as one whose potential was squashed by his own compromise of conservative principles, in some ways repeating the mistakes of his father, while ignoring many lessons in executive leadership he should have learned at Harvard Business School. Of course George W could never quite overcome being dogged from the outset by half of the nation convinced he was electorally illegitimate -- thus aiding the resurgence of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party.
But, Barack Obama is failing. Failing big. Failing fast. And failing everywhere: foreign policy, domestic initiatives, and most importantly, in forging connections with the American people. The incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal put her finger on it: He is failing because he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard says he is failing because he has lost control of his message, and is overexposed. Clarice Feldman of American Thinker produced a dispositive commentary showing that Obama is failing because fundamentally he is neither smart nor articulate; his intellectual dishonesty is conspicuous by its audacity and lack of shame.
But, there is something more seriously wrong: How could a new president riding in on a wave of unprecedented promise and goodwill have forfeited his tenure and become a lame duck in six months? His poll ratings are in free fall. In generic balloting, the Republicans have now seized a five point advantage. This truly is unbelievable. What's going on?
No narrative. Obama doesn't have a narrative. No, not a narrative about himself. He has a self-narrative, much of it fabricated, cleverly disguised or written by someone else. But this self-narrative is isolated and doesn't connect with us. He doesn't have an American narrative that draws upon the rest of us. All successful presidents have a narrative about the American character that intersects with their own where they display a command of history and reveal an authenticity at the core of their personality that resonates in a positive endearing way with the majority of Americans. We admire those presidents whose narratives not only touch our own, but who seem stronger, wiser, and smarter than we are. Presidents we admire are aspirational peers, even those whose politics don't align exactly with our own: Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Harry Truman, Ike, Reagan.
But not this president. It's not so much that he's a phony, knows nothing about economics, is historically illiterate, and woefully small minded for the size of the task-- all contributory of course. It's that he's not one of us. And whatever he is, his profile is fuzzy and devoid of content, like a cardboard cutout made from delaminated corrugated paper. Moreover, he doesn't command our respect and is unable to appeal to our own common sense. His notions of right and wrong are repugnant and how things work just don't add up. They are not existential. His descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience.
In the meantime, while we've been struggling to take a measurement of this man, he's dissed just about every one of us--financiers, energy producers, banks, insurance executives, police officers, doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, post office workers, and anybody else who has a non-green job. Expect Obama to lament at his last press conference in 2012: "For those of you I offended, I apologize. For those of you who were not offended, you just didn't give me enough time; if only I'd had a second term, I could have offended you too."
Mercifully, the Founders at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 devised a useful remedy for such a desperate state--staggered terms for both houses of the legislature and the executive. An equally abominable Congress can get voted out next year. With a new Congress, there's always hope of legislative gridlock until we vote for president again two short years after that.
Yes, small presidents do fail, Barack Obama among them. The coyotes howl but the wagon train keeps rolling along.
that is laughable
>>>>
>
...a lover and a fighter.
"I'm at least half a bum" Rocky Balboa
Comments
Very true. Just picked up a Saranac Winter Sampler 12 pack. Some decent brews. Got a sixer of Sierra Nevada Celebration Ale, as well. So, I can't complain. I'm still a little upset about the state of American Society though.
Oh yeah. I get to listen to a bunch of Pearl Jam, Radiohead, Pink Floyd, AIC, Soundgarden, and Dylan. Not too bad.
"Palin without tits." Can I use that?
Hilarious.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Glad to put a smile on some faces in the Moving Train.
It's a bastardization of referring to Palin as "Bush with tits". Pretty sure that was a Bill Maher quote. Love ya Bill.
I know it was on page 1, but I've just gotten around to reading that article. There was a line towards the end that struck me...
"....His [Obama's] descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience..."
The reason it struck me is that, the whole way through the article, before I reached that line, I found myself thinking of the writer, "....His descriptions of Obama don't make sense and don't correspond with my experience..."
Come to think of it, the same goes for the frankly bizarre characterisation of Bush.
"George Bush Jr didn't fail so much as he was perceived to have been too much of a patrician while being uncomfortable with his more conservative allies... [his] potential was squashed by his own compromise of conservative principles... "
That's it?! I think even the most rudimentary understanding of the Bush presidency is enough to illustrate how far off the mark that is. I don't thinkanyone on either side could seriously say his main problem was being seen to be patrician!
