Antonin Scalia

The Ivy League doesn't offer athletic scholarships, so where did you come up with that bullshit? Was it because he was a black guy playing basketball, plus the fact that it fits the rest of your bullshit post?

I didn't have much time to do anything but skim over the two lengthy diatribes trying to prove how stupid Obama is, but I'll wager that I'll find more baloney when I look more closely later on.

 

I am not trying to be a condescending [Penis] here, and really have no idea as to their motives, but it's not about the money for everyone. Your question makes a hell of an assumption regarding their mindset post-graduation.

 

Interesting theory, I never thought about that.

 

Sorry, I misspoke in calling it an "athletic scholarship" - when in reality, it was a "financial aide package" that reduced his annual tuition - room, board, etc. - to some $3,500 per year. At Princeton.

"From the NY Daily News:
Coming out of high school, Robinson was heavily recruited by both the University of Washington and Princeton. The former was offering a full ride, Princeton a financial-aid package that would leave his parents with a bill of $3,500 per year." (Link: Craig Robinson has always been there for his brother-in-law, Barack Obama - Page 2 - New York Daily News)

Now that the red herring is dead, would you like to discuss my other points? I'd be more than happy to do so, seeing as my position is both easily defensed and adequately supported.

 

Barack wanted to move/live to DC after college and was told it would be better for him to move into Chicago and to "come up" through that political scene.

 

bullshit they don't offer athletic scholorships. they don't call them athletic scholarships true, but they sure as hell offer preferential financial aid and admissions to athletes.

it's not just the dollar amount we are talking about here, it's the prestige of the position. these were choices made by those who either lack ambition or lack other options. nor were their positions where they could do the greatest good.

 

If the left would exhibit 1/100th of the willingness to investigate the intelligence of their own candidates / elected members as they are toward Republicans (read: racists).....we'd have far less things to argue over.

 

Your points are not adequately defended. They are positions expanded upon incomplete and selective information or simply extrapolated from your own biased pre-existing determinations.

First, on Michelle Obama, you throw her under the bus for "throwing her degree in the trash" after, ridiculously, stating she owes white people or society something. Of course, people go into fields other than their majors all the time as, oftentimes, new opportunities arise. As for her "wasting" her career, she became a dean at a college and worked with the mayor of Chicago. To say she wasted her degree is absurd. To say that she used her degree to advance her career would be more accurate, so your characterization lacks the analytical chops you think it does. You reduce her to some kind of ingrateful leech who's abidicated her responsibilities because she doesn't work in a law firm anymore. Hell, Barack doesn't use his law degree, either. I suppose he's spitting in the face of those he cheated out of a spot at Harvard, too.

As far as Craig Robinson, he got financial aid as most Ivy League students do. He skipped second grade, showing his intelligence at an early age, and he still had to get accepted into Princeton, so to suggest he was in because he's black, without any proof, is a pretty insulting and specious argument, unless you have some different information.

After all that, I am still waiting on the evidence to counter the fact that both Obamas graduated with honors from Ivy League schools, which, for Barack Obama, I know for a fact means he was in the top 20% of his class.

 

Because we don't put forth candidates based upon some idiotic conception of folksiness or common man persona. Democrats typically select the ivy tower folks over the good ol' boy back slappers. That's why we get stiff, distant shitty candidates like John Kerry instead of moronic shitty candidates like George W. Bush.

Otherwise, why are Republicans the biggest victims? Always whining about the evil left; how they control the media and pick on conservatives, etc. Then they pull out the "What about him?" defense that I wouldn't accept from my 8 year old whenever confronted about something.

 

If you had two kids, both did the same thing, you had evidence that both did it, and yet you only got on to one of them for doing it then said child would have a legitimate gripe about it.

 

Or, if the child just imagined the gripe, plus was hypocritical in their whining, then they wouldn't have cause. Such as the case with the creation of the unintelligent Obamas. It's simply a manifestation of the massive Republican character assassination sqaud that has made their agenda known from Day 1, i.e. "Our goal is to make Obama a one term president." We liberals haven't questioned their intelligence because there was no reason to do so, outside of the meandering and self-serving "logic" created by Republicans to suit their agenda.

 

Please show where I said either anything about "whites" or "society". In fact, your inference to such may speak to your own racist beliefs. If someone were to be offended by her failure to take advantage of the opportunity given her - and at a direct cost to another more qualified candidate - why should it be reserved for "whites", specifically, or "society", generally - who would be offended? Couldn't blacks? Puerto Ricans? Native Americans (no one cares about them, ammiright?)?

[/quote] Of course, people go into fields other than their majors all the time as, oftentimes, new opportunities arise. As for her "wasting" her career, she became a dean at a college and worked with the mayor of Chicago. To say she wasted her degree is absurd.[/quote]
She didn't waste her degree - you'll notice I gave her full credit for meeting the affirmative action quotas at two schools and in landing Barack.

