Not a typo — no, this one is stranger. While John C. Drew Ph. D. claims young Obama was at Occidental College in 1980-81 spouting Marxism [link to American Thinker web site], a new report from two ex-members of a secret CIA Mars time-travel and teleport team claims the future President was actually on Mars.
Andrew D. Basiago, 50, a lawyer in Washington State who served in DARPA’s time travel program Project Pegasus in the 1970’s, and fellow chrononaut William B. Stillings, 44, who was tapped by the Mars program for his technical genius, have publicly confirmed that Obama was enrolled in their Mars training class in 1980 and that each later encountered Obama during visits to rudimentary U.S. facilities on Mars that took place from 1981 to 1983.
The White House denies the story.
Discussion is being continued on this topic under Is Obama a Marsist (continued).
Here is an explanantion for the video
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43299687/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/did-amateur-spot-secret-mars-base-uh-no/
“It looks like a linear streak artifact produced by a cosmic ray,” said Alfred McEwen, a planetary geologist at the Lunar and Planetary Lab at the University of Arizona and the director of the Planetary Imaging Research Laboratory.”
[skip]
“McEwen explained. “But with space images that are taken outside our magnetosphere, such as those taken by orbiting telescopes, it’s very common to see these cosmic ray hits. You see them on optical images and a lot of the infrared images too,” he told Life’s Little Mysteries.”
“As a cosmic ray passes through a camera’s image sensor, it deposits a large amount of its electric charge in the pixels that it penetrates. If the particle passes through at a shallow angle to the plane of the camera, it affects several pixels along its path. The result is a bright streak on the image.”
“The digital compression software that converts the image into a JPEG file then “sort of smears out the image, giving it that pixelated look,” McEwen said.”
Just like a smiley face on a pdf of a birth certificate.
Yeah. The other problem with the video host is that he’s struck by the “rectangular shape and “sharp angles”… however, that just so happens to coinside with him zooming into the level of pixilation in the resolution.
Seems like he’s falling for optical illusion and seeing what he wants to see. Same as folks who see images in clouds…
I saw Elvis in the frozen food isle.
If Groucho Marx and John Lennon wrote a musical together, it would be a Marxist-Lennonist production.
Their copyright has been filed by the law firm of Dewey, Cheatum and Howe.
Once again:
Pareidolia ( /p¦rɨˈdoʊliə/ parr-i-doh-lee-ə) is a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being perceived as significant. Common examples include seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon or the Moon rabbit, and hearing hidden messages on records played in reverse. The word comes from the Greek para- – “beside”, “with”, or “alongside”—meaning, in this context, something faulty or wrong (as in paraphasia, disordered speech) and eidōlon – “image”; the diminutive of eidos – “image”, “form”, “shape”. Pareidolia is a type of apophenia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia
First President on Mars! Obama just keeps racking up significant accomplishments! Maybe in his post-presidency, he’ll have time to go back.
Any attempts to create an eligibility related meme out of this, or is it so far just a general Obama Conspiracy? Is a President found to be in the thrall of Martian mindworms eligible for re-election? Nothing in the Constitution about mindworms. I guess the Founders were too busy to go to Mars. Still, when the voters hear about the mindworms, I suspect it may cost Obama a few votes. Hard to trust a bug.
Speaking of mindworms, how many of the Red frontrunners have been to Mars? Oh, wait….Reds….red planet…..oh nooooooes!
Red state.
I’m more interested in the timetravel part of the CIA program. This would explain some of the time traveling claims birthers seem to believe in from Ann Dunham’s mother being able to assign a social security number in 1977 based on her working at juvenile court in 1986 to Bill Ayers being able to get Obama the social of a dead person in 77 even though he didn’t know Obama until the 90s
thanks for the link for John Drew. He’s been a long-time and regular commenter on the NYT Political Caucus blog (the last couple of years under the name Augustine 25), where he’s been spouting this stuff too, as well as complaining about his wife being unemployed (entirely Obama’s fault) and other conservative/conspiratorial stuff. Lately he’s been absent, and I’ve been wondering what happened to him. I’ve actually missed him — whatever the topic, his post (rant) was absolutely predictable, creating a bit of stability in an uncertain world.
What on earth………er, Mars am I supposed to be looking for in this video???? I watched the whole thing and am a at a loss here. President Obama was enrolled in a Mars training class and this video is the proof????? How??????
oops……misspelled my screen name…………
Tell Sven that’s where the adoption papers and the other documents birthers demand are hidden.
I believe that smrstrauss would probably appreciate any help from constitutional experts over at http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7466841558189356289&postID=909525113481608842&page=1&token=1324496414797
In order to properly understand the relationship of the video to the story, it is necessary to look at the story’s category: “Wild and Wacky” and perhaps consulting item 3 under the sites Editorial Policy. I hope that clears up any misunderstanding.
– red diaper baby 1942
You have to admit my story has come a long ways since my first posts at the NYT The Caucus blog site. I remember folks over there saying I was lying about having a Ph.D., lying about ever attending Occidental College – I graduated the year Obama started at Oxy, lying about meeting young Obama.
Today, however, the story of my debate with young Obama has appeared in books by Michael Savage, Jack Cashill, Paul Kengor and Stanley Kurtz.
My take on young Obama’s ideological extremism has been confirmed by a liberal author, David Remnick, who interviewed all the participants in that 1980 debate including Caroline Boss, Hasan Chandoo and Barack Obama.
Ironically, the fact that I was posting at the NYT The Caucus blog site about young Obama’s ideological extremism as early as 2008 is now part of the evidence that the mainstream media failed to properly follow up on clear evidence of Obama’s radical, Marxist socialist roots. Thankfully, more people are waking up to the fact that Obama has lied about his ties to Marxist socialist philosophy. It make you wonder, what else is he lying about?
No, can’t say that it does. Maybe it would if I knew more, but my curiosity isn’t piqued enough to hunt down your story.
So? Israel was founded by Ben Gurion, a socialist and an atheist. Golda Meir was a socialist, and a Marxist at one time. The kibbutzim are the foundation of Israel. I was a kibbutznik for one year. Kibbutz can be translated as commune or collective.
Israel has universal health care, and it is socialized: all ambulances and hospitals are government owned. Physicians and nurses are paid by the government. Medical care there is equal to the States, sometimes better.
Also, federal bailouts were started by Nixon, for Lockheed:
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/economy/a/lockheedBailout.htm
Nixon also instituted wage and price controls to tame inflation. Reagan approved stiff tariffs on Japanese big bikes to give Harley time to recover. Michele Bachmann accepted $250K in farm subsidies. Cattle ranchers do not pay market rates to graze on public land. Alabama gave Kia the land, and trains Kia assembly line workers at state expense. ADM got 50/gallon tariffs on Brazilian ethanol. In Pennsylvania and Montgomery county MD, liquor stores are government owned. Social Security is pure socialism, as is public transportation and public libraries.
I could go on for pages.
Banks and stock brokers privatize profits, and socialize losses.
Yes, you left the place when Obama arrived there.
Which makes you THE expert on Obama’s beliefs in those days, of course.
Makes us wonder what else he is lying about? Considering the places where you have been posting this self-aggrandizement, it must be his birth certificate, of course? Did he have a computer with Paintshop on when you met him? Oh wait, it was Vattel of course? How many copies of Vattel did you see him burn, after replacing them with Blackstone?
Inquiring minds would like to know. And no, we do not want to know about you personally. Why should we?
You might need to be intelligent to have earned a PhD, but apparently you don’t have to be very wise.
You can always tell a Harvard graduate, but you can’t tell him much.
“And Alaska — we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs. … It’s to maximize benefits for Alaskans, not an individual company, not some multinational somewhere, but for Alaskans.” – Sarah Palin, explaining the windfall profits tax that she imposed on the oil industry in Alaska as a mechanism for ensuring that Alaskans “share in the wealth” generated by oil companies. – New Yorker interview, Sept. 2008
Thankfully people are waking up to the fact that Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are crackpots.
Sarah Palin used AK tax dollars to fund dominionist churches
Today, we find that part of those funding scandals include the tax money of Alaskans used to pay for youth programs at Juneau Christian Center.
Read on: http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/4/155547/0997
– Paul Pieniezny
If you read the American Thinker article, Meeting Young Obama, you will find that I was in a very good position to identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs in 1980-1981. My girlfriend, at the time, was the co-president of the Democrat Socialist Alliance. She was the one who introduced me to young Obama and the one who verified his participation in the activities of the Democrat Socialist Alliance. (She was a classmate of Obama’s.) I founded this group, under a different name, in 1976.
I knew both Hasan Chandoo and his girlfriend, Margot Mifflin, from the anti-apartheid efforts which took place in the spring of 1979 on the Occidental College campus.
The liberal author, David Remnick, has verified that Obama’s roommate, Hasan Chandoo, was a Marxist, socialist. I have a Ph.D. in political science from Cornell University. I’ve taught American Government and the U.S. Presidency at Williams College in MA. If I’m not the best qualified person on earth to correctly identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs, then I don’t know who else in the world would be qualified to do so.
So what?
– misha
I spent a year living in England and I saw the results of socialized medicine. It creates bad teeth.
“If you read the American Thinker article”
LMAO
Gee. Why not cite extreme fright wing cesspools like the P & E or WND too?
😛
Well then, Mr “expert”, perhaps you could tell us exactly why we should give a damn?
I mean even if Obama’s Ideological background is as you describe(and I don’t believe for a minute that it is), why would that matter?
Are you saying that If someone attends Mass twice he is forever a Catholic and may never be anything else? Obama is clearly not Marxist now, so why should we care if he had a passing interest in Marxism, or Catholicism, or modern interpretive dance, back in college?
Furthermore, are you suggesting that if he is a Marxist, that would disqualify him? Are you saying that some political ideologies are precluded from running for office? Is it just Marxism you would forbid, or are there other political ideologies you would deny? How about Liberals, should they be allowed? What about middle of the spectrum Conservatives? Libertarians? Just who, in your universe, is allowed to run for office?
And what do you suggest we do with the millions of people who defied your law and illegally voted for this marxist? Should perhaps round them all up in internment camps? Who would run those camps, FEMA maybe?
I pity any political science student that had you for a teacher. I can’t see how they would possibly have passed any course after yours.
I lived in Canada for many years and France for a few and have one cavity in my whole life. I am healthy as a horse.
Besides the US has socialized Medicine-it’s called Medicare and tens of millions of seniors will kill anyone who touches it. On the other hand, “Obamacare” uses private insurance, private doctors and private hospitals. I can only conclude that whatever Obama believed at 20, he is disapointingly unsocialist today. Only a tiresome fool believes the same thing at 50 that he did at 20. Does that describe you?
So has your former girlfriend publicly confirmed your claim?
Has Hasan Chandoo?
Has anyone else from Occidental?
Pictures or records of Obama’s involvement with the Democrat Socialist Alliance?
I acknowledge your claim. I just don’t see anything that corroborates your claims. And frankly- why should I believe you?
How can you spout such nonsense and still claim any expertise in polysci?
Personally, I draw the line at Red Sox fans. Romney is thus disqualified. And Bloomberg. Obama is a White Sox fan; that’s sad, but not disqualifying.
Alright. Let me just start over……….
And there I was, thinking one of the main characteristeristics of being an academic was to be critical of oneself and one’s opinions. And not to attach too much importance to paper qualifications, but rather to pedagogic and scientific achiements.
(Oops – and there I go talking about myself – better keep my mouth shut before I fall into the trap here… )
Well of course…. I just didn’t consider it necessary to stat the obvious 😉
If anyone wants to see John Drew smacked down check out the fogbow links:
http://thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=3350
John Drew came in, made a fool of himself, lied repeatedly about what Remnick said and was booted. It’s funny how Drew’s story morphed from him being at one function where Obama was at at Occidental to having a conversation with Obama to spending a whole day with Obama. He’s a serial exaggerater who is so into John Drew that he has a life doll of John Drew.
Whew! Funny stuff!
Now THAT is entertainment!
And enlightening.
Thanks!
– sfjeff
As you may know, Hasan Chandoo verified that the “debate” took place in an interview with Ronald Kessler, a New York Times best-selling author. See, http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/obama-college-marxism-occidental/2010/02/08/id/349329 Kessler gave both Boss and Obama the opportunity to react to the story and both declined the offer.
Presidential historian David Garrow interviewed me last month regarding my take on young Obama and verified my relationship with Boss through photos, old letters and cards. See, http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2011/12/giving-up-all-my-secrets-dr-drew.html
To me, the primary evidence that Obama is still a Marxist socialist is his lack of a conversion story, his later ties to Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers and Alice Palmer, and his continual use of Marxist rhetoric and concepts including class conflict, alienation and redistribution of wealth. I have never suggested that my take on President Obama’s current views is based simply on my observations of his behavior slightly over 30 years ago. For one of the best books that traces out young Obama’s interaction with me and his later ties to Marxist socialist activists – including folks associated with the famous Midwest Academy – I recommend you check out Stanley Kurtz’s well-researched book, Radical-In-Chief.
If you would like more information on the folks behind Fogbow and the lies I caught them telling about me, please see my blog at http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2011/12/dr-drew-crushing-fogbowers-and.html
The leader of the Fogbow website is Bill Byran. Bryan is a crook who is no longer allowed to practice law in California because of his criminal behavior. http://www.wnd.com/2011/06/311093/
I wouldn’t take the Fogbowers too seriously since they don’t hold up well to sunlight and transparency.
Bob Ross, by the way, is the reason I’m no longer posting at Fogbow. I humiliated him repeatedly for the way he expressed doubts about David Garrow interviewing me for his book last month. Apparently, in Bob’s wacky world, a photograph is not enough evidence to convince him I was interviewed by Garrow. I guess Bob thinks liberal writers and people like me just naturally hang out together for the fun of it. What a joke! The folks at Fogbow finally pulled the plug when I won the debate and demonstrated Bob’s utter silliness.
So, he does have a talent apparently. The world needs clowns.
Allowing the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy to expire = Marxism? Was Reagan a Marxist? Nixon? Eisenhower? Clinton?
I notice you avoided explaining why that would be significant, even if it were true….
I notice you avoid most of the hard questions…
Hardly the sort of thing I would expect from a PhD and an expert in Political Science.
You mean like the way Orly humiliates her opponents every time she goes to court?
This is fascinating. John Drew hardly humiliated the people at the Fogbow. What a foolish claim. John Drew failed to support much of his claims and was shown to be quote mining several authors…
Such a joker.
Wait are you talking about this statement:
“If that’s what John Drew said, that’s what he said,” Chandoo commented. “I can’t remember Obama ever talking like that. It sounds a bit absurd to me, but that’s my opinion. I can’t remember him ever expressing an interest in being a Marxist.”
http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/obama-college-marxism-occidental/2010/02/08/id/349329
That’s not much of a confirmation of your story.
Daniel:
Bob Ross is a freak…even by Fogbow standards. He seriously said that having photographic evidence wasn’t proof that I was “interviewed” by Garrow. It was an absolutely silly thing to assert and displayed a profound lack of common sense.
For a great look at why Obama’s ideology is a threat to American values, prosperity and our U.S. Constitution, I recommend you check out Michael Savage’s book, Trickle-Up Poverty. For an eye-openning look at why FDR’s policies made the Great Depression worse and longer than it should have been check out Burton Folsom’s book, New Deal or Raw Deal.
I have no doubt that business owners and employers are frightened by Obama’s long-standing ties to Marxist socialist thought. I don’t see the economy getting much better until Obama is kicked out of office by the same swing voters who elected him in 2008.
– gorefan
Please. 🙂 LMAO Hasan Chandoo could have denied ever making that road trip with young Obama. He could have denied ever knowing me and Caroline Boss. Chandoo did none of that.
Ronald Kessler is a great journalist, the author of best selling books on the CIA, FBI and Secret Service. See, http://www.ronaldkessler.com/ If my story did not ring true, I don’t think Kessler would have published it. Kessler, of course, is a conservative.
Chandoo, by the way, admits he is a Marxist socialist in David Remnick’s book, The Bridge. Remnick is a liberal. Remnick reports Boss was the leader of the Democrat Socialists Alliance at Oxy.
You should know that Chandoo does not have a strong reputation for telling the truth. In the Kessler article, he is basically caught lying about how often he sees President Obama. It was really pretty funny. Kessler caught Chandoo in a lie even as Chandoo tried to discredit my take on young Obama’s ideological extremism.
Remnick makes the argument that Chandoo was more of an ideological extremist than young Obama. I take the opposite point of view. I met them both and Obama, by far, was the most extreme revolutionary of the group. This, of course, would help explain why it was Obama and not Chandoo who ended up hanging out with unrepentant terrorists like Bill Ayers. Of course, I have a real advantage over Remnick in making sense of young Obama’s ideology. I was there to see it.
Oh, the trip may have occurred, what Hasan appears to be saying is the debate never happened. At least not the way you remember it.
I was there and you were crushed by your inabilities to provide supporting evidence and your misquotes.
Sorry Drew, but you stood no chance given your level of ignorance.
I changed it because you thought that I was a girl. You were no match for a girl in a pink dress my dear.
– gorefan
I have provided the most complete and most detailed account of young Obama’s ideological views. I have done so in a complex and truthful manner that does not trap young Obama into a simplistic black and white point of view.
My story helps explain why Obama went on to hang out with people like Rev. Wright, Alice Palmer and Bill Ayers.
My report on young Obama’s ideological extremism helps make sense of the role played in developing his intellectual beliefs by Frank Marshall Davis while Obama was still in Hawaii.
Don’t you think it is strange that I’m the only person out there willing to describe what it was like to debate young Obama?
If my take is so inaccurate, then why aren’t any of his friends from Oxy providing evidence of Obama arguing a pragmatic centrist point of view when they tangled with him intellectually? If Obama was not a Marxist socialist, then why doesn’t Chandoo provide us with some evidence of the sort of non-Marxist non-socialist things young Obama would say to him? The reason is that they can’t.
I read the interview.
Not once des Hasan confirm any ‘debate’ took place. And Hasan specifically denies remembering Obama ever discussing Marxism. Hasan refutes your position.
Boss isn’t quoted at all. She is your former girlfriend- how come she hasn’t come out validating your story?
What this shows me- as I suspected- that you have nothing to corroborate your story- and in the case of the story you cited, you are willing to twist the truth.
And you were not extended a contract at your College which you of course blamed to affirmative action rather than to a poor publication record and a run for office.
Sorry my friend, I believe that you’re upset that President Obama and you met under similar circumstances and that he managed to achieve the Office of the President, while you are now advising people on how to write grants. While you blame your failures and his success on affirmative action, there is no real evidence of such other than in your imagination. Now you feel you have an opportunity to vent your frustrations in your minute in the limelight. But by stepping into the limelight you have exposed yourself as well…
For that we thank you.
She and others discussed Obama in Remnick’s book and while Drew asserts that this supports his case, it actually totally demolishes it.
Remnick, David (2010-04-06). The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama (p. 104). Knopf. Kindle Edition.
No wonder Drew left…
– nbc
None of the other Fogbowers changed their avatars over the course of the debate with me. Why did you suddenly think that was a great idea?
I took it as a sign there is something wrong with you. You’re a pleaser and a cheerleader for the left. You really don’t have anything of serious intellectual weight to offer the real world.
Simply repeating a quote that shows I’m right about young Obama doesn’t earn you a Ph.D. in anything.
Still avoiding the question I see, “Dr” John
– sfjeff
You aren’t applying your common sense. 🙂 Chandoo made a huge mistake even responding to Kessler’s request for an interview.
Chandoo could have said that I was making the whole thing up, that he didn’t remember me or Caroline, or that he never drove up to her house in Portolla Valley with young Obama.
He did none of those things.
Instead, he lied about never hearing Obama discuss Marxism. Trust me. I was in the room when Obama debated Marxism right in front of me and Chandoo. The true test of my story is that it has withstood the test of time. The Obama literature is moving steadily in the direction I indicated as early as 2008 – young Obama was a ardent Marxist socialist.
ROTFL, so Chandoo did not support your story so he must have been lying… Yes Drew, that must be the case.
Whatever you stated is of little relevance as the facts show otherwise.
– nbc
Please…even the people at Fogbow were making fun of you for changing your avatar while you were debating me. 🙂 You made yourself look like a weakling and a fool.
On a more serious note, I think you’re minimizing the role of affirmative action in the lives of young people like me in the 1980s and today.
I was harmed by affirmative action while I was at Cornell University because the best interviewing opportunities went to the less objectively qualified black students.
While I was in the political science department at Williams College I observed numerous times when better qualified white candidates were discriminated against in favor of black applicants.
Today, 50% of the new hires in that political science department are blacks.
The head of the political science department told me that I was not allowed to advance along the tenure track because of the poor quality of my scholarship.
Subsequently, I won an extremely rare honor from the American Political Science Association for having the best doctoral dissertation in the nation in my field.
The way I was harmed by affirmative action later on in California is now illegal. I really hope swing voters learn more about the liberal left and its out right hostility to young white people and their careers.
Because you were such fun in your ignorance. Drew, you continue to be soo wrong about simple issues and I thought you might appreciate being shown wrong by a little girl in pink.
It shows that Obama, according to his friends was NOT a marxist and yet you continue to foolishly assert the contrary. I find that fascinating self delusion.
– nbc
You really don’t see how silly you look right now, do you? I don’t know why anyone would take your blog seriously if they see the way you react to these posts.
Think about it. Chandoo admits to Remnick that he was a radical as a youth. Chandoo is Obama college roommate. Why would Obama pick Chandoo as his roommate if young Obama was a centrist pragmatic type?
It makes no sense.
Anyone who keeps their avatar consistent should be able to figure out the truth. Oh, wait, you changed your avatar last time I debated you…
So you say. Where is your corroborating evidence?
Not really. That you cannot produce one person to back up your claim is what I think is strange.
Well, I am not the one who failed to get his appointment extended at Williams College or who failed in one or two elections…
So who is lacking in serious intellectual weight here? Furthermore, I have shown you to be slightly confused about your representations of Remnick and Obama himself.
Sorry John in our discussions I have not seen anything that suggest serious scholarship on your part.
A statistical fluke at best based on a sample of three or so.
Yes, that makes sense your track record does not show much other than your ‘award winning’ thesis. A one time fluke perhaps? Sorry my friend, a single thesis does not make one a scholar that takes hard work.
So you have claimed, without ANY supporting evidence.
Again no evidence to support this has been presented.
In fact Williams College was criticized for its mostly white male faculty… Sorry John, you fail again
It is found in the fact that Chandoo and others deny it and obviously must be lying…
Sigh… And John wonders why he was let go from Williams’ College…
Remnicjk Chandoo, for his part, readily admits to his youthful radicalism, but says that Obama was never the least bit doctrinaire: “The only thing doctrinaire about him was his austerity!”
To slap an ideological tag on Chandoo and Hamid, let alone Obama, is not only unfair; it also credits them with thinking far more programmatically than they did. “I would say we were idealistic and well-read in terms of understanding all the ideologies,” Hamid said.
