Our president, Barrack Obama, appeared in a White Sox jacket to throw out the first ball. He looked pretty spiffy... tall, dressed in a handsome black-and-white jacket. He had all the prerequisites. He looked almost like GW on the aircraft carrier, wearing the right, manly clothes.

And during his whole trip to the All star Game, he talked about what great a White Sox fan he is. The media amplified that message for him. What a great story! A youthful president who is a long-time devout baseball fan and who adores his town team. How American.

Except, he doesn't even know the name of the White Sox ball park. Umm.... how good a fan can you really be?

I'm not surprised. The leftist media and all the moonbats who loudly and viciously slammed GW for every little mispronounciation or personal speaking habit he showed, are uttely silent about Obama's many misspeaks with and without his teleprompter.

It's not so important now, is it hypocrites? Here's how Time and Newsweek would have reported last night's game if it had been GW.

"Barrack Obama attended the All Star Game last night dressed in an official White Sox jacket although he admitted later that he had never played organized baseball. After strutting from the dugout to the mound in his White Sox costume, Obama threw a fairly respectable ball to the home plate. Some Washington DC insiders observed privately that Obama should have spent as much time working on the economy last week as he did practicing pitches in the Rose Garden. 'He's more concerned with his image than about the people,' said an anonymous Democratic leader. 'And he's a fake. He didn't even know the name of the White Sox field. You'd think a "lifetime fan" of the game wearing a White Sox jacket could get that right.' "

*****
We'll be friends until we're old and senile. Then we'll be new friends.
-Anon.

Moonbats are moonbats. What else would you expect?

You are equating what Obama did to Bush's impersonating "Tom Cruise" and his "Mission Accomplished" claim.

Don't think so, AJC. The point is that the press made fun of every Bush mispronunciation. Obama gets a pass. In no way is this a comparison of "Mission Accomplished."

You are equating what Obama did to Bush's impersonating "Tom Cruise" and his "Mission Accomplished" claim.

You nailed it, Moniker.

 

Gee, this whole fucking issue is sooooo important.  Sorry, this board is getting to be a real snooze.  I'm usually neoconned out in 10 minutes. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are all equal, but we definitely are not the same"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't see any neocons on this thread so far, Roby. With the exception, perhaps, of Poetse. I don't know if she/he was a liberal jew elite journalist or political scientist who turned conservative.

 

*****
We'll be friends until we're old and senile. Then we'll be new friends.
-Anon.

OMG!!! LMAO!!!!

I watched the video... what word did Obama fail to enunciate correctly?

Jim...

Did he say "Cominskey" rather than "Comiskey" ... what was it?

If so, that is the difference between me misspelling a word or two, or my occasional lapses into poor punctuation, and poetse's word salads.

No discrimation at all with you stupid conservatives.

Jim...

Fuck, I always thought it was Cominsky.  It was just not important enough to worry about.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are all equal, but we definitely are not the same"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fuck, I always thought it was Cominsky. It was just not important enough to worry about.

---------------------

It would have been important if GWB had said it.

Did he say "Cominskey" rather than "Comiskey" ... what was it?

If so, that is the difference between me misspelling a word or two, or my occasional lapses into poor punctuation, and poetse's word salads.

No discrimation at all with you stupid conservatives.

Jim...

So if you are so sharp, why don't you use the possessive case before a gerund. Would give your salad "eye-appeal."

don't see any neocons on this thread so far, Roby. With the exception, perhaps, of Poetse. I don't know if she/he was a liberal jew elite journalist or political scientist who turned conservative.



I prefer not to say. Liberals won't listen to the truth. If they didn, they would no longer be liberals.

That's funny and petty too. Correcting someones pronunciation..

KETTLE/BLACK

***********************************

I've learned that the people you care most about in life are taken from you too soon and
all the less important ones just never go away.
And the real pains in the ass are permanent.

Being human beings and therefore imperferct-- and being politicians who must speak publicly 24/7-- both Obama and Bush have made a lot of misspeaks.

In Obama's case, a lot it seems in the 1.5 years he's been in the spotlight.

Mispronouncing the name of his home ball park-- that he is "such a fan" of-- on national television is just the last of many verbal mistakes. If you choose, in your amor for the man, or out of profoundly crippling partisanship, to ignore that after eight years of nitpicking Bush, that's your choice.

But every now and then I will flick your ear with a reminder of your hypocrisy.

*****
We'll be friends until we're old and senile. Then we'll be new friends.
-Anon.

I prefer not to say. Liberals won't listen to the truth. If they didn, they would no longer be liberals.

Sounds a bit like a political hack.

Obama will speak more than Bush because he is very comfortable doing it.

I prefer not to say. Liberals won't listen to the truth. If they didn, they would no longer be liberals.

Sounds a bit like a political hack.

Just an observation and years of experience. So where do you get political hack? Couldn't be that I have observed that l;iberals avoid issues and call names, could it? Wel;l;, Ann coulter said that and I just quote her every time I think it's appropriate.

Ann Coulter???

Well that says it all. One of the biggest liberal hackers around. LOL

***********************************

I've learned that the people you care most about in life are taken from you too soon and
all the less important ones just never go away.
And the real pains in the ass are permanent.

you are always going on about not bringing politics or liberal/conservative differences into the debate but sticking to issues.

I prefer to read whatever Obama has to say in print rather than watch him speaking live or in audio clips.  It's the same way I felt about watching Bush speak live.  Fingernails on a blackboard.

***********************
What is the essence of America? Finding and maintaining that perfect, delicate balance between freedom "to" and freedom "from." ~Marilyn vos Savant, in Parade

you are always going on about not bringing politics or liberal/conservative differences into the debate but sticking to issues.


Well, the issue is the main thing, but that doesn't keep one from making observations, does it.

then you might want to refrain from calling others political hacks when they do the same thing.