And did you forget her work with the hospital, too?

Perhaps I've become discombobulated with the high-minded logic you're throwing at me - but I wasn't sure if you answered these three questions or not:

1. Did she obtain a law degree from Harvard?
2. How long did she use it, and what would you estimate the chances of her ever using again?
3. How exactly do you define "waste"?

I don't mean to get you off message, but could you cite where I compared Michelle Obama an "ungrateful leach", or simply admit that you're doing little more than employing the everready and yet utterly nonsensical defensive move of the left by demonizing the opinion of anyone who speaks out against (gasp!) - a black person.

Spoiler alert: I don't worry with baseless accusations. Like the one you're purporting here.

And here. You are consistent, if nothing else.

I'm sorry, can you cite where I called his intelligence into any question? Of course, I didn't need to, considering that you did spew some ignorance about his über-intelligence.

You are adorable. Who said that either Barack or Michelle Obama were stupid? I believe that it was your ignorant insitence of their mental accuity that started this roll.

Which, by the way, do you still stand by those previous comments as to their hyper-intelligence? If so, can you provide some better proof than you earlier provided (and which has since been ground to powder)?

 

Man, talk about a 180 you've done, suddenly.

You were the one consistantly challenging their purported intelligence and every single accomplishment they ever had, so don't play the insouciant one now. You were stating the only way they made it through school and life was because of their color, not through merit. You stated that the Michelle Obama's only accomplishment from getting a law degree was to marry someone and that she stole an opportunity "from thousands". Hell, I never even said they were "hyper-intelligent", like they are Steven Hawking or something, that's an argument you made up about me; I said they were obviously very intelligent and listed the reasons in terms of their accomplishments, name graduating with honors from the most prestigious schools in the country, for one.

And, no, it's not that I'm criticizing you for speaking out against a black person. It's because YOU played the "Oh, they've only gotten where they are because they are black" card in regards to their lofty achievements and I called you on that bullshit. Don't play that right-wing faux innocence on me, the racial component was your doing.

I mean, your whole post is [uck fay]ing ridiculous. You didn't call out the intelligence of Craig Robinson? You said he only got into Princeton because of an athletic scholarship and, when I called you on that bullshit, you tried to throw out he got financial aid, which most Ivy League students get anyway. So, you were saying, point blank, that Robinson didn't deserve to be at Princeton based on.......what? I'm curious to hear what your supposed logic is behind this is.

 

You are legitimately trying to say there is no largely liberal media bias? Is that correct?

 

I legitimately can't believe someone could argue against Obama getting part of his accolades handed to him. And for the record, I pretty much loathe both parties and view them as one party with polar wings. Obama was handed a gift on a silver platter. He found a niche and rode it to the top. But denying affirmative action played a key role is asinine.

 

News media is driven by an ability to sell ads. The content on air replicates that need. As a general rule on social issues they trend left of center but on economic issues they are in the tank for Wall Street, which is a big part of their bread and butter.

And to be totally honest, I don't think a great deal of the on-air talent is sophisticated enough to know any more than to ask poorly thought out questions.

 

Every major accomplishment which they boast is largely - if not entirely - the product of affirmative action.
This includes their respective educations, degrees, licenses and which culminated into his ultimate election as President.

He was as unqualified then as he is now. It as obvious now, as it was then.

That either possesses some hyper-intelligence, as you originally suggested, is absolute stupidity, rubbish, nonsense, and glorious ignorance of the first and highest order.

The reasons you offered in the meager defense of such an idiotic statement, while taking an indefensible position, did little but to further bring to light their many shortcomings and to substantiate your own dogmatic allegiances, despite mountainous evidences to the contrary.

When facts failed you - in typical liberal form - you resorted to name-calling, attacking the person and demonized that which was so well-proven as to be self-evident, ostensibly, in the hope that you might obfuscate the obvious and the inevitable. If you could not disprove it, you slooped to discredit it. But the facts remain, unwavering, despite your theatrics, illogical precepts, and baseless assertions - and which became increasingly more desperate and flailing foolish than the last.

I am absolutely bankrupt as to how I might possibly be more clear, than this.

Until we're ready to speak the truth, and about all races, with no special consideration being given to anyone - and we're willing to do so with both unflinching and unfailing honesty, the problems which plague us will never be resolved. So, your sacred cows must be sacrificed, just as mine, and everyone else's must do the same.

 

And when given analysis of parties/politicians? You cannot tell me as a whole there is not an overall liberal slant. The on air folks dont set the tone.

 

I'm not following your logic.

 

Not that my opinion matters, but my take on Obama's intelligence/educational accomplishments is this: I think Obama is a very smart man, and I think he benefited from affirmative action. There's no reason to try to act like he's not smart because one simply doesn't like him. I'm not going to vote for him, but I do think he's very intelligent; however, that doesn't mean he's Steven Hawking either.