You claimed Remnick supported your position now you admit that he contradicts your position but that somehow you should be taken seriously anyway…
– nbc
You silly little avatar changer. 🙂 To me, that was the online equivalent of wetting your pants. I thought it was funny that you did that and your fellow Fogblowers worried about you. It was a laugh. You really can’t handle the truth, can you?
Remnick’s book also indicates that the Democrat Socialist Alliance flew a big picture of Karl Marx on the Occidental dining hall. This is hardly the behavior of a group of people who were not Marxists. 🙂 I knew Caroline Boss a lot better than you. She was definitely a Marxist in 1980-1981. Chandoo was definitely a Marxist.
We have clear evidence that Boss and Chandoo were Marxists according to Remnick’s book. I don’t see how you can assert that young Obama’s friends were not Marxists simply on the basis of one quote from Wahid Hamid. My take is that Boss, Chandoo and Obama were all Marxists. I don’t see how I could be so right regarding Boss and Chandoo, but somehow mistaken about young Obama?
I would think that an objective observer would see that I’m telling the truth.
My fellow fogbowers thought it was hilarious for me to change into this pink girl cheerleader, since you were erroneously believing that I was a female and called me a cheerleader.
Wetting my pants? On the contrary, I was laughing my pants off at the lack of rigor in your ‘research’.
Even Chandoo fails to make the case. He considers himself a radical but even his friends admit that this was youthful playfulness, exploring these new ideas. These same friends claim counter to you, that Obama was not a Marxist. So who should we believe? Someone who met Obama fleetingly or his own friends?
Given your attempt at self inflation, I have no problem making the rational choice here my friend.
Can we expect you supporting your claims about discrimination any further or is the statistically flawed claim of 50% the best you have to offer?
I am getting more and more convinced that your advisor was right when he told you why your contract was not extended. Must have been a tough time to accept this.
Chandoo: Chandoo, for his part, readily admits to his youthful radicalism, but says that Obama was never the least bit doctrinaire: “The only thing doctrinaire about him was his austerity!”
Hamid on Chandoo and Obama: To slap an ideological tag on Chandoo and Hamid, let alone Obama, is not only unfair; it also credits them with thinking far more programmatically than they did. “I would say we were idealistic and well-read in terms of understanding all the ideologies,” Hamid said.
PS: I knew you would like the cheerleader picture… But honestly my friend, the joke was on you. Sorry that you failed to recognize this.
On Fogbow I explained what I believe is troublesome with Drew’s claims. While his claims that Remnick supported his position are in fact contradicted by the actual text in Remnick’s book and while there were other problems with Drew’s citations, I find his inability to address his claims of discrimination poorly supported given the known facts
Oh yes and then there is his claim that Ayers wrote Obama’s book… Will this silliness never end…
– nbc
Frankly, you are seeing the exact skills that made me such a great political scientist. I have a terrific advantage over you in that I was there and I saw Obama’s Marxist socialist perspective face-to-face. If you had an ounce of common sense and a tiny bit of intellectual clarity and courage, you would instantly see that it is amazing that Remnick has confirmed the basic facts regarding young Obama and that they line up perfectly with what you would predict knowing my story. Remember, I went public with my take on young Obama’s radical ideology as early as 2008.
Remnick is a liberal who is reporting information that is extremely consistent with my take on young Obama and his friends including 1) verifying the attachment of the Democrat Socialist Alliance to Karl Marx, 2) verifying Chandoo’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought, and 3) verifying Wahid Hamid’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought. Wahid Hamid even says Obama shared these socialist ideas. If this same information came from Jerome Corsi you would be attacking it as made up falsehoods.
At this point, I don’t thin any serious person doubts young Obama’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought. The real debate is over his honesty and integrity and whether or not the American people will still like him once they realize he deceived them about his ties to Marxist socialist extremism. Finally, I’d like to point out that it is not that easy for a white male conservative to get a job at Williams College in the first place. You need to be about 100 times better than the average applicant even to get in the door. I doubt there is any achievement even remotely equal to that in your academic record. As I have said, your writing style tells me you have not yet completed you BA degree. You also seem to lack common sense.
Fascinating how you can say this with a straight face and yet you failed so horribly in your career as a political scientist. Even after you failed to continue down the tenure track at Williams because of the poor quality of my scholarship according to the head of the department, you did not show any further evidence of scholarly development.
As JeffZ so carefully explained
Poor Drew continues
In fact, most scholarly person would in fact doubt Obama’s commitment to Marxism because neither his friends in the past nor his present actions support such a foolish position.
Sorry Drew, you have shown no scholarly qualities so far that would support your grandiose claims about Obama or yourself.
You take a sample of a few assistant professors as evidence of a 50% hiring of blacks, you ignore that Williams has been historically a white male faculty, you claim Remnick supports you and then whine when he does not and claim that Remnick must obviously putting his spin on the story.
Sorry my friend, if you want to play the scholar, at least make an attempt to act like one.
Sigh, still not able to read and comprehend the quote I provided. Remnick provides no support for your thesis about Obama and even your position on Chandoo and Hamid are poorly supported as my quotes have shown.
Is it that hard to deal with contradictory evidence my friend? Not a very scholarly position imho.
Sigh… Still no evidence I assume to support your position? Silly me, I thought that a scholar would at least have some facts and data, not pure speculation or personal beliefs. Surely you can do better my friend.
Why is it so hard for your to accept that perhaps you did not measure up to Williams’ requirements? Your further track record also does not show much supporting evidence that you were the scholar you believed your were.
As JeffZ reminded you
Rory also observed
As others have also noticed, you have leveled some significant charges but provided no substantive evidence.
I am not the only one who finds this somewhat disturbing and perhaps lacking in scholarship.
See, here is the thing. Your only claim for publicity is your supposed connection to young obama- without that connection you are just one more right winger claiming Obama is a Marxist- and they are a dime a dozen.
And you haven’t gotten anyone to corrobarate your story. Which to me is questinable- my college GF would vouch for me if the story if it was true.
– nbc
You silly avatar changer. LMAO The Democrat Socialist Alliance (DSA) – according to Remnick – hung up a huge sign featuring Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad. KARL MARX…
Caroline Boss was the co-president of the DSA at the time. Young Obama was active in the DSA and appeared at one of their key anti-apartheid events in 1981…not long after I first met him. Chandoo was active in the DSA too and, along with Boss, was one of the key speakers at that event.
Are you going to argue Remnick doesn’t say the DSA promoted the image and ideology of Karl Marx? Have you even read Remnick’s book?
Wow… And your point is what?
Sigh… I love how you manage to move the goalposts so quickly…
Since you were the ‘gold medal winner’… Here is a somewhat simplistic analysis, not unlike some of the ones you presented.
By johnatrisk
What was your track record again? Remember that the gold standard in academics is your publication record.
And still no update on your claims that you suffered discrimination at Williams or elsewhere other than your personal anecdotes.
If you want to be an auto-biographer then fine, but if you want to be a scholar surely you understand that you fall short of the standards required by such institutions as Williams or even when involved in these internet discussions?
Surely you must realize that ‘I tell you it’s true’ carries not much weight in an argument? And when you are trying to spin Remnick well, that’s just the icing on the cake in my perspective.
– sfjeff
I’m not a journalist. It is the responsibility of journalists like Ronald Kessler and others to interview people and report the truth. I’m just one small point of reference for those seeking to understand Obama’s life story. I can report that I have been interviewed by Michael Savage on his radio program and that my story has been checked out by numerous authors (and publishers) who have determined that it is credible.
You have to admit that David Remnick provides substantial collaboration for my take on young Obama. (My gosh, Remnick reports the Democrat Socialist Alliance is promoting Karl Marx on the Oxy campus at the time.) Remnick is a liberal who would be expected to protect Obama. Instead, he basically verifies that young Obama was a radical extremist who held to views which would be seen as dangerous and offensive to most Americans.
If Obama is no longer a Marxist, then why doesn’t he share the story of how he stopped believing in Marxism. I have a story like that. It is sort of a painful story where I dropped a lot of my old friends and even had to start a new career. As far as I can tell, my wife and I have shown great courage in bringing my story to public attention. We were warned we would be murdered if we went public with this story.
I would expect that I get some credit for being courageous enough to tell the truth back when no one wanted to hear that young Obama had been a Marxist socialist extremist. I’m grateful that liberal authors like Remnick have basically verified my take on young Obama so that people can see I was telling the truth.
Well, that by itself is quite enlightening.
Again misrepresenting Remnick
Still blind to the facts..
Anyone who wants to discuss what silly things President Obama did when he was in school should remember one thing — let he who is without sin cast the first stone — and then tell us where we will find their blog comments asking about President Bush’s background. Senator McCain, who I voted for and donated to, has a colorful background as well.
President Obama is not a Marxist, socialist or any of those pejoratives you toss around. He deserves to be replaced for other good reasons. Name calling will certainly persuade some folks, but they are already not going to vote for the scary Black guy in the White House. If you want to persuade the bulk of people on this site, you need to use logic, i.e., President Obama has not turned the economy around, and the candidate you are urging is not part of the group who got us into the mess that President Obama inherited.
Or you can call him a Marxist, and perhaps in four years Mayor Booker will replace President Obama, as Misha sometimes predicts. Then you will have a second scary Black guy in the White House, and no fantasies about Newark not being in the United States.
Oh for goodness sake… Such a magnificent story teller. Did you not first claim that you were a friend of Obama, and “one of the people who knew Barack Obama.” when in fact he had met Obama at two fleeting meetings.
If you are so convinced that Chandoo was not telling the truth because he did not really ‘meet’ the president during the celebration then what should we think of your embellishments?
– nbc
Use some common sense, little avatar changer. If I was an African American and my thesis was good enough quality to win one of the top nine awards given by the APSA each year in recognition of extraordinary achievements in political science, then do you think I would have been allowed to go on to compete for tenure at Williams?
Remember they only give out four awards every year among over 530 new Ph.Ds in political science.
You have no intellectual credibility at this point if you think anti-white discimination had nothing to do with that decision.
The fact that blacks are currently way over represented in the Williams College political science department is clear evidence of systemic bias against young white scholars.
Frankly, 95% of all Ph.Ds. in political science go to whites. How is it that Williams College is in a situation where 50% of its new hires are black? The bottom line is that you aren’t very good at seeing reality. Remnick points out that Obama’s closest friends at Occidental College hung up a huge sign featuring Karl Marx…and yet you think this fact has no significance?
Incidentally, I have never been at an anti-Apartheid rally, but I imagine for African-Americans being opposed to Apartheid is not a controversial issue. (It should not be for real Americans, either, but it was.) People troubled that an African-American has some political views shaped by the color of his skin ought to try working in the two most integrated aspects of our society, professional sports and the military. I’ve only done the latter. You meet lots of minorities. Your life depends upon them. You get to know them and understand that growing up in rural Indiana, like me, does not expose you to the inner city, or Apartheid, or other issues which are important to African-Americans. To me, Israel was an abstraction (although I have now been there multiple times for my work); to Jewish people who had relatives killed in the Holocaust and who have cousins in Jerusalem, Israel attains mythic proportions.
You should have sees what some of my close college friends hung up. It means nothing.
– John Reilly
The economy was doing pretty good until Democrats took total control of Congress in January 2007.
I blame them for wrecking the U.S. economy, not the Republicans or president Bush. I think that Obama was responsible for the great recession too in the sense that business leaders knew that he was bad news for our nation and they have held back on creating jobs or making big investments until they see him out of office.
The same thing happened during the New Deal when FDR frightened off business owners and investors which his anti-capitalist hostility.
My story is useful, in part, because it provides evidence that Obama holds to a long-standing commitment to Marxist socialist ideology, a commitment reflected in his time with Frank Marshall Davis, with me, with Alice Palmer and later Bill Ayers.
Business leaders and employers are right to fear Obama…if he had his way their freedom and wealth would be sharply curtailed and confiscated by the government.
With the same track record? Unlikely. Sorry John but by most academic standards, you were just not up to par with what is expected from you. That you won an award is relevant to showing promise, but in the end, things just did not appear to pan out for you. As I understand, you did not publish much of anything else, and although your teaching may have been up to standard, I find your present display of ‘scholarship’ to undermine even that aspect. Since you informed by the department head of Williams that you were not allowed to advance along the tenure track because of the poor quality of my scholarship, you have failed to show any further evidence that would show a scholarly career.
But the real problem is that you have failed to provide any substantive evidence to support your claims about Williams and that the evidence shows that, contrary to your claims, Williams had a mostly white male faculty.
Now, I understand from Ken Thomas that you may have been somewhat of an odd duck
I also understand you tried to unsuccessfully run for political office while at Williams (and for another unsuccessful one while in CA). How am I doing so far?
So, the combination of your lack of substantive evidence combined with your documented scholarly history, causes me some obvious concern.
Again, purely argumentative and lacking any foundation in evidence or data. I have also shown that those who received similar awards as you did, showed far more scholarly promise in the first three years. Again, putting some doubt on your claims of discrimination. Sorry my friend, being given an award for a thesis is not a free pass to tenure…
Even though when you were hired, the Williams Faculty was overwhelmingly white male and even though your samples is based on a sample size of 4 IIRC? Do you really want us to believe that this is a scholarly argument? A sample size of 4… My goodness…
You really have no substantive data now do you?
Again, this is not helping you with your claims of being a political science scholar…
Fascinating how you so quickly dig your own hole…
Hey, you’re free to blame whomever you want—what specific Congressional actions do you think caused Wall Street and the housing boom to go bust in less than 9 months?
As for me …. this thread was more interesting when it was about Mars!
– Dr. Conspiracy
I’m just saying that nbc is leaning too hard on the Wahid Hamid quote in Remnick’s book which says: “We weren’t Marxists.” I’m just asking if they weren’t Marxists, then why does Remnick report that Boss and her friends in the Democrat Socialist Alliance were displaying a picture of Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad? I knew Boss, Chandoo and Obama and I know why the DSA was promoting Karl Marx – its because they were Marxists, just like me at the time.
So your argument is that even though they claim that they were not marxists, that they must have been so because they had a banner of Marx… I see. So when you claim that Remnick supported you, you were not referring to the part where he cites Chandoo and Hamid but rather to the picture hanging over the Quad…
Sigh… I am starting to see things more clearly from the Williams’ perspective here.
Yes, I understand the ad hominem argument quite well… Is that the best you have to offer?
Sorry to have interrupted your digging…
– nbc
This sample size issue is a sign of how I know you don’t have a college degree. We are not talking about a sample, we are talking about the total population when we discuss the dominance of blacks in the Williams College political science department. There are no statistical issues involved when you are dealing with a population instead of a sample of the population.
Have you figured out your answer to the question of why Obama friends were promoting the image of Karl Marx if I’m lying about young Obama and his friend’s commitment to Karl Marx’s philosophy? Facts from the liberal author David Remnick are stubborn things. It looks to me like my claims they were Marxists is verified by David Remnick’s book.
– nbc
I’m just reporting that I never claimed Williams was part of a “left-wing conspiracy.” You know me well enough just through these blog posts to see this is a lie promoted by a mentally unstable guy with deep personal issues. The sort of guy who would brag about charging $150 per hour.
I also think it should be obvious that I never said I “was the only member of the Faculty who would vote Republican in the 1988 elections.” This just doesn’t sound like me. I do remember pointing out that among the entire faculty there were only three of us who were registered Republicans.
Even so…why all this interest in my time at Williams College. The only reason it is relevant to me is that while I was there I got to know Obama’s favorite professor Roger Boesche better and hung out with one of the Occidental Marxist professors Obama mentions in Dreams From My Father, Carlos Egan. Boesche was a socialist and Egan was a Marxist. I would love to be interviewed on Obama’s teachers at Oxy.
OMG this is just too funny. You made a claim that 50% of the polisci department involves blacks. When the sample size is 4, such a claim has little relevance. Surely anyone who knows statistics would know this. A scholar would do a more in depth analysis over time of the polisci department to see if this single ‘statistic’ is meaningful or just a fluke. Furthermore, your claims were about when you were hired and fired, when Williams’ was mostly white male faculty. Again you seem to be missing the point here, which is evidenced by your need to attack the messenger rather than provide a rational argument.
As I and many others have asked you so many times now, where is the substantive data to support your claims? Anything beyond your claims? Any data? Anything?… You made such broad accusations about Williams and yet when asked for some substantive date you point to a sample size of 4 which includes two blacks and claim that this is somehow evidence that blacks are hired at a too high a ratio… Come on… Is that really your best answer? It does not provide much hope for your claim of being a ‘scholar’ though.
Of the total faculty of 21, there appear to be 5 black people, 5 women. Hardly the 50% you were arguing based on the sample of assistant/associate professors for instance. Again, even today, the white male prevalence has yet to be addressed fully.
Even though the book states the contrary?
ROTFl… Now that is just too ironic in my opinion…
It sounds exactly like you IMHO
Because you made such poorly supported claims about being the victim of discrimination and affirmative action. It helps understand the level of credibility one may assign to your ‘grandiose’ claims.
Dr. Drew: Why not respond to my inquiry about why what President Obama did in college has any value to our discussion? Or Dr. C’s observation that his friends hung worse on the walls? Were you commenting on Speaker Gingrich’s more recent history of dating while married? Or whatever Mr. Cain was doing? What about persistent stories about President Bush’s drug use?
You met the President twice, and the two of you have divergent views and did not become lifelong friends. That’s all that happened.
Separately, you are concerned that Williams seems to have an over-representation of Afriican-Americans in the Poli Sci department. So what. Life is unfair. Were you concerned about the underrepresentation of African-Americans or women as President? Tell us where you wrote about that. We have a population size of 44. Did I get the jargon right or do you need to see my degree? Shouldn’t we have had 22 women Presidents or 5 African-American Presidents by now? Maybe all that life is doing is balancing out the overrepresentation of African-Americans at Williams with the underrepresentation in the White House. The universe is in balance.
Remember that Drew was asked to show that he suffered discrimination and he points to a present incoming faculty of assistant professors, four of them in total, 2 of them who are black as evidence.
That misses the point twice: 1) it has no relevance on the hiring practices of Williams when Drew had his short stint there, during a time where Williams was known for its mostly white male faculty 2) it provides a single instance in time based on a small sample of 4.
Both are significant flaws when making any argument, let alone a scholarly one.
I am also surprised why he names Ayers, who other than host a party for Obama’s kick off, was not much involved with Obama.
But I am sure, Ayers must be lying…
or
Even the claims that Ayers somehow wrote Obama’s book is ill supported and unsubstantiated and actually contradicted.
And then Alice Palmer…
He never really hung out with Ayers and his relationship with Alice appears to be quite interesting when Obama challenged Palmer’s signatures and invalidated her hasty run for office, leading only Obama to remain as a candidate. Hardly a love affair I would say…
That sums it up. Combine this with John’s obsession that he was held back by affirmative action and Obama managed to become our President and you can understand why he may not feel particularly friendly towards our President. He is blaming a lot of people of his misfortune, somehow missing the possibility that he may be to blame.
Yeah…that pretty much sums up my impression of things too.
Sounds like just another disgruntled crank with deep seated issues of insecurity who masks them by blaming the rest of the world for their failures, resenting success and having to desperately scream for attention and try to convince the world to pay attention to them…
He should pair up with Ron Polarik. They could spend endless hours in huffy fantasy fancy, trying to out-prima donna each other…
Exactly.
His basic argument was “I’m an amazingly talented academic and scholar, I knew Barack Obama when he was at Oxy, therefore I am the most qualified person in the world to understand his motivations and ideologies.” You were doing a great job taking him apart with his second statement, so MikeD, myself and Slarti went after the first.
He tried to deflect attention away from his own academic achievement by pointing out alleged racial favoritism in the Williams PolySci department, making the mistake of not only handing us the ammunition to debunk his claims, but also backing himself into a corner and forcing him to show us his publication record.
It starts here: http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=3350&p=318211#p318211
Ditto on both accounts. That has to be one of the most ironic statements borne out of classic projection that I’ve ever come across….
Considering all the irony meter explosions and episodes of projection we’ve seen on display from various other Birthers here over the years… that really says something!
As I mentioned above, Ron Polarik has some stiff competition here… LMAO!
I feel obliged to point out that there is nothing wrong in being a soc ialist or a Marxist.
Plenty of countries in Europe including France, Sweden, Germany, Spain, and arguably the UK if you define the “old” Labor Party as soc ialist have had soc ialist governments while remaining trusted and valuable partners in NATO, having their share of billionaires, etc.
A lot of what Marx wrote remains a valid model to analyze social and economic factors; one is not obliged to agree with or believe in what he thought might be future trends (especially as reinterpreted by Lenin and Trotski who were the true ideological fathers of the USSR) to deny that Marx provides excellent analytical tools — today (with Capitalism in crisis and running against Democracy) more than ever.
These terms are misused for their sheer irrational fear factor in US politics.
@John Drew
“Use some common sense, little avatar changer. If I was an African American and my thesis was good enough quality to win one of the top nine awards given by the APSA each year in recognition of extraordinary achievements in political science, then do you think I would have been allowed to go on to compete for tenure at Williams?”
Do try to be more precise in your self-inflation, John. The award you won was one of nine dissertation awards given out by APSA. There are a large number of other awards given out by APSA, many of them for career achievement.
In addition to the nine dissertation awards, there appears to be one major general excellence award (the Goodnow award). There are also eight career achievement awards, four book awards, and two paper awards. If we judge by the cash prize associated with the awards, the APSA rates most of those as more significant than the dissertation awards.
Just so we’re clear, I’m not dismissing the work that you put in to your dissertation. It was recognized with an award, and it was almost certainly a superb dissertation. But you can’t stop there and expect to keep an academic job. Yes, you had potential. Based on the award you received, I’m happy to admit that you had tremendous potential. But you didn’t make the effort needed to realize that potential, and that’s a crying shame.
In addition to everything else you just pointed out, it’s worth noting that all four of those assistant professors have publication records while at Williams that dramatically exceed all of the work Drew did while he was employed there.
I’ve seen people here with bad teeth. They drink well water, which lacks fluoride. Some brands of toothpaste in Israel lack fluoride. It has nothing to do with socialized medicine.
I repeat: Medical care in Israel is equal to here, sometimes better.
This is, of course, complete rubbish and a transparent lie willfully propagated by American right-wing ideologues.
THE GUARDIAN actually looked into the matter and found that some factors were purely cosmetics (fewer use of braces in Europe) and also attributable to higher water fluoridation in the US.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-22429,00.html
Wiki:
Water fluoridation, when feasible and culturally acceptable, has substantial advantages, especially for subgroups at high risk.[8] The U.S. Centers for Disease Control listed water fluoridation as one of the ten great public health achievements of the 20th century;[14] in contrast, most European countries have experienced substantial declines in tooth decay without its use, primarily due to the introduction of fluoride toothpaste in the 1970s.[3] The use of topical fluorides (such as in toothpaste) to prevent caries among people living in both industrialized and developing countries may help supplant the need for fluoridated water.[3] Fluoridation may be more justified in the U.S. because of socioeconomic inequalities in dental health and dental care.[15] While water fluoridation is a predominantly American phenomenon,[16] it has been introduced to many countries to varying degrees[17] with many countries having water that is naturally fluoridated to recommended levels and others, such as in Europe, using fluoridated salts as an alternative source of fluoride.[18]
Generally speaking, this GUARDIAN article thorough debunks the many lies spouted by American right-wing ideologues about the NHS:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/aug/11/nhs-sick-healthcare-reform
Senator Bernie Sanders runs as a Democrat-Socialist. The kibbutzim are pure communism. They prove that communism and democracy are not mutually exclusive. They are a raucous democracy. Every decision is turned into a Talmudic discussion.