Barb,

I understand what you are saying about Bush.

I haven't got the same feeling about Obama though at times I think he is delivering a sermon and I don't care for that approach.

I love listening to this president.

***********************************

I've learned that the people you care most about in life are taken from you too soon and
all the less important ones just never go away.
And the real pains in the ass are permanent.

He throws like a sissy! and.......he should shouldn't he! LOL!

The language of priorities is the religion of Socialism.....Aneurin Bevan

hen you might want to refrain from calling others political hacks when they do the same thing.


People who decry Bush's budget and not Obama's are political hacks./

People who make fun of Bush's misspeaks and not Obama's are political hacks.

Clearly, you should be able to understAnd that from this thread. Those who refuse to see both sides of the issue are poloitioc hacks. The term hypocrite is trite and is too good for those myopic people.

That term would also apply to those who attack Obama's budget and misspeaks but did not attack Bush's budget or misspeaks.

That term would also apply to those who attack Obama's budget and misspeaks but did not attack Bush's budget or misspeaks.

----------------

I would like to know what term you would assign to those of us who have "attacked" Bush's budgets and misspeaks AND now "attack" Obama's budget and misspeaks. 

To assist, I have previously referred to myself as an equal opportunity basher.  Does that work for you? 

I "attack" actions taken by the president, congress, etc. that I don't agree with no matter the party.  And, imo, it's too bad more Democrats aren't following suit under this administration's reign.

 

 

 

They could call themselves anything they wanted assuming any of them exist.

hat term would also apply to those who attack Obama's budget and misspeaks but did not attack Bush's budget or misspeaks.

Not necessarily true on the budget. Bush's deficits were caused by a recession at the beginning of his first term. He was also fighting a war against terrorists. None of that could be classed as unnessary spending.

OTOH, Obama does not have to spend money. He could let the recovery take its natural course rather than spend stimulus money. And he does not need to spend as much as he is spending; therefore, his deficits will be larger and unnessary. Therefore, one could be against the Obama budget without being a political hack.

OTOH one could be against both Bush's and Obama's deficits and be consistently against deficit spending.

One could be for Bush's deficit and against Obama's and justify the spending as necessary under Bush but not under Obama. the huge difference would justify such reasoning.

But there is no way one can justify Obama's deficit and be against Bush's without being a political hack of very selfish.

And what would you say about the speech differences?

Well it should be obvious. It is more than a laugh, it is to portray the man making the misspeaks as one of low intelligence. (Political hacks to point out that one man is dumb because ne misspeaks--and ignore the misspeaks of another because he belongs to your party.

See what happens when you stick to the issues. You recognize who the political hacks are.

I address the speech in another thread.

Obama will be judged as being smarter because he is more articulate. The misspeaks were just part of Bush's problem. He just had a problem expressing himself when questioned. And part of that could have been because of concern about misspeaking.

You're right. The delivery has nothing to do with the content. The content is important for judging the intelligence.

Of course when one reads from the teleprompter, it is the intelligence of the writer.

But in this situation, the media are responsible and they are biased in Obama's direction.

He isn't reading from a telepromter all the time and Bush didn't do that as well as Obama.

It is more how their minds work. Obama is able to think better on his feet than Bush was.

And the content of Obama's statements and speechs is more complex than Bush's. It has to do with the fact that Bush was concrete in his thinking - and not well suited to trying to think through a problem when asked a question. He needed time to get his thoughts together and that doesn't work out well when being questioned.

He isn't reading from a telepromter all the time and Bush didn't do that as well as Obama.

It is more how their minds work. Obama is able to think better on his feet than Bush was.

See, I covered the various possibilities and you tell me he isn't reading from the teleprompter all of the time.

When one reads from the teleprompter, someone wrote the script. That person may be a professional speech writer; therefore, we cannot judge the intelligence of the speaker when he reads anopther's writing.

Whe a perso is speaking extemporaneously, we can judge his intelligence if he has no notes. He cn or cannot think on his feet.

The point is that the media makes more of Bush's misspeaks than it dos Obama's. that is the entire point of the post. Obama goofs, and the media don't care.

I am trying to teach you to think, and you prove that I failed. OK, back to the drawing board.

They could call themselves anything they wanted assuming any of them exist.

------------------

There's no assuming to it, ajc.  Several of us 'exist'.  You, like other Dems, choose to ignore the fact that there are those of us who "attacked" Bush policies/misspeaks and now "attack" Obama policies/misspeaks.  Why are the rest of you Dems afraid to speak up now, as you used to?

Thanks, Inka. Another's statement. is sometimes better to emphasize that which is obvious to one party and hidden to the other.


BTW Check out Maw's posting of the Glenn Beck video. Notice the content. That is the important part. Not a smooth delivery, but effective and logical.

I don't ignore it. I just don't recall it being done

For instance, will anyone accept that I have stated I thought the stimulus package was not fast enough in its spending and that we should have been more attentive about Japan's experience with infrastructure stimulus actions which didn't work well for them. Those are criticisms of Obama's plan but I don't anyone will recall they were made.

They just aren't in the vain of saying he is bankrupting the country or leading us to socialism.

don't ignore it. I just don't recall it being done

For instance, will anyone accept that I have stated I thought the stimulus package was not fast enough in its spending and that we should have been more attentive about Japan's experience with infrastructure stimulus actions which didn't work well for them. Those are criticisms of Obama's plan but I don't anyone will recall they were made.

They just aren't in the vain of saying he is bankrupting the country or leading us to socialism.

So when you borrow more money than you take in, you are bankrupting the country. GM is the perfect exanmple.

For Socialism, look at GM another poerfect example. the government is in control of production.

I thought you could think better than that, but obviously the obvious things ellude you.