The author of this article is almost comically out of touch. Even if I try to look at this objectively, this article bears no discernable or meaningful relationship to reality from what I can see.
It's not so much that it's bad, or even that it's partisan & I disagree with it.
It's just... well... plain weird. :?
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
I don't know if any of it makes any sense,I only posted it to make a point that there are lots of opinions out there and to people that believe differently than otheres their opinion is just as legit as anybody elses to them and they will argue it to the end...wrong or right, I don't know why ?
Godfather.
another book you might want to read is Trust Us, We're Experts
http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Us-Were-Exp ... 041&sr=8-1
it's about the use of PR and Lobbyists to sway public opinion ...
yes, there are different opinions on things but the reality is that big corporations are willing to pay PR firms to launch aggressive campaigns that use myths, lies and innuendo to sway public opinion ... so, often when you get articles written like the one you posted - it often reeks of lies and misconceptions ...
it's one thing when someone objectively posts a bunch of crap but it's far more insidious when its a carefully crafted piece funded by special interests knowing that they can reach a specific target audience ...
Yes, there are lots of opinions out there. There are lots of uneducated opinions out there and there are a lot of mentally unbalanced people out there. Why use that as your backup? Yikes. I'd be embarrassed.
nowadays hits you when you're young
Godfather.
All I can say on the matter is that when a person voices their opinion and says things like this about the president:
"...he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them."
I start to lose the ability to take them seriously.
I'm not a huge fan of Obama, but what this author said here is... well, :roll: :crazy:
now that you mention it it does read like "where the buffalo roam" by Hunter S Thompson.
Godfather.
I'm not criticising you for posting it. Yes, there are plenty of differing opinions out there. All I'm saying is that i find this one so bizarre. I don't undertand where the writer's ideas are coming from.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
'Where the Buffalo Roam' wasn't by Hunter S. Thompson. It was a movie. Hunter S. Thompson was a writer and journalist, not a movie driector, or an actor.
And despite this, there's still absolutely no comparison between that movie and that article you posted above.
Who said anything about thinking you are better than someone else?! That makes no sense whatsoever.
My point is that you are backing up your points with someone who is using distorted/falsified 'facts' and is clearly mentally ill. It's not a judgement, just an observation. I can't see how someone would feel comfortable backing their opinion up with something that is so clearly biased and baseless. I wouldn't say I'm a better 'person', but my opinions are certainly much more grounded in reality and fact.
nowadays hits you when you're young
There are a few bizarre people posting here. Coincidence they are all Bush apologists?
nowadays hits you when you're young
In all fairness, I think he was just pointing out that the article he posted was a bit 'wacky', and that this wackiness was somehow comparable to Bill Murray's performance in 'Where The Buffalo Roam'. It was just an analogy, albeit a pretty poor one.
Byrnzie this was all I could find, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081748/
I must admit I thought the book was HST work.
Godfather.
Obama's perceptions of the world are "out of touch" because he is not an uneducated, warmongering imperialist. How un-American!! Shame on you Barack!!
all righty then....he's a warmonger he's just starting to learn,he'll get better at it just give him time.
Godfather.
But don't you think that if it were 100% up to him he would withdraw all troops? Obviously, as we all know, the backlash from the right, the military, and possibly some international leaders (?), would be like nothing we have seen in decades. Obama has learned that what he wants to do is secondary to what he will be allowed to do - allowed by Big Oil, Corporate America, the Right, etc.
Maybe some feel the same way about your article.
It isn't an article. It's a list of statements of fact.
It is a statements of facts. But let's remember: Facts don't matter (like deficits, right D. Cheney?). Only beliefs matter.
might be nit picking here, but is this really a fact
* First president in US history to have all 50 states of the Union simultaneously go bankrupt?
Also, a few are opinion, it would be nice if the orginator(?) of this list had put links under each point to the accompanying evidence...might make some less likely to throw out everything because just a couple may be overstatements or opinion...
But that list certainly corresponds well with what we already know, GW was not a great president by almost anyone's measure...
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
>
...a lover and a fighter.
"I'm at least half a bum" Rocky Balboa
http://www.videosift.com/video/Obamas-Message-To-American-Indians
Edmonton, AB. September 5th, 2005
Vancouver, BC. April 3rd, 2008
Calgary,AB. August 8th, 2009
Isn't it a fact? Do you know something we don't?
Such as?