When my maternal grandfather first came to the States, he read Der Tag, a Yiddish communist paper. When it stopped publication, he switched to The Forward, a Yiddish socialist paper.
It’s called the 1st Amendment. Look into it.
When is Michele Bachmann going to return the $250K in farm subsidies she took?
In re dentistry, also of interest, this 2007 article from the NY TIMES:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/24/us/24kentucky.html?ref=todayspaper
In re “soc ialized medicine”:
Over 1/3 of Americans are already part of a “soc ialized medicine” program where costs are much cheaper (Medicare: $6500 per person, VA: about $5000) than “private medicine” (about $8000):
Medicare (2011) : 49 million
Medicaid (2011) : 51.5 million
Veterans Health Administration (2007) : 8 million
Military Health Services – active and retired personnel (2011) : 9.5 million
American Indian Health Services (2011) : 2.5 million
Total: 120.1 million out of 312.9 million
If you had proper media and proper politicians, the case could be made that it would be cheaper for both people and businesses to extend those programs, instead of going BOOGA BOOGA YURP on tv.
So was Golda Meir.
Or the matching federal funds Bachmann can apply for to pay her campaign debts by suspending her failed campaign instead of ending it?
Michele has her very own taxpayer funded federal bailout!!!
That was her political platform, right?
“Bachmann said she ran for president in part because President Obama’s policies “based on socialism, are destructive to the very foundation of the Republic.” She vowed to “continue to fight” to battle Mr. Obama’s “agenda of socialism,” invoking socialism multiple times in her remarks.” (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57352112-503544/michele-bachmann-drops-out-of-gop-race/)
No Government Assistance (unless it’s me, silly) ! ! !
Do these GOP candidates not understand the meaning of hypocrisy or the concept of socialism?
They must think American voters are pretty stupid.
In college I was a Trotskyite; later a kibbutznik. Now I’m a registered Democrat.
Your point is…
Cotton growers are guaranteed a minimum price, by the US government.
Congress has a 24/7 physician, whose salary is paid for by the federal government. When a member of Congress needs hospitalization, they go to the Naval hospital. I don’t see anyone refusing because it’s government run healthcare.
All taxes are a redistribution of wealth.
Reagan had close ties to Falwell, a bigot who was an ardent supporter of racial segregation. Falwell was adamantly opposed to the 1st Amendment, and publically called the 1st “a mistake,” and advocated an amendment to nullify the 1st, “with the Jewish people declared a protected minority.”
Shrub called Ted Haggard weekly, who advocated harassment of non-Christians:
“Pastor Ted…talks to President George W. Bush or his advisers every Monday…He moved the church to a strip mall. There was a bar, a liquor store, New Life Church, a massage parlor. His congregation spilled out and blocked the other businesses. He set up chairs in the alley. He strung up a banner: SIEGE THIS CITY FOR ME, signed JESUS. He assigned everyone in the church names from the phone book they were to pray for. He sent teams to pray in front of the homes of supposed witches—in one month, ten out of fifteen of his targets put their houses on the market. His congregation “prayer-walked” nearly every street of the city.”
http://www.rickross.com/reference/fundamentalists/fund196.html
McCain had close ties to John Hagee. Hagee described to his congregation Jesus’ Bar Mitzvah (!), explained how Jews control the world’s monetary supply, and demonstrated how the Magen David and the menorah are on US paper currency, in disguise:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7706179979766534830&hl=en# Kettle, pot.
Ayers was never prosecuted. The Justice Department dropped all charges.
I recommend Michael Harrington’s The Twilight of Capitalism.
http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-Capitalism-Michael-Harrington/dp/0671227599/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1325767739&sr=8-1
First of all, they were the Democratic Socialist Alliance not the Democrat Socialist Alliance. Since you can’t even get the name correct, your “expertise” on the matter is questionable. Second, the group at Occidental was affiliated with the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC) founded by Michael Harrington. I knew quite a few DSOC people at the tiime (late 1970s-early 1980s). Not only were they NOT Marxists, they were quite anti-Marxist. They sold “Solidarnosc” T-shirts to support the anti-Soviet workers in Poland and other Eastern European countries. They also strongly opposed the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and Chinese oppression in Tibet. They would have been far more likely to hang a poster of Lech Walesa than of Karl Marx.
And don’t bore me with David Remnick. He wrote a book, Some of what’s in it is correct, some isn’t, just like any other book, Or did you think that everything in a book is automatiically true?
To summarize
Drew, once upon a time, went to one of the collegs that the President (God that must stick in your craw Drew) went to
Drew was not ACTUALLY there at the same time as the President
Drew ACTUALLY only met the President for (at best) a handful of hours a couple of decades ago in a few social venues where he (Drew) was simply one of MANY other (in his case incosequential) people
Drew never ACTUALLY talked to the President beyond a few vacuous social mutterings
Drew never ACTUALLY attended classes, participated in educational, social, political or personal endeavours with either the President or colleagues or friends of the President
Based upon the fleeting, random, nay Brownian motion social equivalent of a couple of hand shakes, Drew has somehow managed to build a massive wealth of knowledge about the President, his background, intellect, education, political thought processes, educational, social and political evolution.
The entire set of this individuals posts lead one to the inevitable conclusions that he is a fabulist with at best a tenuous grasp of facts and a particularly bad case of passive-aggresive entitlement.
I believe the children of today would state with utter disdain that Drew is a LSOS
That sounds a lot like Bill Ayers. Oh, the irony.
Well, when you put it THAT way, John Drew, in spite of his fine education, seems nothing more than just . . . . a fabulist. Imagine that: someone from WND making up stories . . . who’d a thunk it?
Sometimes young people make visual statements as a critique on the prevalent culture. They do things just to get attention. They do things for the shock value. It would be a mistake to read too much into a poster a college student put up. You have a Ph. D. Tell us what kind of fallacy would that be?
I’ll share my college Marx story. I was taking a philosophy class around 1970 and needed to look up a philosophical term. I went to the library and located a book called A Dictionary of Philosophy. The definition of the term basically said that Marx was right about this subject and others were wrong. When I looked for the publisher, it was the Soviet Encyclopedia Publishing House.
So I wrote them and said that at least for a dictionary, definitions should more objective and balanced.
They wrote back and said that only Marxist philosophy was objective and balanced.
I had an enormous portrait of Jimi Hendrix hanging in my college dorm room.
I guess that makes me a dedicated and lifelong Hendrixist but lately things just don’t seem the same.
The Soviet Encyclopedia Publishing House in Moscow? The works are a hoot! Straight out of 1984. If anyone is unfamiliar with the Soviet Encyclopedia and its history, I urge you to Google it and have a blast! Literally right out of 1984, rewriting references works at the whim of the party. Becoming more and more of a joke as the years rolled by. What a depressing place to work that must have been!
Hopefully your library had other philosophy references on hand! I wonder where/why they had one from SE in their collections.
“Objective and balanced”. Hmmm, that sounds familiar … hehe.
Speaking of influential posters . . . in college, I had a poster of the Swedish Bikini Team–did that automatically make me a disciple of Major Boobage?!
Yes. And I still am. Just like my buddy Kenny McCormick: http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/164807/i-was-so-close
Speaking of the Soviet Encyclopedia, reminds me of 2 thoughts on the nature of birtherism and Obama CTs in general:
1. As we were all told when we were kids, 1 lie leads to another, then another, soon you are making new lies to cover for the old lies. Accepting, owning, and communicating the truth, may hurt a bit initially, but not nearly as much as living a lie does. And the truth is a heck of a lot less work … but also a lot less entertaining for others, so please do continue to fib away, ‘O’-denialists!
2. Every time I pick up a new, lurid tale regarding Pres. O., like this bit about Mars, I like to try to fit it into the whole OCT corpus opus, as if they were all true … like some insane, hyper random biographical wannabe sci-fi / thriller novel. It already puts Forrest Gump to shame!
I thought they just rebranded it to conservapedia for the gullible fright wing idiots.
Thought I should check in on this thread this morning. Given the damage Obama has done to the economy, I don’t think it makes sense to waste time discussing misha’s or lupin’s or scientist’s defense of socialism or Karl Marx. It would be pretty clear to objective observers that socialism has always lead to economic failure, unhappiness and oppression. As a political scientist, I recommend Hayek’s Road to Serfdom as a great introduction to why government control of the economy will always lead to poverty and oppression. As an ex-Marxist, ex-socialist myself, I understand where you are coming from. If I really thought socialism improved folk’s opportunities and financial success, then I’d still be a socialist myself.
I’m also an ex-Democrat, in large measure, because of the way I was treated by affirmative action programs. I think there are a lot of white men and women like myself who were surprised at how they were treated in the job market by Democrat party elites. Given my experience, I would have to be insane to vote for a party that is so aggressively hostile to my career interests. Since I was recognized as one of the best scholars of my generation, it strikes me as implausible that I was not the victim of racial discrimination at the hands of liberal elites. This includes the moments in my life prior to working at Williams College and the moments in my life after working at Williams College. I think the hostility of Williams College to young whites is clearly evident in its current hiring practices which are obviously biased in favor of hiring blacks.
(When I was honored by the APSA only four awards every year went out to the 500 plus new Ph.D.s in the field. It was the equivalent of earning a Gold medal in the Olympics. LIke an Olympic champion, I still benefit from this remarkable achievement and I get business from new graduate students seeking my advice on how to earn their Ph.D.)
I’m grateful that a liberal author, David Remnick, verified my take on young Obama and his friends as Marxist socialists. In the book, Remnick reports the Democrat Socialist Alliance hung a large banner featuring Karl Marx…I don’t know what more proof you need of their affection for Marxism. I can report, from my face-to-face experience that Boss, Chandoo and Obama were all Marxists. I think liberals are being delusional if they cannot connect the dots and see that I’m telling the truth about young Obama’s extremist ideology.
Finally, I have never argued that I believe Obama today is a Marxist socialist simply on the basis of meeting him and arguing with him 30 years ago. At the time when I met young Obama, however, I considered myself to be a Marxist, a socialist, and an enemy of the American government. I did not take my role as a revolutionary lightly. Neither did young Obama. I quit being a Marxist socialist when I realized this theory was not an adequate explanation of social change or a very good recipe for creating a better future. For more detailed information on Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers I recommend a book by liberal author Christopher Andersen, Barack and Michelle, which verifies the role Bill Ayers played in drafting Dreams From My Father.
Funny no embarrrassment here. The only thing you showed is that you took a picture with Garrow. I notice there was transcript of the “interview” let alone any video of it. There was no actual interview posted anywhere. I have a picture of me with Lewis Black the comedian by that very same logic I guess we both interviewed each other.
Correction: I notice there was no transcript of the “interview” let alone any video of it. There was no actual interview posted anywhere. I have a picture of me with Lewis Black the comedian by that very same logic I guess we both interviewed each other. So Drew claims he was interviewed but the interview seems to be nowhere to be found.
You’re the freak if said interview took place how come there is no copy of the interview? Oh that’s right you’re still “waiting for it” to be posted. No video, no transcript no interview. Taking a photograph with someone at an event of theirs doesn’t prove an interview
I care more about their opinions than I ever will about yours.
And it’s a good thing this isn’t your website either.
Quick show of hands as to who agrees.
Is Narcissistic Personality Disorder common among paranoid conspiracy bigots?
Just curious.
Gee, I have a real PhD in a real science and never found myself discriminated against in either academia or industry, despite being a white male. I haven’t spent the last 30 years talking about an award I won as a student. Instead, I got on with life and published a bunch of papers and earned patents and put drugs into cllinical trials.
How many papers have you published in peer reviewed journals? Gotten any awards since grad school? You’re like the high school or college athlete who wasn’t quite good enough for the pros and is selling used cars somewhere and spending his evenings in bars regaling everyone about the big touchdown he scored 40 years ago. Very sad.
Al Bundy, Ph. D.
Bob Ross: You are really living up to your low reputation. As you can see, no one here or at Fogbow is rushing to your defense. I wrote a detailed article about what it was like to be interviewed by David Garrow and included a photo of him and me together outside my home in Laguna Niguel. I have e-mails from him introducing himself and setting up the interview. You are starting to sound like one of those guys who think President Bush faked 9-11.
I had a poster of the sex positions of the Zodiac. I found a new one on eBay, and it hangs in my loft, to the consternation of my wife. “Please take it down. Our nieces saw it.”
I also have a poster for Battleship Potemkin, and a poster of Leon Trotsky. One half of Trotsky’s face is an orthodox Jew, the other half of his face is a Red Army officer.
So hopefully “Dr” Drew has stopped dripping and moaning and blaming everyone else for his failed life.
All that, yet you couldn’t publish a couple of articles in your chosen field so you could have kept your job at Williams. Sad.
– Scientist
Please… I saw racial discimination take place at Williams College against better qualified white scholars with my own eyes. I was in on those hiring decisions. I was shocked. The subsequent history of that department, where 50% of the new hires are black, confirms that nothing has changed regarding the anti-white bias of the Williams College political science department. in my field, only 10% of the Ph.Ds. go to non-whites.
A pompous, delusional troll should be measured in Taitz units (Tz).
Funny considering several have already but in the midst of you inflating your own blow up doll ego you missed that no one backs you up. You never posted them on your site once again where’s the interview why has it not been posted? I saw the photo you put up it does not show a house
The discrimination you saw is that Williams discriminated against pompous fools who couldn’t even publish on a regular basis. Why is it you couldn’t even find an equal level job after Williams are you saying Williams somehow blacklisted you. You sound like nothing more than a person with sour grapes.
That means 50% are white. You weren’t good enough to be one of them. Your task was to be so excellent that you could overcome discrimination just as minoriities did over many decades.
Bob Ross:
I think you are getting into the area where it doesn’t make much sense for me to embarrass you any more. No one here is supporting your suggestion that I was never really interviewed by David Garrow. I’m starting to think that you are mentally ill.
– Scientist
Don’t be silly. By national standards, my work was in the top 1% of my generation. It ended up being published almost word for word as I wrote it with only minor changes. You can’t get more excellent than that.
It was more fun for me to move on and become a successful businessman with my own company. As I recall, a Williams College assistant professor was earning about $30,000 a year in 1989. This wasn’t enough to even buy a house out there. I made that much in one month last year.
The whole thought of spending the rest of my life in a field where I was held back because I was Armenian-American instead of African-American had no attraction for me.
Young white boys and girls have good reason to be angry at President Obama and at everyone else who is discriminating against them. Thankfully, the way I was treated by affirmative action is now illegal in CA. It should be illegal everywhere.
Still misrepresenting Remnick I notice
You’re a strange, little man.
You’ve done nothing but embarrass yourself on a privately owned blog as far as I can see.
Bob’s credibility is solid here. Yours? Pretty close to non-existent.
“I’m starting to think that you are mentally ill.”
Are you projecting?
A promising thesis but failure to show much evidence worthy to be allowed to continue on a tenure track position.
As you explained so nicely
Let the facts speak for themselves but it is clear by now that despite a promising start, you have shown little to support your claims.
It’s fine to rationalize this after the fact but we can all see from your resume how you struggled to gain an academic foothold and failed. You yourself admitted to your struggles, so to claim it was ‘more fun to move on’ somehow fails to impress…
Again, no evidence is provided to support any claims of harm by affirmative action.
Why is that Drew?
– nbc
You are not dealing with the fact that Remnick reported that the members of the Democrat Socialist Alliance, led by my ex-girlfriend – Caroline Boss, hung a large sign in the Oxy Quad featuring Karl Marx. This looks like the behavior of a programmatic, doctrinaire group to me. I was a Marxist socialist myself when I participated in the activities of the Democrat Socialist Alliance in 1979. I really think you are living in an immature fantasy world if you think Remnick is not confirming my take on young Obama’s extremist ideology and the views of his Karl Marx supporting friends.
No one here is supporting your suggestion that you were interviewed. If the interview existed you should have no problems digging up the transcripts or video
Excellence is lifetime. You wrote a good thesis. In some committee’s opinion, one of the best of that particular year. Then after that you did zip. That does NOT make you one of the best scholars of your generation. That title is reserved for those who have a continuous record of achievement in the years following. It’s like comparing a one-hit wonder to The Beatles. You don’t impress me. Not even a little bit.
Bob Ross:
Trust me. You don’t understand what you are talking about. David Garrow is writing a book. It’s not the sort of thing where he interviews you and next day it is on YouTube. 🙂 That’s pretty funny if that’s what you think was supposed to happen. You are not the sharpest tool in the Fogbow shed, are you? If you had more experience with academic history books, then you would better understand what I mean when I wrote I was “interviewed” by him.
Its been quite a while since the interview. You claimed originally it was about your supposed relationship with Obama and yet the interview still isn’t posted. Again you’re the one claiming to have been interviewed by an historian about a particular subject and yet can’t show the interview actually took place.
So that is your latest argument… As others have pointed out… Big deal… The direct responses from those who did know Obama contradict your claims about Obama
Nuff said.
That’s called projecting.. I understand that you have to bring down others as you cannot accept that a “girly chearleader” can defeat the Great Drew.
Reality must be tough…
“But I scored 4 touchdowns in one game at Polk High”
ROTFL… Yes, Drew is living in a past where he fumbled an almost sure touchdown and never really recovered.
Drew has some trouble backing up his claims, give him a decade or so…
You’re living in an immature fantasy world if you think anyone does, or even should, care what Obama was interested in in his college years.
Back in my college days I was a ultra-right wing conservative Evangelical Christian. I grew up. Obama did too. You should try it.
– nbc
Remnick reports that Obama’s friends hung a huge picture of Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad. As far as I’m concerned this is powerful visual evidence that young Obama and his friends were Marxists, just as I have said since 2008. This banner was hung during the height of the Cold War while we were still in a deadly competition with the old USSR. Obama and his friends were basically supporting our Cold War enemy and you think this is no big deal. LMAO and RTFL. Remnick is a liberal Democrat. He is confirming my take on young Obama and his friends.
– Daniel
On its own, my report on young Obama is of little importance. It becomes dramatically more significant, however, when it is fitted in with the total story of Obama’s ties to Marxist socialist thought. The best book on this topic is Stanley Kurtz’s book, Radical-In-Chief. Kurtz was originally on the fence regarding young Obama’s Marxist socialist ideology. He credits my account of young Obama’s ideological extremism for encouraging him to further investigate Obama ties to Marxist socialist leaders.
Roosevelt got the idea for Social Security from von Bismarck. Bismarck got the idea from Karl Marx. Social Security and Medicare have kept millions of retirees out of poverty.
East Germany was nothing more than a continuation of the Nazi era. They dressed it up as communism, but in fact it was state capitalism.
Philips of The Netherlands invented the compact cassette, and the Compact Disc. IKEA is the world leader of home furnishings. Volvo sets the world’s standards for crash integrity. My loudspeakers are Jamo, made in Denmark.
Since my stroke, I am wholly dependent on the public sector.
“socialism has always lead to economic failure, unhappiness and oppression” Name the countries. You want unhappiness and oppression? Try Cheney creating WMDs from whole cloth, and then invading so his cronies could get their paws on oil. So far, 4,484 US troops have died; 32,200 have been wounded, many missing eyes, limbs, 3rd degree burns, psychiatric cases; approximately 100K Iraqi civilians have died.
The Christians of Iraq face annilahtion, and Bush and his evangelical amen chorus have not done one thing. Israel rescued the Jews of Yemen, Ethiopia, and Entebbe.
I worked for an optometrist in NY. He wanted his son, who had a C average, to go to optometry school. He told me the exact amount of his contribution to the school’s endowment, and his son was admitted. The kid failed out his first semester. My half-brother did the same for a law school, and was admitted. You are opposed to affirmative action for the wealthy, correct?
So you believe but Remnick’s quotes of Obama’s direct friends show otherwise…
So what now… Again you are now left to make inferences based on poor data. Not the kind of approach I would consider scholarly.
John, to change the subject: did your wife ever get a job?
I’ve certainly enjoyed this prolonged “conversation”, though it doesn’t seem to be going anywhere. In fact, these blogs seldom do; no-one is ever persuaded or changes their mind about anything. But I suppose they do serve as a way to blow off some steam, and they help to create a sense of community among those who think similarly .
I call your bluff. Make your case my “wanna be” political science scholar 😉
Now if you mean capitalism, then you have a case.
How exactly does that show it? Hanging out a poster of someone somehow makes them true believers? Wow imagine all the teenage girls or teenagers that put up posters in their rooms or in college where John thinks somehow they believed everything the person in the poster believed. You’re ridiculous.
You were actively opposed to Nixon’s federal loan guarantee for Lockheed, correct? Nixon’s wage and price controls, correct? Same for Reagan’s approval for stiff tariffs on Japanese big bikes to help Harley, correct?
You have written to your Representatives and Senators, opposing subsidies, correct? You have written to Michele Bachmann asking her to return the $250K of farm subsidies she took, correct? Bachmann tells the IRS she is a farmer, and tells everyone else she is a legislator. Tell me what you have done to stop this.
red-diaper baby 1942
It was a funny story. We reached a point where it looked like she would never get a job at all so I worked with my business consultant to create a job for her within my grant writing company. I had everything set-up and she did it for about a week. Then she got a job outside the house. Two years of unemployment came to a sudden end within a week of her decision to quit looking for a job.
This thread is getting dull. I posted a little at the NYT The Caucus after I read your comments here. The way I look at it we are fighting the 2012 campaign right here, right now. Oppostition researchers will be able to read these threads and decide what sort of information to feed the candidates. In my experience, people don’t admit that you’ve beat them or changed their minds. Instead, they give up posting or switch the subject.
Just like the UN.
Let me add to me previous comment: as a lifetime academic myself (now happily retired, and with an excellent pension, since I live in a European social-democratic welfare state), I’m used to a style of debate that aims at genuine persuasion, in which the participants are interested in arriving at some form of at least provisional agreement on the interpretation of data, rather than merely repeating their own mantra and not listening to anyone else. That’s the biggest difference between scholarship and politics (or for that matter religion). Thanks be to god I’ve been able to spend my life in the academic world: we have our arguments and even our profound animosities, but at least we’re (by and large) disinterested in our pursuit of the truth. Perhaps, John, if you’d been able to spend your life in academia, you might understand that better.
That, by the way, is why there can be no real dialogue between scientists and politicians on questions of the environment and climate change, or other issues involving scientific evidence; we have different ground rules of debate.
By the way, I use “disinterested” in its original sense, now alas all but lost. It is NOT synonymous with “uninterested”.
– misha
Tell me about your stroke.
– nbc
Tell me how you interpret the way Obama’s friends hung up a large sign, in a public area, of Karl Marx and what message they were trying to communicate about themselves with that outrageous behavior?
How is Wahid Hamid’s comment that “We weren’t Marxists” somehow more convincing than the actual behavior of Obama’s friends when they promoted the ideas and image of Karl Marx at Occidental College?
– bob ross
If I hung a large poster of Karl Marx outside my home, then what message would I be sending my neighbors?
Obama’s friends were pro-Karl Marx at a time when the USSR was occupying East Germany, Armenia, Georgia and other countries. They were pro-USSR when the “Evil Empire” was still at its most dangerous stage of development.
Randall Terry sold used cars before founding Operation Rescue.
Sir, you are clearly, seriously, fixated on this poster idea! And making quite a leap in assuming that anyone displaying an image of Marx in the early 1980s was doing so in support of the USSR. Change the story to Lenin and you’ve got a better start.
Was this the only image they were displaying? Was it a political rally? An educational event? An artistic display? How long was whatever it was on display? What was going on around this display? You’re making conclusions on a singular, undocumented, detail. Conclusions which, even if correct, are irrelevant. But, hey, good luck with that.
– misha
I’m a grant writing consultant right now…not a car salesman. 🙂 I’ve brought in millions of dollars to help schools and charities in Southern California and around the nation. Tell me about your stroke? I’m most curious to learn whether or not you are a smoker and a drinker right now.
J. Potter
The large Karl Marx banner was mentioned in David Remnick’s book, The Bridge. To me, it is further evidence that young Obama and his friends were Marxists. Obama, Chandoo and Boss were all active in the Democrat Socialist Alliance, the group that displayed the Karl Marx banner. I have always asserted that young Obama and his friends were Marxist socialists. Remnick provides compelling evidence that supports my argument. I think it is extremely important evidence because this banner appeared at the height of the Cold War. I have no doubt it may have given comfort to oppressors in the Soviet Union, China or Cuba.
Maybe he has Groucho confused with Karl. Say the secret word? What is he hiding?
Several years ago I had a brain aneurysm; I did not have any symptoms. I did not own a car, just my Honda bike. I put on my motorcycle jacket, walked out of my apartment, and shut the door. The aneurysm burst, and a neighbor found me on the floor in front of my door. They called the socialist fire department, and I woke up one month later in the hospital. Penndot revoked my license, and I have to be examined by their physician, and start all over: written test, road test, just like getting a license for the first time. I have not yet been retested. The socialist hospital I was in, is owned by the city. I am wholly dependent on the public sector.
I tried working, and lasted half a day.
My neurosurgeon told me the aneurysm I had was worse than a stroke; the blood vessel totally dissected, and I had to relearn to walk. It took 2 years for my brain to take over what was stored in the tissue that died. I have a service dog to hold on to, because I lost my balance and fell twice. She also is learning to use a K9 rescue telephone.
I have made several written complaints to government agencies, because I was denied service, and my dog was refused entry. There isn’t any private charity who will do for me what government agencies have done.
I am tired of Ron and Rand Paul’s blathering.
Maybe you’re doing it for an artistic reason? See that’s the problem you make an inference based on your total lack of information I would at least ask the person’s views or better yet ask why they hang it up instead of jumping to a conclusion.
– misha
Again, I’m curious. Do you smoke and drink now?
– Bob Ross
As I’ve said, I was dating the girl running the Democrat Socialist Alliance. 🙂 I know exactly why they flew a Karl Marx banner. They were out and out Marxists. According to Remnick, Boss and Chandoo were among young Obama’s closest friends. Both were Marxists. How is it plausible to you that young Obama was not a Marxist?
Well said! I completely agree.
This is a detail mentioned in a book. I am floored. 1 book? Apparently in passing, as you have provided no add’l detail? And I thought you were saying you were excellently positioned to gain firsthand knowledge of young Obama’s true political leanings?
I’m gonna hang up a pic of Marx. One outside the house. One at work. I’ll let you know what people say.
That sums it up pretty well.
LMAO! Good point!
Given the feedback from those who knew him and given the fact that Obama has not since then shown any Marxist tendencies, I would say quite plausible.
So, you were one type of crazy ideological anti-American nut in your youth and all you’ve done is become a different type of crazy ideological anti-American nut in your older days…
So what you’re telling us is that you’ve always been an unstable paranoid and angry alarmist pants wetter…
Now, where was the banner again? Was it on mars? The Marxists were the first Marxists to go Marxing around on Mars? With Mighty Mighty Marxin’ Obama, that is?
So NASA is Marxist, too?
– g
I urge you to read my article in American Thinker, “Meeting Young Obama.” This way you will be able to judge the accuracy of my evaluation of young Obama’s radical ideology.
– g
Please. I’m a business owner, a published author, and an alternate on the Orange County Republican Central Committee. I think it should be clear to any normal person that I have abandoned the radical extremism of my youth and adopted more mainstream ideological views. Obama, however, appoints people like Anita Dunn and Van Jones to high level White House jobs. I’m terrified that Obama doesn’t not understand or respect our capitalist economic system.
* Raises hand in agreement with Majority Will*
Sure seems that way…
My hypothesis – paranoia stems from a heightened irrational sense of fear and thus is a severe form of insecurity. Therefore it makes sense that those with such high levels of insecurity would also be susceptible to Narcissistic Personality Disorder – a common defense that manifests in extremely insecure people.
– nbc
You are starting to be a joke. Remnick reports that Obama’s friends hung a picture of Karl Marx in the quad during the middle of the Cold War and you still don’t believe that Obama and his friends were Marxists? What’s wrong with you? Read Stanley Kurtz’s book, Radical-In-Chief and you’ll see even more details regarding Obama’s ties to this dangerous extremist ideology.
So that is your evidence that Obama was a Marxist even though his closest friends consider this ridiculous?
I see…
I know that this might be beyond your ability to comprehend, but it MIGHT have been an ironic statement. Andy Warhol painted Mao and he wasn’t a Maoist. I take your fixation on Obama’s distant past as part of your personality disorder in which you expect that the fact that you published a good thesis means that the world should bow down to you for the rest of your life.
But on a more general note, here’s the issue you face. Whether you like it or not, Obama is the incumbent President and incumbent Presidents stand or fall on their record in office and their program for the next 4 years, not on college pranks or who their roommates were. When some on the Left brought up Bush’s National Guard records in 2004, I took that as a sign that he would be re-elected. When your opponents have to go back 30 years, that says they are not very focused on the here and now.
FWIW, here is my perspective on the 2012 election. The Republican Congress has very kindly (for Obama) laid down a marker in the Ryan plan, which says, “Here is a voucher for Medicare. If it isn’t enough to buy you a decent plan, tough.” Obama has said he will veto such a plan and he is credible on that count. The Republican candidates jumped to support it. The Republicans have said “Not a penny in revenues from the richest, come wars, hurricanes, or plague.” Obama has said, let’s have a balanced plan. I think Obama’s vision is more appealling, no matter what he spent his college years doing.
Doc C:
Have you considered adding American Thinker to The Ugly list in the footer section of your site’s pages?
– g
Remnick confirms the radicalism of young Obama and his friends. Remnick is a liberal author, hardly a conspiracy theorist. I have an award-winning Ph.D. in political science and have taught political economy at some of the finest schools iin the nation. I think you’ll find that it is very difficult to protect Obama from the charge that he was a Marxist socialist while he was a sophomore at Occidental College. The evidence in overwhelming…
You may be terrified but there is no doubt that President Obama very well understand our (flawed) capitalist economic system and its impacts on the poor and middle class.
To conclude from this that somehow President Obama is a Marxist is not of much scholarly value as it is speculative and lacks, once again, substantive data.
LOL! I like it!
So, what do you propose as the Tz-score range for pompous delusional trolls and where would you place this one on that scale..?.
Come on MW, we need a baseline in order to start using the Tz metric! 🙂
It appears to be at odds with what his closest friend claim. So here we have your opinion based on a fleeting meeting that happened 30 years ago versus those who knew him.
Ouch…
Remnick does nothing of the kind
Source: Remnick, David (2010-04-06). The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama (p. 104). Knopf. Kindle Edition.
All he has done is stated that there was a Marx banner over the Quad… Sorry my friend, by any scholarly standard that does not measure up.
Yeah, the delusional troll really lives in a “Charlie Sheen winning” world in his own head, doesn’t he?
It is quite clear from reading the breadth of the forum that he’s got it completely backwards.
In agreement with John Drew, king of pompous insecurity = John Drew
In agreement with Bob Ross, NBC & Fogbow’s conclusions = EVERYONE ELSE.
– scientist
I think the issue is more serious than that. Obama lied about his ties to radical extremists like Bill Ayers in 2008 and there was no literature for voters to read to check out the facts. Today, swing voters will be able to Google this thread and read that young Obama’s friends hung a banner promoting the ideas of Karl Marx in David Remnick’s book, The Bridge.
These swing voters will be able to read my face-to-face description of young Obama’s extremist ideology.
Swing voters will be able to say that Obama fooled them in 2008, but he cannot fool them in 2012. Swing voters understand that they will be harmed by affirmative action and screwed over by high unemployment if Obama gets another four years. Obama is no friend to swing voters. He holds to a radical extremist perspective that most of them believe is unAmerican.
I never smoked, never used anything illicit, my blood pressure was normal, and alcohol was once a year at a Christmas party. Alcohol is boring. I did my homework in the backroom of my grandfather’s liquor store, while he and my mother waited on customers. He got into the liquor trade by accident. During the Great Depression, no one needed another clergyman, so my grandfather gave up his rabbinic studies, built a still in his basement, and then opened a store when the 18th Amendment was repealed on December 5, 1933.
I think it’s heredity. My mother told me her father had 3 major strokes before I was born, and he fully recovered. He had zero deficiencies. I just have some balance problems, and I lost my photographic memory. My grandfather had a photographic memory, as did his son, my maternal uncle.
Quantifying nutballs should be based on how many times they make the same mistakes but keep expecting different results?
I shudder to think that the current crop of delusional birther trolls might aspire to achieve a GigaTaitz (GTz) like some sort of perverse Moore’s law in action.
– nbc
I think it is clear that I was a very close friend of at least one of young Obama’s closest friends. 🙂 It’s not like I was a stranger visiting with other strangers when I met young Obama for the first time. I knew Chandoo from the previous anti-apartheid movement. My ex-girlfriend was young Obama’s classmate. Obama showed his true colors to me and I provided him with the latest in Marxist socialist thought. My take on young Obama has been deemed credible by at least four nationlly known authors and their publishers. Obama’s friends hung a banner promoting Karl Marx, according to Remnick – a liberal author. How, in your view, is this behavior consistent with the idea that they were not Marxists? I’ve already exposed you as a faux scholar for your silly misunderstanding of the difference between a population and a sample. You will learn the difference during your first year of college statistics.
No he didn’t. You are the liar. They served on a charitable board together. You know, charity, doing things for OTHERS (a concept you ought to check out). Besides, Ayers has done some very positive things to make up for his past errors. You have not.
Did Obama hang it? In fact, it is not clear EXACTLY who hung it is it? besides, swing voters don’t Google conspiracy sites and they don’t listen to failures like you. Especially when they know that you are a partisan Republlcan hack.
You met him briefly twice at parties.
Unemployment is headed down. You should keep up with the news. Go to a mall. tell me if you can find parking. I can’t. The economy is gaining strength. Smart people are positioning themseleves accordingly. I would give you investment advice, but not for free.
I think we can add a corollary to this measurement, akin to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The product of a birther lawyers “Taitziness” and their probability of success in a court is less than or equal to 3.14159265
So the story goes, but that is far from the claim that Obama was or is a Marxist, a position which is contradicted by his closest friends. So who should we believe? Someone who met President Obama some 30 years ago fleetingly, or those who knew him well?
The answer my friends is obvious. That you now are pointing to ‘scholarly research’ when referring to non peer reviewed books full of speculation does not give you any more credibility my friend. Scholars do not just publish books, the publish in peer reviewed journals. If only you had realized this during your time at Williams.
Oh how delusional! What an imaginary sense of pretend importance you have!
The internet is cluttered with blogs and commentary, full of anonymous wannabe’s and inconsequential a-holes with dumb opinions.
If you think any of this is “fighting the 2012” campaign or has anything to do with it whatsoever, you’re just too sad for words.
Any good opposition researcher will be focusing his time on digging into real info on the candidates records and pasts from real sources and video records.
If they are wasting their time trolling the internet for the equivalent of chain-email old wives tales by disgruntled whiners and gullible ignoramuses, then they are wasting their time.
That’s the truly pathetic joke about you folks – you waste all this time trolling with clear intent to make up mud you think you can sling and think you’re participating in some “clever” propoganda war, caring only to sow doubt and “persuade” the gullible.
It is a foolish effort and lost cause. The only one’s susceptible to such obvious rot are those that are already factored in as not planning to vote a certain way. Anyone with a brain or not blinded by ideology is going to see through your made up smears and not only not be convinced, but turned off by the blatent lies and kooky tales. Your silly propaganda games only serve to preach to the converted and by duping the dupes even more, all you do is serve to untether them further from reality and make them less aware of what is going in the real world around them.
So go for it! Waste your time. All you serve to do is undermine your own goals by destroying any credibility you may have had by spouting nonsense and therefore immunizing any broader public beyond your little already-converted-choir towards simply ignoring and discounting you entirely. And your gullible group living in their little self-reinforced bubble of myths only becomes even more blind to any real-world dynamics in play and therefore less prepared and less aware of where their chances actually stand in any election.
So great, keep them distracted and focused on bogeyman fairy tales and susceptible to clicking the payPal buttons of all the manipulative grifters out there preying on their fears. That just leaves them less money and time to devote to any real-world serious efforts that would have any chance of a true impact or change in improving their candidates fortunes or harming the fortunes of their opposition.
Again a speculative and unsubstantiated claim from Drew. We have grown used to this unscholarly approach by now, but it does not hurt to continue to point out how he continues to make assertions but fails to support them with anything substantive.
Examples, please. If he did not rescue GM, there would have been 1M unemployed within one month.
So let’s hear examples about his radical, extremist perspective.
Here’s one from Huckabee: “I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution,” Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. “But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that’s what we need to do — to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards…”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/15/huckabee-amend-constituti_n_81600.html
Then there’s John Anderson: Three times (in 1961, 1963, and 1965), Anderson introduced a constitutional amendment to attempt to “recognize the law and authority of Jesus Christ” over the United States.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Anderson
– scientist
The liberal author, Christopher Andersen, revealed that Obama turned to Bill Ayers for help in drafting Dreams From My Father. There is no doubt, among reasonable observers, that Obama lied about his ties to Bill Ayers. Ayers is our nation’s number one unrepentant terrorist.
Remnick provides vivid evidence that young Obama’s closest friends were Marxists. I can Twitter this blog out to swing voters to bring this information to their attention. I have almost 60K Twitter followers and was paid to live-blog the Republican presidential debated by Sulia. I can easily bypass the mainstream media given the new technology.
I was dating the leader of the Democrat Socialist Alliance when I met young Obama at her home in Palo Alto. I was hardly some disinterested stranger. I was intimately involved with one of Obama’s closest friends and political allies while he was at Occidental College.
My wife was unemployed for over two years thanks to the failed policies of the Obama administration. I don’t think we will ever forget what it was like for her to look for work, go on interviews, and face continual rejection in this terrible labor market.
Exactly but remember, Drew never really may have come to understood this fully during his short stint at Williams. Perhaps things would have been different if someone would have pointed out that scholars publish and publish in peer reviewed journals and that a lack of such a publication record is sufficient a reason to be denied to proceed towards tenure as the head of the Polisci Department at Williams tried to explain to Drew.
Another unsubstantiated claim this time by Andersen.
Fascinating how a scientific analysis of the work does not even support such a conclusion…
Excellent idea. The political decedent follows an irrational set that will never FEEEEE-neeeeesh.
Is she also blaming others for her misfortune? How unfortunate…
I understand that you feel very important, so good luck in your revenge. But lets not confuse your number of twitter followers with accuracy of your claims or the quality of your ‘scholarship’.
– g
I think your are underestimating the power of Twitter and blog sites to spread the news about young Obama’s extremist ideology. The only reason my take on young Obama has appeared in four books is that it came to public attention through YouTube, Twitter, and alternative media sites like NewsMax.
Ultimately, the story only took hold because of its credibility. Nevertheless, it would have been much easier to ignore if I didn’t have the help of modern communications tools. When I tried to get my story out in 2008, the media paid no attention to it. That will be much more difficult in 2012.
The reason nbc is attacking me with nonsense is to undermine that credibility and to make my comments harder to digest. Personally, I think that long threads raise an article’s visibility in Google searches.
I’m with you on this. What an utterly peculiar and irrelevant nit on inconsequence for someone to obsess over and even more sadly, to think it matters or anyone cares squat about it at all!
Somethings are just so unbelievably petty and stupid on their face, that it barely merits response to point that out. Yet this pathetic joker keeps ranting on about it as if anyone cares…
…sorry crazy John, but we don’t. Hate to tell you, but you just come across like some vagrant raving lunatic here and you only have your own weird peculiar obsessive hang-ups to blame for that. Right now, you seem less sane or believable than some wild-eyed drugged out bum on a street corner raving about alien anal probes and the end of the world…
HINT – lack of response to crazies does not mean other agree with the crazy person. It means that they are so crazy that most would rather ignore them altogether and let them mutter to themselves in a corner… Here and there, the rest of the folks milling about will strike up a conversation with each other and be able to point and joke about the crazy perosn in the corner…but that too just means one thing – everyone else agrees that person is crazy and doesn’t believe or care about the nonsense he rambles on about…
and that is the root of your problem…
Drew- I don’t care what some “liberal author” says. I don’t believe something just because someone writes it in a book. Same with Remnick. He wasn’t there.. You claim you were yet you can’t cite a single actual statement by Obama. Did you actuually speak with him? If so what did he say exactly?
As for your wife, what field is she in? Here are the facts. When Obama took office, jobs were being lost at around 800,000/month nd had been since Lehman went bust.. Once the stimulus passed and the money started flowing (by June009) the job losses ceased and the numbers turned positive. Here is a graph http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/non-farm-payrolls
Swing voters will be able to Google that too, my friend.
Besides, according to you, you are brilliant and make huge sums of money. Are you telling me your family can’t live comfortably on your income?
– nbc
I’m pretty sure that the number of folks following me on Twitter is a solid measure of my credibility and the impact of my testimony on young Obama. P.J. Foggy – the disbarred lawyer – who runs Fogbow only has 59 followers. Mimi – @_ccm – only has 1,414 followers. I would say in the marketplace of ideas, the folks at Fogbow are not gaining much influence compared to folks like me.
Christopher Andersen on CNN
Andersen on Ayers
As to Andersen being liberal, I have not seen any evidence one way or the other so far.
Andersen claims that there were two people who confirmed this but they remain unnamed…
Fascinating how quick some people are to jump to conclusion based on such flimsy evidence…
Romney believes American Indians are the lost tribe of Israel. That is radical ideology.
OK-So let’s ask any swing voters here what’s more important: whether you can get health care when you’re old and sick or who Obama’s friends might have been in college and what they did in their free time?
– scientist
Please. I used to teach political economy at some of our nation’s finest schools. The economy started going south in 2007 after Democrats gained total control of Congress. It is now getting better because Republicans have regained partial control of Congress. Obama predicted that the stimulus package would keep unemployment under 8%. Instead, it never went below 8%.
Sorry, I won’t waste my time.
Unfortunately for you, by the time I came to this thread, there was already a long history of conversation on display in order for me to make impressions and come to a judgment.
I’ve concluded that you are a delusional nut. Therefore, why would I have any interest in what you wrote or have to say. I’ve heard you make a bunch of claims and then seen the responses you were referring to from others here and on the link to the very thread you referenced on Fogbow. Your version of events consistenly seems to not hold up and the threats seem to back up what everyone else is saying and be consistently opposite to how you portray it.
So, I’ve concluded that what you say has no merit and can’t be trusted at all and is usually the opposite of what apparently happened or went down.
So again, why should I care about your opinions, rants or what you might have written?
Any “source” or reference you’ve used to back you up turns out to be nothing but another two-bit kook site or hack RWNJ propaganda site…and nothing I’d consider to be a credible or meaningful source at all. Michael Savage? Please. He’s considered such a nut that England has him on their No-Fly list. So hate to tell ya, but when you cite generally regarded kooks and cranks to back you up…doesn’t help your credibility there either.
The world is full of hacks who write fan-fic all over the net. Why would I waste my serious time paying any whit of attention to yours?
I don’t know, misha. Around here, we have a tribe called the Shmohawks. Or is it the Mohawks? I forget.
Hi Johnny! Looks like you’ve found another group of people to pwn you–congratulations! (although I am beginning to worry about your masochistic tendencies).
I thought I’d mention John’s enormous hypocrisy (to go with the enormous ego) since I didn’t see where it had been pointed out previously in this thread. In an article on Oh, For Goodness Sake (I believe this occurred about a year ago, but I’m not sure) it was suggested that Johnny worked for Ann Coulter when he was a grad student in Cornell. This was based on his own statement that he was “Ann Coulter’s teaching assistant”. Now, to people in academia, this obviously means that Ann was a student in a class or recitation that he taught, not his supervisor, but, in what I suspect is a common error for non-academics, OFGS misinterpreted it. Despite an enormous hue and cry by the most important person in the world (that being Mr. Drew himself), it wasn’t until recently that OFGS noted and corrected the error. In Johnny’s words, this behavior by OFGS was “unprofessional”. Leaving aside the fact that I doubt that OFGS is a significant source of income for the owner and I’m not sure exactly what “professional” standard of ethics bloggers are bound by, it would naturally follow that any standards to which OFGS must be held should apply to little Johnny’s very own blog as well.
His response to this HYENAS* breach of journalistic ethics and the painful pwning he received at the hands of the Fogbow? He found information purporting to “out” various members of the Fogbow** and published said information on his very own blog. Now this information contained several significant errors of fact including incorrectly connecting the real identity of an uninvolved person with an online persona and repeating lies about Foggy regarding issues that are matters of public record. As far as I could tell, he made absolutely no attempt to verify any of this before publishing it on his blog. His source? One of KenyanBornObamAcorn’s videos.
Little Johnny Drew has shown himself to be hypocritical, egotistical to the point of narcissism, completely unwilling to acknowledge critiques, incapable of or unwilling to provide objective evidence in support of his arguments, and he’s got the worst case of Obama Derangement Syndrome I’ve every seen that didn’t include birtherism.
I believe that all of this is due to little Johnny being colossally butt-hurt at the (clearly justified) decision of Williams College to tell him to “take a hike”. While Johnny was still in denial*** that his failure could be in any way due to his own shortcomings (which are legion–my opinion), he received a “major award” for his thesis which validated his belief that he had been treated unfairly and thus was born a confirmation bias which may dwarf even the birther greats. When President Obama sprung on the scene and John viewed his two-decades distant memory of their past interaction through the lens of this confirmation bias, he saw in President Obama the personification of every wrong that had been done to him. While President Obama has managed to unite the best of the African and American parts of his heritage, all we’ve seen from Johnny is a sense of entitlements he is owed for being a white male and a sense of victimhood from identifying with his “poor Armenian”**** heritage.
Just my $0.02.
* stolen from Suranis (it’s a joke Johnny–a play on the word “heinous”)
** Johnny, I’d like to make it very clear that I’m not talking about myself–the only things you’ve said about me are things that I have willingly and intentionally revealed about myself, information easily obtainable with the previous (plus a few trivial errors of fact that you threw in), and erroneous speculation based on that information (which I find hilarious). If I was worried about my name being associated with what I say as “Slartibartfast”, do you think I would have revealed it? (sorry, I didn’t mean to use logic on you–I know that you don’t understand it…)
*** a state he remains in to this day.
**** which is just to suggest that this is how I think John sees himself–no generalization about Armenians is implied.
Only one. And you got fired.
Some scientific data
leading to the conclusion that
Cited here
Millican has shared with us his analysis which shows no support for the thesis that Ayers wrote Obama’s book
– scientist
Unfortunately, the history of socialized medicine shows that the elderly are at great risk under socialized medicine. In England, for example, many older people were left to die rather than allow them to run up steep medical bills. I can’t imagine anything more frightening than knowing that the same government bureaucracy that harmed me with affirmative action will be deciding whether or not I get medical help.
How is our system any different when insurance companies decide what your limit is and basically leave you to die
Try this one on: sane reasonable people have no motivation to follow either side of this … either the nuts babbling about their nuttery, or the (speaking for myself) the understimulated and easily amused types that enjoying prodding the nuts to see what kind of noises they make. The scope of your irrelevance is measured by how many followers you don’t have. Here’s an idea, go hire a social media marketing firm, and have them try to boost your numbers. See how well it works!
As for the followers you do have, beyond the few who may be monitoring you out of curiosity, and another few who may be tasked with simply *monitoring* you, birds of a feather, Mr. Drew.
– scientist
I was not “fired.” That is a lie. I was given an extra additional year of employment starting in the fall of 1989. Instead of taking that, I resigned in disgust.
Ah there you go making unsubstantiated claims. What specific measures did the democrats put in place in 2007 that caused the downfall of the economy? What specific measures did the republicans put in place to help the economy in 2011?
So, is it your contention that house prices would have continued to rise forever and the “AAA-rated” CDS/MBS carnival would have continued forever if only there had been Republican Congresses? Remember a guy called Greenspan? A Randian fool like too many Republicans. Of course, even he had the sense to come before Congress in 2008 and admit that the idea that markets are self-regulating was wrong. But I’ll bet you wouldn’t have the balls to admit that.
– nbc
I think it is perfectly obvious that Obama does not have the skill set needed to write Dreams. The best passages are clearly reflections of other work done by Bill Ayers. The best example, to me, is Obama’s description of his white girlfriend in Dreams. This character is an exact match with Bill Ayer’s girlfriend Diane Oughton. For the record, I never saw young Obama friendly with a girl at any of the times I saw him on campus or at off campus events. I think that the reason there are no Obama girlfriends is that there are no Obama girlfriends.
Sure but all we have is your word. Yet you claim you were dismissed over discrimination. Funny how the more times you tell your story the more twisted it becomes.
Why is it you believe Obama doesn’t have the skillset required to write dreams? You’ve shown nothing to prove your theory.
OK, gang. I need to go and deal with some business. I’ll check in later this evening. Regards, JCD
Whats the Johnster is talking about is that some 70+ year old men were diagnosed with prostate cancer, which is slow growing and especially so in old people, and were not told for the simple reason that on average something else will kill them before the prostate cancer would become a problem, and the process of treatment would drastically worsen their quality of life and would in fact shorten their life span. In short, they were better off not knowing.
Yeah, some beurocracy.
You were denied tenure and given a year to look for another job. That’s “fired” in academia.
Can this person confirm you were dating her and that you did not in fact paste a photo of her head onto one of your blowup dolls and drive in the carpool lane?
So your solution is what?
Sorry, but everything I’ve seen from you here comes off kooky and pitifully obsessive and awfully insecure and overcompensating.
*nothing* you’ve said comes across mainstream in the least. Not mainstream in general. Not mainstream in terms of the serious right or conservative views in the spectrum either.
Full-metal-paranoid and obsessive delusional wingnuttery is where I’d classify and junk the kind of kooky and utterly unimportant stuff you sadly fixate on.
Sorry, but your rants here come across so desperate and over-the-top that you’ve only served to destroy any credibility or caring I would normally have on meeting someone new. You seem to be full of a lot of BS that doesn’t hold up and you seem desperate to view some minor inconsequential enounters with a young Obama at a party decades ago into some sad claim for attention or fame. You seem desperately hung up and fixated on past failures and a need to have somewhere else to point the blame, other than yourself.
Sorry, but that sounds like the behaviors of someone who is a broken “nobody”, desperate to pretend and convince others that they are somehow important and willing to tell outrageous whoppers to get people to “like them”…but so fake and creepy in their attempts to do so, that they only backfire and scare others away. So I sense someone who is so utterly socially inept that they are completely without a clue as to why they have difficulties in life and in making conversations and are utterly without the normal human skills to do anything but hurt themselves further. Thus, I am more likely to find it credible that you’re life is a string of self-inflicted failures that you can’t stop nor even capable of comprehending why they happen; than to take serious any claim you make about your “success” or “talent”.
The Al Bundy analogy someone else here recently made seems to work on some level…but then again, Al Bundy is only a has-been and doesn’t seem to also be a deeply scarred and emotionally broken individual. You do.
I could care less what you do for a living or what you claim your accomplishments or career is. You’ve come across so unbelievable that I take anything you claim about yourself (other than that one paper from long ago, which seems to be backed up) with mroe than a “grain of salt”, as the saying goes. You seem to be a “very important person” only within the fantasy-world you build up to protect yourself with in your own mind.
All I see is signs of an utter disaster with no self-awarness. The humanity in me wants to feel pity, but the annoying obsessive crazy rants are such a turn of, that I simply don’t care and only serve to lessen any curiosity I might have about you or what you think at all.
Come on Bob, you know that all of Johnny’s blow-up dolls have his own face on them…
And it’s ummm …. let’s see, it just changed again, get’s so hard to keep track ….. hmmm. It’s … oh, right! 2012!
So, if you bother to scuttle back after taking care of your “business”, entertain us with what you’ve done lately? since invading Panama?
Purely speculative and lacking any substantive support. I have shown how a scientific analysis shows no support for your thesis.
As to your claims about Diana, I assume you can make an argument with the necessary data that would allow us to determine the relevance of your claims?
Well you only saw him two times, his friends appear to know better but I understand that you have you beliefs, regardless of any substantive support.
You’re so right John Drew is so into John Drew that he’s in John Drew
John, why do you insist on telling lies that are very easy to check on and refute?
APSA’s website has a list of the available dissertation awards. Clicking on each of the awards lets you get a list of the previous winners.
You won the Anderson award in 1989.
Jeffrey Herbst won the Almond award in 1989.
Mark Graber won the Corwin award in 1989.
Carol Hager won the Lasswell award in 1989.
Yossi Shain won the Reid award in 1989.
Victoria Hattam won the Schattschneider award in 1989.
Tai-Shuenn Yang won the Strauss award in 1989.
Roy T. Meyers won the White award in 1989.
According to APSA, all of those are dissertation awards. Moreover, you know that there were more than four, because we went through this on the Fogbow thread.
If you keep lying about the little stuff, especially in ways that seem calculated to inflate your own minimal accomplishments at the expense of others, how can we trust you on the big things?
After Johnny failed as an academic he apparently failed as a loan officer (not even nepotism was enough to help him) and now runs some sort of grant-writing business (which, as with everything else, he makes claims about while providing nothing to support those claims…).
*yawn* Why do you presume to think I care or think what a bunch of young college kids thought or did in the distant past and care-free follies of their youth matters at all? Young people get carried away with all sorts of fantasy idealistic notions and also tend to experiment in all sorts of ways. It is part of youth and growing up.
I’ve never cared whether Bush or Clinton or Obama did drugs or other common indescretions in their past. Nor would I care what politicians or political movements they were inspired by in their distant youth.
So for me, it doesn’t even need to reach the level of caring about the inconsequential trivia of your oh-so-brief enounters at a few random parties in days of yore. I find the whole excercise so irrelevant and boring and utterly meaningless to anything to do with the state of affairs in 21st century America, that I don’t even need to address it at all.
…And there you go again, desperately having to tell me that you have a PhD and calling yourself “award winning”… like I care? …like that somehow matters *how* exactly? Are you really that stupid to realize that you haven’t said the same thing already over and over again? Do you realize that *real* successful people don’t have to waste their time convincing others of their credentials or so pitifully and pathetically making and endless plea for attention?
The very fact that you keep bringing it up and even have to use your “PhD” in your internet handle reeks of a desperate need for not only attention, but also to *have* to convince others that you somehow matter. What it signals is just the opposite – you come across as a pathetic and desperate loser, with so little going for himself and so berift of anything of consequence to say, that you have to hide behind artificially puffing yourself up in the frantic and futile hope than anyone will pay attention to you at all.
Simply put, you have nothing to really offer. If you did, your credibility would rest on the content of your statements and the quality of your supporting arguments and evidence and not have to rely on endlessly trying to remind others that, “hey, look at me…I’m a somebody, really, honest…please will someone pay attention and listen to me…please…?”
Your “evidence” and arguments are neither credible nor “overwhelming” nor consequential in any sense of the term.
So “bully for you” that *you* care about these issues. Pat yourself on the head for being in your own corner, there.
Nobody else cares, though. At least not me -not one whit. Nor does it seem anyone else here does either.
I suggest you find a nice little safe-site full of other rabid ODS sufferers, eager in their own pitiful scars and pain to eat-up any anti-Obama rumors they can desperately latch on to. Maybe in those safe-little bubbles you can take advantage of their own obsessive-compulsive blind hatred and gullibility and finally find someone to pay attention to you…
Bob,
I think that John Drew has such a high opinion of John Drew that he literally cannot conceive of anyone who isn’t John Drew that doesn’t share John Drew’s opinion about John Drew. If a person (presumably not John Drew) doesn’t mention John Drew as often as John Drew would like (this comment probably doesn’t mention John Drew as often as John Drew thinks that John Drew should be mentioned–even including this completely gratuitous “John Drew”) that make John Drew sad and anyone who makes John Drew sad must be a horrible person because everyone, whether or not they are John Drew (this is in John Drew’s mind we’re talking about…), knows just how wonderful John Drew is. Remember the zeroth law of John Drew:
You’ve vastly underestimated the importance of John Drew.
Not to mention the first law of John Drew:
You’ve vastly underestimated the significance of the zeroth law of John Drew
I should probably mention that the (n+1)st law of John Drew says that you have vastly underestimated the nth law of John Drew, except when n=infinity – 3, in which case it is “Douglas Hofstadter rules!”. The ensuing paradox may be blamed on Gödel’s theorem, but the important thing to remember is that it’s not John Drew’s fault.
*rolls eyes*
*sigh* Here we go again, nothing but trotting out the same tired old nonsense and lies that didn’t make a difference last time – the only time in which such mudslinging bogeyman rumours could have had an impact.
Concerns (including smears) about a candidate or their past may have some impact on certain people’s choices when someone is first running for an office.
However, an incumbent President is simply judged based on their record and comparison to the alternative. Simple as that.
You can make up all the crazy lies and spin and spout simplistic bogeyman nonsense phrases of “marxism” or what-not and it doesn’t matter, nor does it have any connection to reality. Such amateur-hour tall-tales only work on the already-converted, desperately clinging to excuses to justify their irrational fears and hatreds. They simply don’t hold up or work beyond that audience and I hate to tell you, that audience and their votes are already factored into the electoral equation.
They weren’t part of Obama’s overwhelming vote win last time, nor would any serious person worry about where their votes go this time. It is simply pretty obvious and clear.
As someone else here aptly said, Bill Ayers association to Obama is practically as tenuous and inconsequential as yours is to him. Neither matter nor had any impact on Obama or his decision making. You are simply both irrelevant and unconnected to anything impacting how this Administration operates.
You can say “radical” until your lungs turn blue. Nothing over the past few years has been “radical” in any sense of the term. For a supposed “marxist”, there sure has been nothing but another Wall-Street favoring, Goldman-Sachs graduate financial team in place all along. Nor is “Obamacare” in any real or meaningful way “socialized medicine”, since all it does is prop up the private insurance industry and direct people not already on medicare, medicaid or the VA to continue to get their health insurance from private industry sources.
Your hollow arguments and bogeymen are stupid arguments that only appeal to stupid people and gullible paranoids. Doesn’t matter how many times you say it…there is no fantasy magic in the world that can make your wishful thinking or repetition change reality.
Slarty-As an academic scientist, how do you react to John’s assertion that winning an award for your dissertation automatically makes you one of the outstanding minds of your generation and basically entitles you to tenure at a first-rate institution even if you publish nothing while there?
LOL! A GigaTaitz… priceless! 🙂
Personally, I would think that the mathmatical expression most representative of their chances is:
i
Nope. You are overestimating here and more importantly, completely failing to grasp the segmented reality of how social networking and the internet truly functions.
Once you get beyond a mainstream site or official site of consequence, you are dealing with special-interest sites and amateur blogs. The audiences drawn to those are already self-selected by interest.
Most of the hack propaganda sites are nothing but self-contained little fantasy bubbles. They practice constant self-censorship and therefore attract and appeal only to those looking to feed an already existing confirmation bias.
Propaganda also has a limited reach. It only works on the gullible, the lazy and those who are already locked in a specific mindset and just looking for excuses to reinforce what is already there.
It simply doesn’t work on the vast remainder of society – that includes those strongly on a differing side of an issue, locked into their own mindset and therefore not reachable by their “opposition”.
More importantly, that vast remainder also includes those that simply think rationally or who look for verification before swallowing what someone tries to “sell” them wholesale. Propoganda attempts only serve to work against these latter types, because honesty and truth are favored and any con artist or tall tale teller will quickly be found out and as soon as the propoganda is revealed for what it is, these types will not just reject it, but be driven in the opposite direction from it, out of sheer disgust, as a result.
So sorry, but hate to burst your bubble and another one of your delusional fantasies of over-inflated importance and worth, but spreading silly little lies on the internet is going to result in so little return for the effort required, that it truly amounts to nothing and being an utterly inconsequential waste of time. In mathmatics, we would refer to this as the “limit approaches zero”.
Any real forum or open site will be so full of other opinions and real issues that propaganda is not only openly called out and ridiculed, but even more importantly, not even paid any attention to by the vast majority of readers who are there for other interests and reasons. Further, it will quickly become lost admidst the sheer volume and swirl of other issues and commentary and often buried so deep that very few will ever see it and even fewer will remember or care.
Any special-interest forum is already a self-selected narrow audience. If it is an open forum, propaganda lies will be found out and debunked in the open. Again, they have now lost their effect, except to those already converted.
Only on a censored private forum can propaganda survive unchallenged. But these types of sites are usually agenda-driven sites, so they are only sought out and infested by the already converted. So there, you get to preach to the choir.
But even in all this, commentary on any site may have an extent of permanence, but still usually has a limited viable “shelf life” as new stories and new commentary comes in and again, what someone said days or weeks ago is buried and lost in the mix. Very few other eyeballs will ever come across it.
Same rules are true to who follows what on twitter, etc.
You are simply wasting time on a futile battle in a vast, but fragmented online see. Then again, a “virtual” battle probably has appeal to delusional and susceptibly gullible folks like you – it simply isn’t “real” and online, you can pretend to be important and ignore your utter inconsequentialness and utter futility of your “propagdana mission” in the real physical world…
You simply waste time with hollow words, because they are easy and anyone with a keyboard can type with little effort. As the old saying goes, quantity does not equal quality. Made up stories are just words. Whether you say it or type it, it takes very little effort or creativity to be a hack liar and scam artist.
But the rewards match the effort. Other than being able to damage your own reputation and make yourself an online laughingstock, they simply don’t translate to impacting reality. That requires real world effort.
*yawn* Again, who cares. Your twitter followers…seriously? What a joke.
Unless you can put up some Charlie Sheen or Ashton Kutcher level numbers, you’re just an inconsequential joke, preaching to a small choir of already converted dupes and self-congratulating cranks.
Health care and real world problems only.
A pragmatic like me simply doesn’t care about any petty and irrelevant stupid stuff that has no bearing on either solving the problems at hand or preventing policies that would make certain situations even worse…
Scientist,
I think my mentions of Johnny’s “major award”, which are references to the leg with fishnet stocking lamp that the dad won in A Christmas Story says it all. I don’t, however, consider myself an academic scientist anymore–I’ve trying to test the value of my skills in the market, so I’ll soon have empirical evidence of what they are worth–not that they could ever compare to the value John Drew assigns to John Drew’s abilities.
G,
You know, when I saw the term GTz, my first thought was “that’s intellectually impossible”, but now I think that JD might require something in the TeraTaitz range… I have to agree that it would require imaginary numbers to describe the probability of birther success (and likely negative probabilities as well, since they do damage to their own cause).
What a load of crap! Such lazy and foolish statements prove to me that you don’t know what you are talking about and demonstrate that you are ill-qualified to teach on the subject.
The factors that cause an economy to collapse or recover are complex and long-ranging. The impacts of legislation are rarely felt in the near-term and often take many months after being signed into law to even go into partial-effect…and usually years to truly have an impact.
Please, tell us SPECIFICALLY what legislation passed in 2007 or 2008 “caused” the economic collapse…
Come on bright boy…let’s hear some specifics… this should be good for a laugh!
Face it John, you are full of weak sh*t and you are just talking out your @ss… What an utter joke you are!
The pissant also known as John C. Drew, Ph.D., wrote a thesis on child labor. As a result, he is now V.O. Key, George Catlin, Ralph W. Conant, Karl Deutsch, Henry Kissinger, Nelson Polsby and Anthony Downs.
His field of knowledge is vast, primarily because of his accomplishment of writing 8 grant requests in the last 12 years. He spends the rest of his time promoting himself as the greatest and most misunderstood political scientist who ever lived.
As I said, a pissant.
John,
You keep saying “trust me”.
Seriously why should we?
No one has corroborated what you said that young Barack Obama said.
You have misrepresented what Hasan has said- implying that Hasan has confirmed that Obama was a Marxist.
You quote Remnick- inviting us to believe his/her quotes- yet you don’t believe Remnick’s conclusions.
Reading through all of this- I still don’t see any actual corroboration that you even actually met Obama.
What stands out to me- over and over again- is that your ex-girlfriend won’t comment in support of your claims. You keep saying ‘trust me’ but apparently your ex-girlfriend doesn’t trust you enough to support your claim.
You have nothing to corroborate the association you keep trying to make between Obama and the Democratic Socialist Union(or whatever it is called) who supposedly put up the Marxist poster.
Now, if I were to claim that I had met someone in college, and my friends were at that meeting- frankly any of my friends in college wouldn’t hesitate to verify that if I were to ask them. Why won’t yours? Why don’t your college friends trust you?
I don’t care about what you have or have not accomplished in life- I don’t care whether what you think happened to you because of affirmative action or not. I care about your claims regarding President Obama.
You have made claims regarding President Obama in college, that you have not provided any actual corroborating evidence for. Your account of his supposed “Marxism” is based upon your recollection only- and is supported only by your interpretation of what his friends are supposed to have been or done. This is just not credible.
And the rest of your claims just don’t hold up to rational scrutiny- that Obama must have been a Marxist because two of his friends were Marxists? Seriously- i went to college too- and I had friends that were conservative born Again Christians, members of the Palestinean Students Union
And then we move onto your claims that he is an unrepentant Marxist. I have not seen one thing President Obama has done as President that I would consider a “Marxist” action.
No Marxist that I know of would have engineered the rescue of a private corporation and then arranged to sell it back to the private market.
No “Marxist” would have proposed a mandatory health insurance using private insurers.
And certainly no “Marxist” would have missed an opportunity to let private business collapse- as President Obama could have done if he had let Banks and GM fail- to show the failures of capitalism.
That you- a PHD in poly sci consider President Obama’s actions to be indicative of a Marxist makes me believe you are blinded by your own ideology.
I believe that it was the Judean People’s Front… or was it the People’s Front of Judea?
Hi Slarti!
Long time no see, my friend! Good to hear a post from you!
Your assessment seems to concur with everything else so far.
As you know, we get a lot of kooks that come over hear and attempt their propaganda spiel for awhile before realizing it won’t fly in this forum.
So far, I’d rate this as one of the least impressive one’s on almost all accounts. I mean seriously, a whole desperate attention-whoring tale based on 2 minor incidents of rubbing elbows with someone at a few college parties several decades ago??? That has to be a new record of grasping at tenuous straws for attention! I’d have to rate it amongst the weakest and lamest things we’ve ever heard here…and that sure say’s a lot.
Then again, this all pops up on a blog post about some nutter thinking Obama is a time traveller from Mars…so I’ll still put that as even crazier…but then again, it sure seems the right thread for this nut to pop up, that’s for sure!
In the attention-starved and blatently obvious inflated-ego to mask deep insecurities and failures category…I’d say he ranks above Apuzzo and is in Ron Polarik territory. Polarik may still take the prize as most pathetic and desperate…but this joker is sure doing his best to convince me he might merit Polarik-level loserishness…
Conjugate that verb.
I will point out- that we have more confirmation of Obama’s girlfriends, than we have of yours.
Should we use your own example as a confirmation that you never had any girlfriends?
I teach a class on masturbation. If I’m not there on time, they start without me.
Sounds like another myth you are just making up and attempting to propagate here. I don’t buy it.
For someone who repeatedly claims to be a PhD who taught at a college, you seem pretty uncapable of backing up your wild crank claims with credible evidence and links, as any student could easily do.
So put up or shut up, “bright boy”. Let’s see you prove the nonsense you spout instead of just pulling lazy made-up BS out of your @ss…
Who cares what you think? Hate to tell you, but you are merely an inconsequential nobody with delusions of adequacy. The world is full of a-holes with “opinions”… I don’t pay attention to most of those, so why should I pay attention to yours?
Sorry, but you are simply amongst the minority in your merely sour-grapes biased “opinion” here.
Count me in the category with most of the world, who has no reason to question or doubt that Obama wrote his own autobiography…
Nor are we going to be “persuaded” otherwise by random unhappy kooks seeking attention on the internet…
More importantly, count me in the category that didn’t care whether he’d ever written a book at all in terms of reasons to choose a candidate for President or to impact their performance in that office.
Again, you just come across as a sad and petty little angry person, wailing away about completely inconsequential and irrelevant issues… what a pathetic and meaningless cause….
If that is what he was alluding to, what you said sure doesn’t match up with how he’s trying to package and sell it at all…
I have a picture of me with my arm around the late Marilyn Chambers. I guess that means that she and I – well, I’m sure you get my drift.
LMAO!!
Glad you appreciated the “i” reference too… 🙂
Exactly!
G,
Hello! Sorry I’ve not been around–I’ve been distracted by a myriad of shiny things… By the way, can you send me an email? I think I have a bad address for you.
I’ve greatly enjoyed your point of view on this thread, as it is pretty much how I imagined someone unbiased and rational would react to his pointless, unsupported drivel (I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but I don’t like Johnny very much…). I completely agree that he’s well into Polarik territory (who also has a “soft” PhD… hmm… I wonder if Polarik ever won a “major award” like Johnny…). I think that he is useful to compare to birthers in order to determine how he is similar (probably due to advanced Obama Derangement Syndrome) and how he differs (not sharing their particular delusion*). I would also note that there is absolutely no evidence which would indicate that John has a sense of humor and while absence of evidence is not evidence of absence I believe that John’s funny bone, so to speak, is evidently absent. In my opinion, this is what makes the Drew toy so much fun to play with. If you’re lucky, you will have annoyed him enough for him to start making wild speculations regarding who you are and what you do and then try to insult you as if his delusions were true–for someone with no sense of humor, the effect is extremely comical! Which just goes to show that even if you can’t make a joke you can still be a joke…
* He has indicated that he believes that science has disproved evolution (which indicates a world of confusion on its own…) and he did some bragging on his linear regression prowess (as shown in the bestest thesis in the world) until I called him out on talking pseudo-math and challenged him to demonstrate his unparalleled ability at statistical analysis–he hasn’t gotten around to it yet, and I’m not sure how much longer I can keep holding my breath… 😉
Misha,
Slartibartfast is doing his John Drew impression so in true John Drew style he is unable to even acknowledge any comment (by someone other than Slarti pretending to be John Drew or even by John Drew himself) which might indicate anything that wasn’t completely positive about me (which is to say me as John Drew in my hypothetical John Drew impersonation rather than the actual John Drew). Is that clear?
OK, I’m back.
1) Williams College: I don’t think it is fair to suggest I was “fired” by Williams College. 🙂 As I said, I had a year left on my contract. I was not even allowed to advance into the tenure process. It was obvious to me, at the time, that this was a political move designed to keep a young white conservative, anti-affirmative action person out of the department. Today, 50% of the new hires in the political science department are black. Currently, 5 out of the 19 people in the department are black. This is in a world where whites make up 90% of the Ph.Ds in the field. I saw anti-white discrimination take place at Williams College while I was on the faculty there. The fact that I won the William Anderson award from the APSA is objective proof of my rather startling talent as a young scholar. My thesis was later published almost exactly as it was written and it now available for purchase. I have gone on to leverage my training and expertise at American government and public policy to establish my own management consulting company and to win millions of dollars in funding for non-profit charities and educational institutions.
2) Obama’s College Girlfriends: Don’t you think it is strange that I don’t remember a single girl hanging out with young Obama. As far as I can tell, there are no photos of him with ex-Occidental College girlfriends. There is no evidence of any romances in young Obama’s life. You would think in a world where every move made by Herman Cain is carefully documented that there would be one ex-Obama girlfriend out there discussing what it was like to be on a date with young Obama. I think Obama is lying to the American public about a lot more than his youthful commitment to Marxist socialist ideology. He is lying about having girlfriends too…after all one of the few stories we have about a girlfriend in Dreams is really a story about Bill Ayer’s girlfriend Diane Oughton. I mean, really, why hasn’t a single Obama girlfriend ever been interviewed?
3) Obama’s Karl Marx Loving Friends: Remnick’s book came out after I went public with my story on the radicalism of young Obama and his friends. My contact was specifically with two of those friends – Boss and Chandoo. (I was dating Boss at the same time she was running the Democrat Socialist Alliance at Oxy.) The fact that Remnick reports that the DSA hung a banner celebrating Karl Marx should be proof enough to a reasonable person that young Obama’s friends were Marxists. Chandoo, by the way, called himself a Marxist socialist and admitted his youthful radicalism in Remnick’s book. Remnick is a liberal…not a RWNJ. 🙂 I have admitted that I was a Marxist socialist myself when I first met young Obama.
4) Documentation: I have provided researchers like Stanley Kurtz and David Garrow with dated photos of me and Boss together and with a copy of a card she sent me at the time we were involved in a long-distance romance.
5) Please Look at the Source Documents: For a look at my story, in my own words, I recommend reading two articles I wrote for American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/john_drew/
6) Other Collaboration: After I was interviewed by Ronald Kessler, he followed up and sought to interview everyone involved in my debate with young Obama in 1980. Chandoo had an opportunity at that time to say the event never happened and he did not. Both Boss and President Obama were given a fair opportunity to respond to my statements by Kessler and both declined to be interviewed. I take “no comment” as tacit agreement with my take on what happened that evening. Everyone involved was given a fair opportunity to question my integrity and say that I was a liar. They passed on the opportunity.
Was young man Obama a radical? Not according to Remnick’s book, which “PhD Drew” loves to quote out of context:
NYPIRG [New York Public Interest Research Group] was seen as a Naderite group, and seen as kind of wishy-washy and bourgeois. But Barack was getting students involved in bread-and-butter issues and he was very good at it. And, while Barack himself was not a radical, he had read, he could speak that language if need be.” p. 121
In that section of the book Remnick is writing about Obama’s activities in 1985.
I also noticed that Drew’s name doesn’t appear in the index of Remnick’s book. The author writes 600 pages about Obama, yet he fails to mention the man who knew Obama so very well.
Hey, no worries! Yeah, it might be a few days, (due to some other things I’m tied up with…that I’ve already fallen behind by getting distracted here again), but I’ll definitely send you an email with a good address…be patient, I won’t foget. 😉
Wow…”science disproves evolution”…LOL! That’s a new one! Not that I care what such an obviously damaged and completely unimportant random nut on the internet thinks about anything…but the premise is so laughably backwards…and you brought it up…so I had to comment. 😉
– Rickey
Personally, I’m puzzled by why Remnick did not interview me too. I think he must have seen the article about me debating young Obama in the Ron Kessler piece that came out in February 2010 – prior to the publication of The Bridge.
My theory is that Remnick knew I existed and did not interview me on purpose because it would have spoiled the argument that young Obama was not a programmatic or doctrinaire Marxist socialist. Frankly, I would think that a political scientist like myself would be a highly credible judge of young Obama’s ideological beliefs.
Nevertheless, my take on young Obama has been featured in Michael Savage’s Trickle Up Poverty, Jack Cashill’s Deconstructing Obama, Stanley Kurtz’s Radical-In-Chief, and Paul Kengor’s Dupes. You can find my name in the index of those book, for sure.
Ironically, I’m most annoyed that I’m being attacked here for lacking a sense of humour. Here’s a video taped version of my standard stump speech on meeting young Obama…it looks like I’m getting plenty of laughs with this audience. See, http://youtu.be/HEQ6L2QIMUo
As I recall from our previous discussions, when you say that Williams would not let you stay on the tenure track, what you mean is that they said that they would not be renewing your contract for another 3 years, yes?
And as I recall from our previous discussions, when you talk about your “rather startling talent as a young scholar”, you are referring to a dissertation that was largely authored while you were a student at Cornell, was accepted by their faculty for a degree, was not given any award until after Williams parted ways with you, and does not actually constitute what any objective observer would consider to be “work done at Williams”, yes?
And as I recall from our previous discussions, when you talk about your “rather startling talent as a young scholar”, you’re referring to a track record that included the following publications during your time at Williams:
, yes?
And as I recall from our previous conversations, you are unwilling or unable to provide the name of one “less qualified” minority candidate who accepted a job you were refused, yes?
Holy shit. I would encourage people to watch that video, yes. If nothing else, it casts doubt on Drew’s claims to have been well regarded as a teacher.
aww a crazy old man got an open mic
He reminds me why I despise self-important blowhards with far too much spare time and so very little sense.
It’s Buzz Killington . . .
“‘I’ve quite a mastery of the humorous yarn (laughs). For example, do any of you know the tale of how cornmeal came to be?”
“Now, who here likes a good story about a bridge?”
Good grief! Who cares. You were let go and you are still suffering from sour grapes over it all these years later. Neither of which speaks well for you.. ok, the end. Sorry, but I could care less to be bored by your sad-sack life story any more.
*yawn* Again, who cares?
This has to be the dumbest point of attack and lame reasoning from you yet.
For one, you’ve admittedly barely brushed elbows with the guy. Hell, I’m sure there are thousands of random idiots out there who’ve attended at least *3* parties that Obama was also at in his youth…so you don’t even rate amongst those inconsequential nobodies.
Second, if your whole argument is that during two minor incidents of being at the same party with someone else that you didn’t see them with a girlfriend at the time…. I mean seriously??? That is your argument? ROTFLMAO! Then again, this from the guy that uses that same wisp of barely having met someone to sadly latch onto as his small “claim to fame”…and to pretend he knows anything about the guy or his ideology…
Look, who cares if Obama had a girlfriend at that time or not. Heck, who cares if the man ever got laid before he got married at all? I mean seriously, dude, you have some major jealously issues and feelings of your own inadequacy on display here that you are hung up over such stuff. Only tells us more about you than anything.
The President however? Gee, happily married and many years into his one and only marriage and he and his wife have two beautiful and well-behaved young daughters. Oh, and he’s part of the most exclusive career club on the planet – only the 44th person to ever to be US President! Yeah, sounds like he’s doing pretty good there…
You however…not so much…
*snore*. Who cares. Seriously, you’ve got issues. Go see a therapist for that obvious jealousy and resentment you carry around.
And that proves what exactly? How tired and sad. The only “documentation” you offer is something that doesn’t seem to prove much of anything at all and is only related to some minor and irrelevant petty hang-up you have over a long-distant and irrelevant past that you are stuck in… boy, you are one of the most scarred individuals I’ve ever encountered!
Your entire life since college and your little thesis must be such an utter miserable failure and disaster for you to be so fixated and hung up on minor incidents from well over two decades ago… This has to be one of the saddest sagas I’ve ever seen play out in my life!
Sorry, you are a sad joke and just some random desperate loser. Remind me again why I would care to visit your site or give a squat about what your opinion or “credentials” are? Oh that’s right… I don’t and I won’t bother to waste my time. Heck, if I’m going to waste my time getting a laugh at crazy nonsense, I’d waste time checking on some freak like the TimeCube guy before I wasted time with your site. At least his crazy is so out there it is mildly entertaining. You, just boring and bitter with about the lamest story to tell I’ve seen yet.
But hey, maybe you can find some some bitter sad sack on the street with even a less tenuous claim to Obama than you. Maybe someone that bumped into his cart at the grocery store once and who plans to write a book about his obvious deep personal connection and communist connections to China, because the guy saw a pack of Ramen noodles in the cart…
…Yeah…find us *that* guy! Because then you wouldn’t be the lamest and most inconsequential sad sack we’ve come across here…
Seriously???? Oh please! That is the lamest argument by you yet!
Hate to burst your widdle bubble there John, but did it ever occur to you, what everyone else has realized is *sooo* blindingly obvious about why none of them bothered to reply to you???
Hint..hint… because you are irrelevant and a nobody and of no consequence whatsoever at all! They have absolutely NO reason to care what you say or waste their time responding to you. You are just as meaningless and unimportant as every other random looser with a loud mouth and made up claims out there. You are not special. Heck, whiny pathological liars with crappy meaningless lives striving for attention are everywhere. Saying you are a dime a dozen is assigning too much value to you or what you say!
Wow…I really thought Ron Polarik was the most pathetic ODS-suffering nobody desperate for attention on the internet…but you…you may have him beat!
I really didn’t think that was possible…so there you go…I’m going to bestow you the “Saddest Clown” prize! Now you have *two* prizes you can brag about for the rest of your life… *woo hoo*
So quick…you better make a desperate search to find that angry grocery cart guy and hope he’s got to be out there somewhere…amongst the tens of thousands of similar random people who’s run into Obama at the grocery store…and hope you find him quickly!
Because unless you can produce *that* guy… I seriously doubt we can find another contender better suited for the “Saddest Clown” prize…and you really will have that around your neck to kvetch about for the rest of your bitter life….
And despite this you have failed to provide any supporting evidence for your beliefs. Perhaps you have overlooked a far more plausible and logical explanation such as the quality of your academic scholarship. Given your poor track record in publications, it is not unreasonable to reach the conclusion that while your thesis may have been promising, you had failed to show what it takes to gain tenure?
You have made many assertions which have so far remained totally unsubstantiated, you repeat the same unsubstantiated assertions without any effort to provide any logic, reason or more relevantly substantive evidence. All you claim that you, as an award winning assistant Professor should have deserved all the deference from your department. Apparently the faculty, or the head of the faculty had his reservations and while you attribute this to discrimination or affirmative action, or other ‘flavor of the day explanations’, you have utterly failed what I see as the foundation of any scholarly attempt, namely to provide substantive evidence not just speculation and rumor.
Your claims would have made more sense if you could have shown some evidence, or if your career had shown that you were a good scholar. But I am not sure that this is evident from your track record.
How many publications? Peer reviewed? Over what time period. What grants, proposals to fund your research have you been able to lay your hands on, what academic successes beyond your short stay at Williams?
I believe these are reasonable questions.
I want to emphasize to those of you who are wasting electrons on John Drew that he used one of KBOA’s videos in an attempt to “out” Fogbow members. KBOA–the deadest of the birfer dead-enders. KBOA who thinks that the fact that the Library of Congress contains material written by Vattel is “proof” that the 2-citizen parents=NBC BS is correct. KBOA, who thinks that Jefferson taught Vattel at William and Mary. KBOA, who thinks that every mention of the term “law of nations” is a reference to Vattel’s book. This is the level of researcher that Mr. Drew relies on to make his points. To paraphrase KBOA herself: Pffft, FAIL. Womp, womp.
Funny how you have to note 50% rather than the far more modest number of 2 out of 4… Not much evidence by any scholarly standard. 5 out of 19 being black, I counted 5 out of 21 , either way, that number is quite reasonable. Women are under-represented while white males are certainly over represented in this sample, as I said, Williams was in your days mostly a white male faculty, so the claim that you were a victim of affirmative action,once again, defies logic.
Purely speculative again and based on a single data point which can be interpreted in many ways but requires one to accept that Ayers wrote Obama’s book even though any scholarly analysis denies such a possibility. But perhaps you can provide us with an appropriate scholarly analysis that shows otherwise?
As to Remnick, he quotes Obama’s friends who, unlike you, have known him for more than a fleeting visit and discussion 30 years ago, and who have claimed that the idea of Obama being a Marxist or having been one is somewhat ridiculous.
Source: Remnick, David (2010-04-06). The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama (p. 104). Knopf. Kindle Edition.
So all you have is a banner and your belief that Obama must have been a Marxist because he hung out with people you consider to have been Marxists. Fine, if that is the best you can argue, then from a purely academic position, you have failed miserably in making your case.
That you in addition 1) use ad hominems whenever people raise valid objections 2)feel the need to inflate your own achievements further undermines your position.
Since you have made much of self contradictions, I will end with the following
Augustine25 is John Drew’s alias
On February 17, 2010, Dr. Drew wrote on ResistNet:
Again, we see a trend of inflation of importance… That does not provide a good foundation for a scholarly, academic argument.
Oh and as to John’s suggestions about Obama
Tough when the facts somehow do not add up.
Oh no, you ability to provide us with much laughter is appreciated 😉
Oh and for those who are not aware, Drew has a history when responding to Ken Thomas he resorts, as he has done here, to some very funny claims…
Fascinating. Sad but fascinating. Am I the only one who sees this?
– nbc
I think it is odd that the people around young Obama claim he had lots of girlfriends, and yet none of these girlfriends has ever been interviewed by the media.
What’s up with that? Lisa Jack doesn’t say she was Obama’s girlfriend, only that she once saw two girls sitting on his lap. I think Jack is lying. I don’t see young Obama doing that…
Obama himself claims he had a lot of girlfriends in Dreams From My Father, and yet there isn’t even a photo of him even close to a girlfriend. Obama’s romantic life is as vague and hidden as nbc’s true identify. Why is nbc afraid to reveal his/her real identity? Why isn’t there a single, verified girlfriend in young Obama’s life?
Quick comparison 😉
obamaconspiracy.org
Traffic 0.00024
world rank 747,684
US Rank 199,006
thefogbow.com
Traffic 0.00044
world rank 255,391
US Rank 60,019
anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com
Traffic 0.000023
world rank 5,057,867
US Rank N/A
Just saying…
Yes, how odd… But we have much second hand information of people seeing him date girls
That few remember him could be easily explained by him not having many long term relationships but he surely appears to be a hit with the girls…
I would like an Olympic Medal please, because I had the potential to win one but decided not to bother competing or even training because I knew how good I was because I won one single race.
Page number please… I found three references to girlfriend in the book. Can you help me out here…
KBOA is a whole different type of obsessive loser. John just seems to be some random bitter guy with a desperate need to get attention.
KBOA however…she’s comes across more Fatal Attraction… except Obama has no idea who she is…. still, her reaction to everything is like a jilted stalker who just can’t accept that people just aren’t “in to them”. So she comes across more of the “psycho nut” variety. Others have reported that she’s openly admitted to being a tweaker and meth head…so that would explain a lot of the weird flights of frenetic mania she demonstrates. Then again, I personally can’t confirm this nor do I care about her and her personal problems in life enough to bother finding out. If she ended up going quiet for a long time, I’d probably just suspect she did something really stupid and was probably in a jail cell somewhere… but nothing important enough to make national news.
yes I understand why you believe anyone who contradicts you must be lying.. But then again she was far more a friend of Obama than you who met him twice fleetingly, 30 years ago.
By that standard we could turn the table on you…
Yeah…because we heard so many news stories and reports from prior President’s college and high school girlfriends…
…oh wait…we didn’t. Nevermind.
ROTFLMAO!
Sorry, but Obama’s romantic life is quite obvious. Happily married with 2 beautiful and well-mannered children. Sounds like quite the family man success story and winner in that department!
And president of the USA… Considering that Drew may have met our President during a fleeting visit, it must be hard that Obama turned out to be so successful. State Senator, US Senator, President, with Columbia and Harvard education.
He is da man!!
Hey Johnny, it looks like your personal attacks on me (really just you attacking the delusional straw man version of me that you have created) just made people wonder why you couldn’t refute my arguments–why do you think that is?
– nbc
If the people reporting, second-hand, that young Obama had tons of girlfriends, then it seems like it would be easy to find at least the tiniest little bit of evidence of one of these romantic relationships. As far as I know, there are zero pictures of young Obama with a girl available to the public. Not a single woman has ever been interviewed as an Obama girlfriend.
This is particularly odd since we know so much about the romantic relationships of Obama’s closest friends at Occidental College – including Boss and Chandoo. Ironically, Margot Mifflin and I have been among the most honest and most objective observer’s of the young Obama.
My personal report, of course, is that I never saw Obama around a girl in anything that looked like a romantic relationship.
The only report we have on Obama’s sexual experience comes from Larry Sinclair. See, http://www.wnd.com/2011/11/365989/
Frankly, my take on young Obama is a better fit with Sinclair’s story than with Lisa Jack’s. We know from Remnick’s book, The Bridge, that Obama’s sophomore year at Occidental College was filled with cocaine usage. The sort of random homosexual behavior described by Sinclair is a good fit with the sort of things discussed on the Oxy campus…especially by members of the English literature department where Obama studied.
It seems to me that the public has not really fully understood Obama because the media has failed to thoroughly investigate his past. If he was so popular with the girls, then why hasn’t even one of them been interviewed?
And unlike whoever the fright wing troll, the President has a terrific sense of humor.
Should Johnny’s marriage be considered a failure because he doesn’t have children? After all, isn’t that the whole point?
You have a “standard stump speech” about a 30-yr old chance encounter?
So far the picture of Karl Marx has received no comment.
I’ll hang one tomorrow at work and let you know how it goes.
Because he can’t?
I’m sure the good folk here put a high value on the credibility of Larry Sinclair… do you ever do any research into a source before you use it? It has become painfully obvious why Williams fired you.
He’s a major award winning political science PhD–surely that’s not true!
John,
What is the relevance of my employment history to my critique of your statements and character?
Possibly because who Obama dated, like what political ideology interested him, is of no consequence or interest to any sane person.
Please tell me, “Dr” Drew, what other past Presidents of the USA have you demanded this level of “investigation” from?
Do you mean to imply that someone who is obsessed with a couple of conversations that occurred decades ago and a job he lost (also decades ago) due to his own incompetence is not sane? (presumed incompetence, that is–his behavior here and elsewhere suggests that he was a poor performer, academically speaking)
Probably the same relevance that Obama’s college sex life is to his eligibility as POTUS.
– nbc
Here’s a picture of me as a young man at Occidental College. See, http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2009/11/augustine-25-remembers-face-to-face.html
This came out in 2009 before I was interviewed by Ronald Kessler in that NewsMax piece. All I’m asking is why don’t we see a similar picture from young Obama’s life if – as Lisa Jack say – he was so thoroughly popular with girls at Occidental College.
At this point, I think it makes more sense to say that Obama is lying about his heterosexual relationships. This should raise serious issues about his honesty and integrity. In Dreams From My Father, Obama claims that a lot of girls – black and white – broke his heart. Well, why doesn’t he give us just one name so we can follow up with that.
You are always demanding collaboration and evidence from me. Why isn’t it fair for us to demand evidence from Obama that he was as popular with the girls as he and his friends claim him to be? See what I mean?
Michigan schools going to and winning bowl games?
Nice to see you around, even if it is for the poster who I now just scroll past after getting the initial experience of him at fb (and he needs to remember…. Publish or Perish).
I’m not professionally qualified to pronounce “Dr” Drew insane…. but I would certainly put money on it.
Possibly because a married, successful, educated man who claims to have had girlfriends in college is an ordinary, and hardly surprising claim, of no consequence to anyone, and so the barest of evidence is enough to satisfy any reasonable person.
On the other hand, a professional loser who drips and moans about how bad the world has been to him, and who only met The present POTUS in passing, and was of no importance then or since, claiming that the President of the United States has falsified every part of his past including his sexual preferences, and has managed to somehow get elected President despite lying about things that are nobody’s damn business anyways…. well that’s an extraordinary claim, and as such requires extraordinary evidence.
Maybe that’s the difference?
– Daniel
Please… nbc is always demanding more evidence from me, more proof, more data.
Meanwhile, we cannot verify many of the claims made in Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father.
One of the most interesting of those claims is that Obama dated a wealthy white woman who took him for a boat ride on the family’s lake.
Later investigation by Jack Cashill, however, shows that this story actually matches Bill Ayer’s description of his relationship with Diane Oughton. If Obama is claiming that he dated a wealthy white woman in his book, then what is wrong with us asking for evidence to back that up?
If Obama just made that girlfriend up out of thin air, then he can share that news with us all and the matter will die out. The bottom line is that we should expect our president to be a person of honesty and integrity.
If Obama dated all the girls he says he dated, then why hasn’t a single one of them ever gone public with the story?
Fogbow just did a huge story about all the people who knew young Obama. You know what caught my attention? Not a single one of the people they mentioned was an ex-Obama girlfriend. Not one.
What other President have you demanded proof of sexual preference from “Dr” Drew?
“If he was so popular with the girls, then why hasn’t even one of them been interviewed?”
Here’s one of many extensive interviews with one of the President’s former girlfriends.
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/02/the_michelle_obama_interview_h.html
Gee. That was easy. And I don’t even have a Ph.D.
Are NPDs usually pathological liars too?
Maybe that’s because you are making the extraordinary claims?
And really, you still havn’t explained why anyone should give a flying fuck at a rolling donut about all this?
Nor have you listed all the other Presidents you have demanded this sort of detail from?
Maybe it’s time you answered a few questions “Dr”.
Maybe that’s because you are making the extraordinary claims?
And really, you still havn’t explained why anyone should give a flying f*^&% at a rolling donut about all this?
Nor have you listed all the other Presidents you have demanded this sort of detail from?
Maybe it’s time you answered a few questions “Dr”.
For being an insufferable douche bag?
You’re puzzled? That is not surprising, given your grossly inflated opinion of yourself. My guess is that Remnick does not believe any of the garbage you have been spewing and that he did not want to poison his book by including your falsehoods.
You consider being cited by Michael Savage and Jack Cashill to be a badge of honor? It is no wonder that people on the far right are the only ones who take you seriously.
You and Jerome Corsi give Political Science a bad name.
– Daniel
Please… A ton of people are very interested in the truth about Obama’s sexual preferences. It seems to me that the fact that not one single girlfriend has ever gone public is a matter of great public interest.
In Christoper Andersen’s book, Barack and Michelle, Michelle’s brothers told her that Obama was not gay. The point is why did they have to even say that to her? What had Obama been doing prior to that moment which made her interested in their “investigation” of Obama.
I think it is ironic that the folks posting here are demanding unlimited information from me regarding my thesis, my Ph.D., my job record – virtually everything about me – and yet you balk at the simple suggestion that Obama name even one girlfriend in his life prior to marrying Michelle Obama.
Isn’t it puzzling to you that Obama claims he had plenty of girlfriends and yet not a single one has ever been identified? I think that is shocking. We know all about the love life of Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, John McCain – but absolutely zero about Obama. His friends claim he was surrounded by young women, yet there is zero evidence to back up this claim.
You call a handful of birther nutbags a “lot”?
And How many other Presidents have you dmended they prove their sexual preferences of?
The only reason you choose to pretend we don’t know as much about Obama as we do about Cain is that you don’t like what you know about Obama, so you pretend it doesn’t exist.
How many more years of your pathetic life are you going to waste dripping and moaning about how everyone else is to blame for your failures?
WTF, did PooPooPolarik morph into DooDooDrew?
I guess I just don’t see what’s so special about our latest lunatic. Chronic liar, full of himself, able to con some of the people all of the time, milking the birther issue for every dime he can get…seriously, anyone who gives credence to Larry Sinclair is full of it.
Not in the least. You see it’s none of my damn business, and it’s not at all important to his job as POTUS.
Sorry I can’t be as obsessed as you are about his sexual performance.
– majority rule
See what I mean? You tested my claim and found zero interviews with ex-girlfriends. The article you cite is an interview with Michelle Obama.
If Obama is a gay man pretending to be straight, I would think that this would impact his performance as president, don’t you?
A detailed interview from at least one of the girlfriends Obama claims to have dated would easily clear up the matter.
You demand research and proof from me. Why aren’t you demanding research and proof to back up Obama’s claims that he led a heterosexual life prior to meeting and marrying Michelle Obama. As I’ve said, not a single girlfriend has ever been interviewed. Not one.
Because Obama’s not a pathetic loser dripping and moaning about how bad the world is to him, and making up all sorts of ridiculous conspiracies about things that don’t matter in the least about people he has an obvious axe to grind over…..
You, on the other hand, are that pathetic loser.
Therein lies the difference.
Slarti you’re assuming too much we all know that laws are called John Drews
Daniel
You aren’t keeping up with the news. Don Fulsom has gotten a ton of media attention for supposedly outing Richard Nixon. See, http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=35516
In the book Nixon’s Darkest Secrets: The Inside Story of America’s Most Troubled President, Fulsom says Nixon had an affair with Charles “Bebe” Rebozo.
If people are digging up dirt on Richard Nixon, then why aren’t we seeing a similar effort to identify Barack Obama’s old girlfriends?
If he was an invisible purple spotted unicorn from Betelguese IV, pretending to be straight, it still would not impact his performance as President, because the premise is not worthy of attention from any reasonable person.
I only care if he can run the country. I’m sorry I can’t be as obsessed as you are about where he puts his genitalia.
Yeah I didn’t care about any of that drek either.
You seem inordinately interested in the sex of Presidents
There’s no shame if he fantasizes about the President.
There might be for the President
Listen, troll. I didn’t test squat. She was a former girlfriend. If he only had one serious girlfriend, good for him. He obviously found his soulmate and has a beautiful, loving family.
You, on the other hand, reek of am extremely petty and desperate need for validation and in some ways much too weird and sad for this forum.
Good God!!! What is the color of the sky on your planet? Many of us the real world separate any sexual interest with our actual day job, even if that job is nearly 24/7. Do you understand the word, obsessive?
Good point.
Northland10,
You’re half right (I’m a natural-born MSU fan* with a BS and an MS from State who greatly enjoyed Cousins’ last game–my enthusiasm for UofM’s victories is, shall we say, somewhat less… ;-)). And how about those LIONS! 😀
You really have to thank Johnny for me showing up here–I was playing with him on the Fogbow (before he got kicked off for being a misogynistic git) and his blog and when I saw he was here and how brutally he was being pwned by you guys (special mention to Misha and the rest of the red brigade–well done!), I just had to join in the fun…
I’ve been out of academia and working on a sekrit project** for a while now–publish or perish isn’t really my game anymore either, although I’m looking to have my work judged on its merits which seems to be a foreign concept to Johnny*** who, near as I can tell, thinks that he deserves recognition due to his status as an oppressed white male (who won a major award for past research after he was fired for not producing any new research in three years… this is the greatest tragedy in the history of the world, by the way). We’ll see what happens.
* Blood and Soil
** it’s not really a secret, but I think that pretending it is annoys Johnny…
***he doesn’t really get the whole “science” thing… or the “math” thing, or the “reality” thing for that matter.
Daniel:
The real issue here is Obama’s integrity and honesty. He lied about his close ties to Bill Ayers. He lied about his ties to Marxist socialist ideology.
I think it is reasonable to ask if he is now lying about his sexuality and the nature of his relationship with Michelle Obama. He sure likes to present the image that he is a heterosexual. I have no doubt that part of the reason people voted for him is that they assumed he was not gay and that names and addresses of former girlfriends would be readily available.
Today, we see a very different story. We live in a world where the media is obsessed with Richard Nixon’s sexual behavior, but shows absolutely no interest at all in whether or not Obama – and at least two of his friends – are lying about his popularity with girls.
I’m just amazed that people at this site are demanding that I turn over my employment records and personal information, and yet display no interest in the possibility that Obama is out and out lying about his life in Dreams From My Father. Imagine what Dreams would have read like if Obama had told the truth? It would be a very different book and I doubt Obama would still be president.
Yes, that’s pretty much where I was going with that…
John C. Drew you lied about your relationship with Obama
see: http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/?p=16905
I don’t care who you are. What little tripe you’ve spewed here is nauseating enough.
You mean like you are doing? LOL! Wow…is there anything you don’t project your own failures onto?
Again, who cares? Why are you so jealous of the president and hung up his dating record back in college? WTF? Do you have some sick sexual obsession or fansasies about Obama yourself? I mean really, Larry Sinclair? You just keep doing whatever you can to further damage your credibility don’t you? Are you trying to express your own latent homosexuality here? Is that was this is really about??
Majority Will:
I think it is very odd that you would persecute me when I’m telling the truth about young Obama’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought, but then display no interest in demanding that Obama prove one of the most important claims he makes in Dreams From My Father.
You strike me as a typical liberal. You really can’t handle the truth. Do you really think for one minute that our drug using president wasn’t having sex from the moment he entered Occidental College to the moment he married Michelle Obama. Please, give me a break.
If he was having, as he claims, intense heterosexual experiences, then why hasn’t a single girl or female partner come forward to verify this? Why should we wait until Obama leaves office to determine whether or not he really dated a wealthy white woman whose family owned a farm with a lake? If Obama is lying about stuff like that, I want to know the truth now – not later.
No the real issue is you CLAIM he lied, and you CLAIM it’s significant, and you CLAIM his relationship with his wife is somehow your business. Are you seeing a trend here?
Obama’s claims are on the face, normal and ordinary, and his visible life now bears out those normal, ordinary claims. No more evidence is required, since it’s none of my business any ways.
YOU are the pathetic loser making grandiose, extraordinary claims about things which are none of your damn business, and which run counter to what any sane person can see. YOU are the one who needs to provide extraordinary hard objective and substantive evidence to support your extraordinary claims, not Obama. Your pathetic and ridiculous conjecture arising from speculation drawn from your obsession with Obama’s genitalia do not qualify as evidence, nor does any of the drek you’ve drooled out onto the forum floor here.
Obama gets the benefit of the doubt, both from common sense, and from a presumption of innocence ( I assume you’re at least somewhat familiar with that term, mr polisci expert).
You, the loser making the wild accusations, get no such benefit. The burden of proof rests squarely on your shoulders. The burden of proof is not satisfied by coulda/woulda/shoulda, Mr Polisci expert.
My experience has been that people who are obsessed with the sexual preferences of others are often conflicted about their own sexuality.
So what is the true story, Dr. Drew? Did Obama reject your advances during one of your fleeting meetings with him at Occidental?
If you don’t wish to be ridiculed, stop being ridiculous.
G,
Little Johnny doesn’t understand that arguments have merits that are independent of who presents the argument. I do admit that I am somewhat mystified that Johnny thinks I would be embarrassed about information which I posted about myself, but since by that point he didn’t really have any credibility left to loose, it’s kind of a moot point…
Again, no one cares what you think. I clearly think you are a pathological liar with severe issues and one of the worst inferiority complexes I have ever seen. Your bizarre hang-ups only reveal insights into you and say nothing at all about Obama, a man you barely ever met and clearly didn’t know. Your weird fixation on his college dating life is seething with obvious jealousy…and potentially indicating some weird sexual obsessions of your own.
Guess what. He’s President AND happily married with 2 beautiful children.
And you…you’re nobody.
By “a ton of people” you mean you…and a few freaks.
The rest of America…not so much.
Correction: A few people, who’ve caught you in previous lies about yourself, have pressed for clarification from you on claims which you seem to be the one bringing up in the first place.
The rest of us…we don’t care about you or your past at all. Not interested in you. Sorry. You are neither interesting nor important. Just crazy and desperate for attention. Sad.
Again, where is there a requirement for someone to have a girlfriend before they marry their wife? A lot of Evangelicals would take serious issue with that…
– richCares
Let’s get one thing straight. I NEVER said I was a classmate of Obama’s. My ex-girlfriend was Obama’s classmate. Not me.
[Personal information redacted, Doc], the OFGS blogger, makes a lot of mistakes in her report on me including using a Twitter post which mentioned my @Augustine25 address, but did not come from me. It is clear from the context that it was a Follow Friday post made by someone who wanted others to follow me. It was not a tweet from me. It would be silly for me to tweet people to Friday Follow me.
Nevertheless, [Personal information redacted, Doc] has also made the foolish mistake of asserting that I worked for Ann Coulter while she was an undergraduate student at Cornell University. This was a silly error that any responsible person would have understood if they had the least amount of experience in higher education.
I brought both these issues to [Personal information redacted, Doc]s attention immediately, but she did nothing to correct the record. She is an irresponsible blogger who makes very silly mistakes.
Well said.
Northland10,
See what I mean?
Johnny,
Which of the statements I’ve made about you would be impacted by answer to any of the questions you ask? Why?
p.s. Are you even aware how badly this line of attack is failing you or why?
While Johnny is a malicious blogger who recklessly and negligently makes significant errors of fact.
BS. We only know about Cain’s wife, the woman he had a recent affair with and women who came forward claiming he harrassed them.
We don’t know nor do we care or need to know anything about who he dated in his youth.
Same with Gingrich and McCain – we know of affairs they had cheating on their wifes, because it played out while they were in public office!
We know nothing about who they dated when they were young. Nor would it matter. Nor do we care.
So you’re analogies have ALL just been busted.
Note: Everyone you put as a reference is someone who cheated on their wifes and/or failed in marriage one or several times.
Compared to Obama – been married to the SAME woman all along, with two healthy and well-adjusted children. So he’s been a shining example of traditional family values and a success story in that regards, while the others are known for their public adult failures.
You really are a consumed with bitter jealousy of Obama aren’t you…
Are you a gay man pretending to be straight John? Is that what this really is about? It sure seems like it… I mean, what other explanation can there be for how only you are hung up with Obama’s sex life? At first I thought you were just jealous of him…but now I see it is more than that… an unrequited crush that makes you feel like a spurned lover…
…maybe you are like KBOA after all.
Sorry, but we’re not here to be your analysis couch for your own personal sexual hangups and issues. If you are trying to finally come out of the closet, find somewhere that cares to do it.
g.
LMAO Wow! You just don’t get it. If Obama is lying about his youthful heterosexual relationships – as appears to be the case – then he is only living the illusion of a healthy marriage as POTUS.
Frankly, your case would be much stronger if there was evidence of even one single girlfriend in Obama’s life prior to meeting Michelle Obama.
Just one…
People are obsessed with claims that Richard Nixon was gay, why isn’t there the same level of interest in whether or not Obama is gay.
Right now, the only report we have of anyone messing around with Obama comes from Larry Sinclair. If Sinclair is correct, then Obama was the sort of high risk guy who used drugs and put Michelle’s health and safety at risk through contact with other men. Obama might have killed Michelle with the AIDS virus if Sinclair’s story is correct.
Obama looks like a very different person if you view his through the lens that reminds you not a single girlfriend has ever been pictured with young Obama or reported dating young Obama. Not a single one…
Wow… so you lack logic skills too, I see. That was one of the worst irrelevant connect-the-dots attempts I’ve seen recently. For someone who claims to have a PhD, you sure come off like a really stupid person.
I’m starting to agree with others here that I’ve been too light in my assessment of your problems. Your level of illogic and intense obsession could be more than just an extremely bitter sore loser with low self-esteem and many recent years of failure to his name…is sounds like it has morphed into a full blown psychosis of some sort.
If you aren’t clinically mentally ill *and* mentally challenged, then you sure do a good job of presenting yourself that way.
Nooooooooooo………
YOU just don’t get it.
Nobody cares that you are obsessed with your delusions of the sex life of the President.
We don’t care what you’ve dreamt up about him.
You’re right, I don’t care that you think he’s lying. I don’t care if you think he’s a narwal in disguise either, for which you’ve given an equal amount of credible evidence.
If I cared at all about all the myriad ridiculous conspiracies people have made up about Obama, I’d end up wasting my life obsessed with woulda/shoulda/coulda… in short, I’d be you.
No he hasn’t. Sorry, but NO evidence whatsoever of him lying on any of that.
YOU however have been telling whoppers here at such a rate that you are obviously pathological…
So again, the only common pattern I see is your continued ability to merely PROJECT your own failings onto others.
Therefore, again quite telling. What you are really saying here is that YOU are a liar. Yeah, we know that.
g.
Obama is the one who asserts he dated girls and was involved in heterosexual relationships prior to marrying Michelle Obama. I’m just saying that there is zero proof that those assertions are true. nbc demands that I back up what I write with proof. Why is it so strange to ask Obama to prove what he wrote in Dreams was truthful?
The issue here is not sex. The issue is honesty and integrity. Based on my experience, I think Obama lied to the public in Dreams and created a false narrative about himself – including his supposed ties to girls and his neglected ties to Marxist socialist extremists.
Basically, Obama is a liar. He is lying about his sexual history and his intellectual history in Dreams. I think it is important for the media – and for bloggers – to confront Obama on both issues. Remnick confirmed my take on young Obama’s Marxist views but did not interview a single Obama girlfriend. Neither did Christopher Andersen in his book, Barack and Michelle.
The issue here is Obama’s honesty and integrity. Why should we have a president who is living a lie everyday he is in office?
…of madness
And I’m saying nobody sane cares
I’d rather have a president who lies about having college girlfriends over a President who lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Nobody ever died over a locker room bragging
Where do you come up with this nonsense? Sorry, I watch and read a lot of news and often have some news channel on in the background while I’m working. Haven’t come across any massive stories about Nixon’s sexual behavior. In fact, I can’t recall a single one. Nada. Zip. I’m sure, somewhere, someone wrote some book about the topic and somwhere, on some channel *someone* then talked about it, but “media is obsessed with Richard Nixon’s sexual behavior”…sorry that never happened.
Again, what is with you and your creepy, bizarre fetish obsession with President’s and their sex lives? First Obama and now Nixon…*eeeww*. You really, really have some disturbing personal issues and hang-ups going on. Go have your coming out party somewhere else.
Neither this blog nor its readers care about the sexual pasts of this President nor prior ones. Get over it and move on. *sheesh*
You can attack me all you want on a personal basis, but it doesn’t change the fact that I’m applying the same common sense that helped me win the William Anderson Award from the APSA. It is the same common sense that makes me a successful business owner today.
If Obama is telling the truth about the girlfriends he knew prior to meeting Michelle Obama, then how come no one has ever interviewed those women and debriefed them to get the truth?
If Obama is telling the truth about the girlfriends he knew prior to meeting Michelle Obama, then how come we do not have a single photograph linking Obama to one of these women?
Instead of creating all sorts of elaborate explanations, the simplest answer is that these girlfriends were fabrications designed to hide the truth from the public. The simple and easiest explanation is that Obama is lying about them in Dreams From My Father.
The media hid FDR’s affairs and JFK’s affairs, it hid what it new about LBJ and William Jefferson Clinton’s affairs. It kept John Edward’s affair secret for months. Why is it so hard for you to see that this same media is covering up for Obama’s lack of girlfriends?
Far more interesting and actually on topic:
1980: U.S. secret Mars teleportation program and rudimentary facilities on Mars
The firsthand, eyewitness testimony of Mr. Basiago and Mr. Stillings as to the existence of a secret U.S. presence on Mars that is made possible by a revolutionary “jump room” technology that has been concealed from the public is congruent with similar accounts given by three other Mars whistle blowers:
(1) Former U.S. serviceman Michael Relfe, who spent 20 years as a member of the permanent security staff of a U.S. facility on Mars;
(2) Former Department of Defense (DoD) scientist Arthur Neumann, who has testified publicly that he teleported to a U.S. facility on Mars for DoD project meetings; and
(3) Laura Magdalene Eisenhower, great-granddaughter of U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who in 2007 refused a covert attempt to recruit her into what was described to her as a secret U.S. colony on Mars.
Not to burst the Martian bubble but we could probably find a few better uses for teleportation on Earth.
Look, you are free to ask those very *few* people, (who’ve obviously debated you in the past, and who only seem to be asking about your past because they’ve caught you fibbing and embellishing things) to take up the issue with you somewhere else or offline or via exchanging private emails on the issues.
This is a public forum on a specific topic, which you’ve just come over to on your own volition and posted on.
Most of us here have NO INTEREST whatsoever in you or your past. Sorry, we don’t care. Not about you. Not about your dubious and shoddy claims. Not about your opinions or obsessions on Obama.
You’ve shown nothing of value or interest, relevant to any of the actual topics we cover on this blog. You are seriously just blathering on and on and on about the same stupid and boring stuff that we REALLY DON’T CARE about. It is petty, meaningless and irrelevant. You are nobody, so your random musings and conjecture about things you obviously have little actual knowledge about don’t mean squat and are boring…and are really starting to come across deviantly creepy too. So give it a rest.
We’ve heard the same creepy obsessive and utterly irrelevant stories from you over and over and over again. You’ve said nothing new. All these posts and all you are is a broken record on the same useless cr@p again and again and again. If that isn’t a sign of mental illness on display, I don’t know what is!
If you want to post here, contribute something relevant and informed about the specific topics at hand. If you can’t do that, I’m going to publicly request to Dr. C. that he ban you.
I have yet to see you tell the truth on ANYTHING here at all.
You make a lot of wild claims and smears about Obama and his youth. Someone you barely ever met and didn’t know.
All you have done is gone off the rails on your own bizarre fantasy conjecture obsession. That is NOT truth. That is conjecture. In other words, pure made up dreck and nothing but a product of your own weird imagination.
It has no place here. We deal in facts and sourced information. Wild musings based off of scant meetings 30 years ago just don’t cut it.
Further, you keep demanding that we have the same concerns and hold to the same hang-ups that you do on utterly trivial and irrelevant issues that have nothing to do with one’s ability to be President, nor anything to do with the activities of this Administration.
We DON’T share your concerns. Get that through your limited little thick head. All these posts and you haven’t gotten a clue that NOT A SINGLE PERSON has expressed any interest in ANY of the weird little petty worries that you’re obsessed with. None. Nada. Not one.
You bring nothing to this blog of value. I don’t care if others asked you about your past or your personal information. You and your “bonafides” aren’t relevant to anything on this blog either. Take those conversations up with those individuals off-line and go elsewhere with them.
Really, its like a huge flock of pigeons with diarrhea swooped in and cr@pped all over the place. All you’ve provided is to stink up the area with a bunch loose nonsense spewed forth from your @ss.
I mean seriously, I know you are a very damaged person, but can’t you at least pretend to act like a normal person and contribute something relevant and sourced that is on topic?
Get a clue – when folks tell you they are not interested or don’t share a concern or think your ideas are “creepy”…that should register with any sane person that they need to drop that failed line of conversation and move on… *sheesh*
John,
Have you ever considered how rude you are being to Doc C? (Who is, after all, our host here) Has anything you’ve said been even remotely connected to Mars? Has anyone here said “how interesting John, tell me more…”? What was your intention in posting on this thread? How do you think you appear to people reading this thread?
Doc,
Mea culpa–I’ve just come here to poke John with a pointy stick, but you were the one who lured him here by using his claim for your pun. Personally, I think that President Obama’s secret base must be on Venus–why else would they have all of those clouds there?
Then that particular award was very poorly adjudicated, or it was bought.
If you don’t want to be rifdiculed on a “personal basis” then don’t employ ridiculous attacks of other people based on their personal life.
Again.. WHO CARES!
Nothing he did in college MATTERS or is relevant to his being President now…several decades later!
Not his experimentation with drugs. Not his dating habits. Not who he did or didn’t party with. NONE OF IT. Zip. Nada.
Get it through your head. You’ve covered this same ground already. Over and over and over again here.
We are not interested nor concerned in the least. You are a broken record and beating dead horses. 100% of the responses to you on these issues have all said the same thing – There is NO interest and NO traction here in your same silly claims. Move on.
G.
Thank you for signifying that I have won this debate. In my experience, I’m usually expelled from these blogs at the point where my critique of President Obama starts making the greatest possible headway with swing voters. As a young man, I displayed an almost eerie grasp of the truth about political situations – including the relationship between child labor laws and child welfare programs – and stuck to the truth despite massive social pressure to abandon my thesis.
Over my life, I have been proven right about the importance of child labor laws in predicting the rise of child-oriented welfare programs.
I was attacked when I said welfare programs harmed people, now those programs have been replaced with work requirements.
The affirmative action programs I fought against in California are now illegal.
My take on young Obama’s ideological extremism was dismissed at first – now it is published in at least four books on Obama’s life.
My questions about why no Obama girlfriends have ever been interviewed by the media represent the same, bold, courageous. original insight.
I didn’t win the William Anderson Award from the APSA because I was the best researcher, the best math modeler, or the best writer. I won because I courageously created new truth that changed the way we think about the U.S.
In my experience, liberal claim to appreciate freedom of speech, but – in the end – they are all to eager to silence their opponents. On my blogsite, in contrast, I publish the comments of my detractors and do not censor anyone. I’m grateful that new technology is on the side of those of us who treasure freedom and who are willing to risk their lives to bring about needed changes in our hurting world.
Man that must have been one hell of an award!
Meanwhile, ol’ Karl has garnered his first comment:
“What the hell is this fuzzy, toilet brush-lookin’ dude doing here?”
For reference, I have posted this image, printed on a standard letter page on a nice, white wall, all by itself. No distractions, not even a caption. I admit, a very generic experiment, but, since you were unable/unwilling to provide more detail regarding the anecdote at the heart of your obsession, I’m trying to keep it as free from bias as possible. That, and the experiment was deemed not worthy of a budget. If you’d like to contribute to our research in hopes of generating more useful results, please click here.
We’re all hopin’ Karl gets more action this weekend. Stay tuned!
If your performance here is any indication you are expelled from a blog when the level of disgust over your inhumanity rises to the point of biliousness.
Like most trolls, you come to a forum, be as disruptive, asinine, and disgusting as you can possibly be, and then when you get tossed because of it, you pretend it’s because you were either victorious, or because you’re a martyr.
So please go ahead and have your delusions of grandeur. You’re a sad, sorry little man, and it is that condition alone which guides your interactions.
No, we’re not mad at you. If I feel anything at all towrd you, it’s pity, but that is well tempered with the knowledge that you are what you are, because you’ve chosen that road yourself.
In parting let me offer you this one question.
How can we miss you if you won’t go away?
Good thing I’m not a liberal, and it’s a good thing for us conservatives that you are not taken seriously and thus we are not judged by your delusions.
!?????
Thanks for turning it up a notch, Mr. Drew!
Ummm yes, we are always demanding collaboration and evidence from you. What I wonder is why you are so threatened by something as simple as some collaboration for the rather bold claim you have made?
None of us are obsessed with Obama’s sex life like you are, none of us are speculating as to what Obama’s sex life is- we see the evidence in front of us every day- a healthy, prosperous husband and wife with two children- without a hint of scandal or adultery.
I pointed out to you that we have more evidence that President Obama had girlfriends, than we do that you had. Which is odd because much of your claim rests on your claiming that Boss was your girlfriend.
So again- why has Boss never confirmed she was your girlfriend? If she was your girlfriend, why has she never come out in support of your story? There is not a single girlfriend I had in college who would not back me up today if I asked them to. Why is your ‘ex-girlfriend’
And why are you so obsessed with Obama’s sex life?
Are you projecting again and trying to tell us something about yourself here John?
You are definitely demonstrating strong signs that indicate mental illness. Your commentary pattern here definitely suggests a whole host of pathologies going on.
Your weird obsessions with irrelevant sexual issues and fixation on gay sex, suggests you are a deviant.
Your bizarre bitter fixation with your early career and desperate need to convince us you are “important” suggests just the opposite – a bitter has-been and failure. Are you trying to tell us something here about the truth of your own financial and living situation? Because you sure don’t come across as a successful or stable person in the least…nor someone smart enough or with the social skills to keep themselves from screwing up their own life and fortunes over and over and over again…
All I’ve seen in your behavior since the beginning is obsessions and fixations that seem to really be about what is going on with you. So I can only assume everything you are “wondering” here is really just more of your subconsious projection seeping through…
John.
Do you have any actual collaborating testimony or evidence that:
a) Barack Obama ever spoke with you?
b) Barack Obama ever spoke with you about Marxism?
c) That Barack Obama ever claimed to be a Marxist?
Post the actual quotes to support your claim- not inference, not speculation- or admit that your story of your discussion with Obama is what it is- your uncollaborated story.
Next point:
John- you have claimed that your analysis reveals that President Obama is a Marxist. You also portray yourself as a having a doctorage in Political Science.
So here is my challenge to you John- should be simple for someone as educated as yourself.
List the 3 major principles of Marxism.
Explain how Barack Obama’s actions in saving Big Banks and GM fit in with those principles.
Don’t disappoint me John.
*Sigh* NO John, You don’t get it.
I don’t know what “case” you are talking about, as the only one trying to make a case and utterly failing here, is you.
I’ve repeatedly said that I don’t care about what the president did or who he dated in college. That’s not a case. That’s a response to your irresponsible, silly, and quite dysfuntional obsessions.
I’ve repeatedly said that NONE of that is relevant to his being President. And it simply is not. I’m not alone in expressing that we DO NOT CARE and it IS IRRELEVANT to you either. That pretty much sums up 100% of the reaction you’ve gotten and yet you are still hung up on this bizarre, sick obsession.
I *have* repeatedly pointed out that the President is married and has 2 well-adjusted children. That is not at “case” John. That is a simple, self-evident fact. Turn on the TV. You’ll see proof and evidence of the First Lady and the Obama children.
Not all the time mind you, but pay attention and you’ll see pictures and here coverage of them. And you’ll come across proof of them in the media much more than any evidence of stories about your weird Nixon sex fixation either.
For the last time. Don’t care about Obama’s past. Don’t care about Nixon’s or any other President’s. I am a well-adjusted person, so I have no need to wonder or fixate on their sexual history or have bizarre gay fantasies like you do about them. To me, that is just really sad, creepy and unhealthy that you do.
Like you, Larry Sinclair is a widely discredited liar. His made up stories went nowhere, because the media started to vet them when he first made those claims and they fell apart. He miserably failed the lie detector tests and he has a dubious past. Like you, he simply lacks any credibility and therefore deservedly is not paid attention to or taken seriously by any serious people. Only other desperate and severely damaged people, like yourself, would lack the social awareness and exhibit the clueless awkwardness to embarassingly link to him as a source in order to make an example. Doing so just further damages what little integrity and credibility you may think you have. Heck, Larry Sinclair is such a uncredible source of fail, that a reference to him is worthy of discreting any poster on that fact alone.
You would have come across less damaged if you tried to back up and support the wacky Mars story that is the ACTUAL topic of this particular blog post. That is one of the stupidest and laughably insane tall-tales that anyone’s come up with yet about Obama’s past…and yet, Larry Sinclair’s credibility and reputation probably ranks much lower than the Mars Time Travel cranks…
Excuse some spelling errors in my last several posts- I wasn’t wearing my glasses when I was typing it in and missed seeing what my clumsy fingers did. But the content is correct.
Don’t care. Don’t buy any of your BS either. Sorry you and your stories have ZERO relevance and ZERO credibility.
Nor do I see any real evidence on anything yet, whatsoever at all that has caused me to question the President’s honesty or integrity.
And NO, I don’t care whether you view him as dishonest or not. Your simple opinion is just that and means nothing to me. I do not value it or give it any weight. Sorry. I think you are a complete crank and nut with a lot of unhealthy issues, that’s all.
Now again, this blog has been excessively tolerant of your derailing it from the topic at hand. That alone is a clear violation of this blog’s terms.
Stop bringing up the same meaningless arguments that we’ve already rejected and repeatedly told you we don’t care about at all. If you cannot contribute ANYTHING of value on the actual blog topic at hand and if you are simply too mentally damaged to learn and grasp when to move on, then you deserve to be banned as you are accomplishing ZERO here except looking like a fool and saying the same failed and rejected nonsense over and over and over again.
Saying the same thing repeatedly isn’t going to make any of us take you any more seriously than the last time. Nor are we any more likely to “change our mind” than we were the first dozen times we told you that you were full of it and we see no interest or value in the sick and sad opinions and meaningless stories you’ve offered.
Oh John, you are only important in your own mind!
You’ve shown no actual sense here, common or otherwise. In fact, you’ve displayed a continual lack of it.
You simply lack any credibility and have an inability to contribute to the topic or grasp that no one is buying your nonsense, nor do they care about any of your claims or opinions.
You’ve told us repeatedly what you think and what your wild theories are and what your petty little obsession are.
We’ve heard it. We’ve rejected it. Give it a rest already. There’s nothing you’re saying here that you haven’t already covered. Nothing about you or your claims about yourself matters or is viewed as credible either.
We don’t share your views NOR your conclusions. We don’t value your opinion. We don’t view you as credible and seriously question both your competence and your sanity.
Everything you have said so far has been repeatedly and resoundly rejected by EVERY other person posting here. Get a clue.
*finally* Thank You Majority Will, for bringing this forum back on topic!
LOL! Patrick over at BadFiction has some good coverage of the story in his latest recap too. From some of the reporting, I see that the claimants are also tying this into “Remote Viewing experiments…” No surprise there.
fun stuff on John C. Drew at fogbow: http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=6983&start=300#p322881
😉
John C. Drew, Ph.D.: G. Again, thank you for signifying that I have won this debate. In my experience, I’m usually expelled from these blogs at the point where my critique of President Obama starts making the greatest possible headway with swing voters. As a young man, I displayed an almost eerie grasp of the truth about political situations – including the relationship between child labor laws and child welfare programs – and stuck to the truth despite massive social pressure to abandon my thesis. Over my life, I have been proven right about the importance of child labor laws in predicting the rise of child-oriented welfare programs. I was attacked when I said welfare programs harmed people, now those programs have been replaced with work requirements. The affirmative action programs I fought against in California are now illegal. My take on young Obama’s ideological extremism was dismissed at first – now it is published in at least four books on Obama’s life. My questions about why no Obama girlfriends have ever been interviewed by the media represent the same, bold, courageous. original insight.I didn’t win the William Anderson Award from the APSA because I was the best researcher, the best math modeler, or the best writer. I won because I courageously created new knowledge that changed the way we think about welfare programs in the U.S. In my experience, liberals claim to value freedom of speech, but – like you – they are all too eager to silence their opponents. On my blogsite, in contrast, I publish the comments of my detractors and do not censor anyone. I’m grateful that new technology is on the side of those of us who treasure freedom and who are willing to risk their lives to bring about needed changes in our hurting world.
Dude, it was a student award, not a freaking Nobel Prize. And that new truth you keep going on about has been cited a total of 7 times in 30 years.
Oh get over yourself, John! You are a seriously insecure and delusional nobody.
You’ve won nothing. It is quite obvious that you never do. But you are such an obvious repeat failure and loser in life that you have to constatnly lie to yourself to keep going.
Whatever. Tell yourself you are the king of the world all you want John. Pretend you’ve accomplished all these “amazing” things. Give your self a few Nobels while you’re at it and pretend you own your own island. Heck, why don’t you just pretend to yourself that you are really the President! Go for it John. Tell yourself whatever you need that keeps you from crying in your sleep every night. Most importantly, tell yourself whatever you need to to just go away.
The truth is you’ve come here and done nothing but discredit yourself repeatedly. All negative reactions you’ve garnished are due to your own poor behaviors and wild whoppers.
You’ve not only made nary a single post that has anything to do with the actual topic of this blog article, but you’ve utterly failed to convince a single person here to believe you or agree with any position you’ve held. Not one. You’ve wasted your time and this blogs time and you’ve proven incapable of carrying an actual conversation that goes anywhere. You just keep rambling about the same petty and irrelevant nonsense over and over and over again. So keep pretending you’ve made any “headway” in your own fantasy mind. But in reality, you haven’t, except in getting a lot of people who didn’t know you to find you utterly contemptible and unworthy of respect or credibility.
For someone who keeps touting his PhD, you only demonstrate how utterly inept you are with any of the political claims or concepts you try to use. Free speech, as enshrined in our Constitution is a specific protection of the government not inhibiting said rights.
Obviously, this is a private blog and not a government site. Nor are we agents of the govnernment. This blog has clear rules and terms for conduct and specifically for keeping the conversation primarily focused on the topics at hand. You’ve been repeatedly reminded and warned about that and yet you’ve continued to violate the terms of this site…and have only gotten more flagrant in doing so.
You’ll end up being banned because you can’t follow the rules or handle an adult conversation appropriately, that’s all. If getting banned was your goal all along and you consider that a “win”, then chalk one up for you. *woo hoo* That makes you nothing but a Troll and again, not a serious person. So hey, when your accomplishments in life are nothing but a string of getting kicked out of places…that only says something about you – and none of it is positive.
But hey, utter rejection is “winning” in your world, so go with that and go “win” somewhere else…
Hi Somerset:
Wow! You are welcome relief. This G. fellow is already seeking to get me banned here. We may not have much time. 🙂
My doctoral dissertation was actually more influential than you might imagine. Because I focused on what caused the first welfare programs I ended up being a significant footnote in books written by the most famous scholars of the American welfare state including Theda Skocpol. I was the first person, for example, to identify the earliest origins of the original, state-level mother’s pension programs that later became AFDC programs during the New Deal.
I’ve been rereading some of the letters I wrote around the time I “discovered” the connection between child labor and child welfare programs and I was startled to remember the disbelief and astonishment that occurred at Cornell University when I first “unveiled” my new theory.
Young people starting their academic careers might be startled to realize how resistant people are to intellectual changes, particularly paradigm shifts.
At a certain point, we need a paradigm shift in the way the public sees Barack Obama. There is a big gap between the real Barack Obama and the image of Barack Obama. I’m glad I have played a small role in helping people figure out that more accurate, fact-based view of Obama.
Dear Dr. C — I’m afraid I was the one who first brought Dr. Drew onto the blog, by referring to him, a bit humorously, in an early post. For that I apologize, both to you and to my fellow-bloggers.. I now most urgently suggest that we simply stop responding to his posts. I for one am tired of reading his repetitious, obsessive and self-serving rants.
Nope. Just standard procedure for expecting folks to obey the rules here and a loss of patience with someone obviously intent on breaking them.
Face it John, you’ve failed to be interesting and don’t seem to have anything new to say. Saying the same nonsense over and over again is just clutter and becomes quickly tiresome.
You added nothing here and you won’t be missed. You’ve merely cluttered the blog and derailed a topic. I certainly don’t care what you have to say about your life story or your bizarre claims, so I certainly could care less about what you think about me or what you think of this blog.
You can’t follow the rules here and you have nothing to say of value or merit, so you deserve to be banished. Simple as that.
We don’t have to ban him, but I do most urgently suggest we stop responding to him. Dr. C, I’m afraid I was the one who inadvertently brought John Drew onto this blog, by referring to him (with humorous intent) in an early post. For that I humbly apologize, both to you and to my fellow-bloggers. But if we stop responding to him, he’ll soon stop posting. I for one am tired of reading his obsessional and self-serving posts.
If we stop responding, he’ll go on believing he’s “won” the debate. But since he’ll believe that anyway, does it really matter, and do we care?
G.
Obviously, I’m not aiming to change your views. I’m anxious to communicate credible information to swing voters who happen to land on this thread.
Many of these swing voters are not aware of Remnick’s book The Bridge of how Remnick illustrates the way young Obama and his friends thought by telling the story of how the members of the Democrat Socialist Alliance at Oxy hung a big banner of Karl Marx in the Oxy quad.
These swing voters may not realized that Obama claimed to have a lot of heterosexual relationships in Dreams, but that no one has ever interviewed any of these girls. No interviews at all.
Swing voters, in fact, may not even be aware of my take on young Obama’s ideological extremism or my status as an award-winning political scientist, the sort of person well-trained to accurately identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs.
Finally, swing voters may not realized that affirmative action programs are aimed making their lives worse, their incomes less, and their opportunities more limited. Whenever I hear Democrats talk about helping the middle class, I always think about how my career as a young man was harmed by affirmative action programs. I learned at a young age that Democrats did not care whether or not I made it into the middle class. In fact, they were actively hostile to me and my career.
Over a long time, I may change your views. I’m an ex-Marxist, ex-socialist, ex-Democrat myself. I know that change is possible for those who have the courage to confront the truth.
Ah yes, poor John. Somehow, your entire life’s constant problems are always everyone else’s fault, aren’t they? So, you admit that you get banned frequently…yet you can’t seem to grasp what that pattern really says about you, can you?
Poor John. You’ll never get it and you’ll just keep making problems for yourself everywhere you go. Good luck with that. Obviously its worked out sooo well for you…
Keep that fail train rolling along, O’ Brave Sir Robin…
Ouch! That’s got to hurt, John.
G,
Thanks for everything you said–one thing, though, my last name is spelled “KessEler”. While it’s up to Doc C whether or not what Johnny has said about me is appropriate for this blog, it doesn’t bother me at all–in fact, I find it hilarious. Besides, he must know all about me–he’s scanned my thesis! 😉 **Don’t worry, I think at least 30 of the 80 pages are figures and some of them are very pretty (aren’t they, John?).** Anyway, I’m sure someone of the stature of Dr. John Drew, award-winning PhD understands exactly what I was saying in my thesis. I’m sure that he, with mathematical skills which include both linear regression analysis and high-school calculus (no, really, I’m not kidding–he said so himself!) easily understood my results and their significance–even given the very poor quality of the writing. He does have a PhD, after all… and his special insight which allowed him to win a major award! 😉
He thinks I’m a paper tiger and he’s a scientist! You cannot make this stuff up–can you see why I find him hysterical? Plus, if things get tough, we can eat his minstrels… (and there will be much rejoicing!)
This is fun. This post indicates the exact comment that got G. all hot and heavy demanding that I be banned from this site. It is interesting to read what was apparently the straw that broke the G.’s back.
Nope. You are a delusional nut. I don’t value the claims of crackpots.
If that is your whole goal (the one thing I might actually take you serious on), than whatever. Good luck with that.
We’ve already had this discussion – the one area I’ll say was a legitimate area of simple difference of opinion and where I don’t mind simply agreeing to disagree.
As you know, I see your true agenda to be a futile quest. You’ve basically just openly admitted that you are not about truth at all and are just shamelessly here to try to peddle unfounded smears in the desperate hopes to “sway” (translation “trick”) gullible “swing voters” to fall for your lies and doubts you think you can sow.
One, I have no respect for silly games or propagnda. A lie is a lie is a lie and I do not value dishonest people. I see it as a sign of utter weakness. If you can’t hack it in the world or make a point with the truth and real solid evidence, then your point never had merit in the first place.
I realize that emotions are a part of the human condition, but I also view as a sign of fragile weakness those that are not mature or intelligent enough to think for themselves or be able to get control of their emotions and not let them consume them or lead them to make preventable mistakes…or at least when we all fall and do, to be able to own up to one’s own failings, pick themselves up without having to rely on a crutch of excuses and grow from the experience.
Those that can’t are weak. Sorry, but that’s how I view it.
As I said, I think you are tilting at windmills in your propaganda con game plan anyways. It definitely is a futile endeavor here, that’s for sure. The rest of the internet is, as I said, a vast fragmented mess where too many people naively think they are more important or “swaying” opinion than they are.
There are assuredly places where you can reach your marks – the gullible and susceptible. But you keep assuming that they are part of the “swing middle”. Any folks that would be susceptible to “swing” on the cr@p that you are peddling already have ODS and therefore, you’re really only able to preach to the choir.
In the current and very partisan environment we currently live in, there is plenty of anti-Obama rhetoric across all forms of media that has been blaring at a constant pace for the past 3 years. Even the “low information” voter hears a lot of it. So, if it was a message that could appeal to them or their voting decision, it is already factored in.
Those that are truly going to be “swing” voters in this year’s dynamic remain “swing” voters, because their indecision is based on other factors and not a bunch of stupid ODS-related nonsense. If that had any appeal to their motives, they’d have been infected already.
So yes, I think you are on a fool’s errand. Nor do I have any fear or care where else you go to spread your little message, as I discount it and it threatens me not.
It simply has NO place on here AND is a clear violation of the commenting terms here. (Read the Visitor’s Guide listed at the top.)
So yes, for the mere and simple reason that this blog is a specific-purpose blog, I will continue to call for your ban if you deviate from those rules.
Same as I would call from removal of people talking Astrology on an Astronomy-specific blog or endlessly trying to talk about their favorite rap stars on a NASCAR-specific forum.
Folks that intentionally derail a specific topic blog forum and can’t follow the rules deserve a reminder or two. If they continue after that, YES they should be banned.
Your stated purpose still has no value or purpose on this blog. Therefore, take your propaganda game elsewhere. You have a chance to leave here on your own terms instead of under the shame of a ban.
If you offer up that you would like to participate here under the specific rules of this forum, then you need to adhere to only do that. However, I have little faith that you have either the interest or the capability in following the rules or grasping them.
So yes, based on your repeated actions after numerous clear warnings and especially your way-over-the-line unjustified sick attacks on the unsolicited personal life of another poster (one of the most severe violations of this site’s terms – worthy of a permanent ban), my recommendation to Dr. C. to ban you still stands.
Um… Doc C referred to Johnny in the post. Just sayin’…
Speaking of pathetic- bragging how you are doing damage to another poster- bragging that you believe you are possibly hurting another posters ability to make a living?
[This comment has been edited. Doc]
Complete and utter rubbish, possibly delusional.
Most European countries have at one point or another been under socialist regimes and enjoy great quality of life and good economies — in some cases (Germany) unarguably stronger than the US.
John,
I see a lot of you bragging about yourself, I see lots of posts where you keep attacking another poster….and no responses to my challenges….
You know about real stuff.
Like showing us your corroborating evidence or testimony.
Like explaining Marxism and how Obama is demonstrating his supposed Marxism?
Come on John…..
You have to admire Slartibartfest for pointing out that I’m mentioned by name in the original post. How often do the people mentioned in the post participate in the subsequent debate?
G. One of the things I like about debating on these sites is how they teach me about the values and fears of the hardcore Obama supporters. Your reaction to my simple suggestions regarding public scrutiny of Obama’s old girlfriends ignited a firestorm in you. You reacted intensely and began demanding I be banned. To me, this is a classic sign that you don’t want your own team to consider this issue.
I’m guessing this must be a big wedge issue in the Democrat party community. I’ve been reading some of the work that Jack Cashill did on this issue and it maybe that I have underestimated the extent to which their is hostility againsts gays in black community. I was startled, for example, here in CA when gay marriage was rejected by the same California voters who elected Barack Obama p0resident.
Apparently, asking sincere questions about Obama’s sexuality is such a divisive issue that people like you do not want it even discussed among your fellow liberals. I’m also guessing I hit a nerve with you by pointing out that it is the same basic common sense I’m applying to understanding Obama’s sexual preferences that guided my early academic work and later business career.
The combination of my reminding you of this national award and discussing the absolute lack of Obama girlfriend interviews set you off like a rocket. Am I right to see this as a sensitive issue that drives wedges among Democrats?
Are you purposefully dense or simply ignorant?
There is a huge difference between Marxism as in “what Marx said & believed” and Marxism as in “what some his followers said & believed”.
For the former, rather than quoting and paraphrasing, I refer you to a the well-balanced entry on Marx’s legacy on wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx#Legacy
As for the later, why, the fact that Jesus inspired Torquemada does not make Christianity a “dangerous extremist ideology”.
You, sir, are a poseur and a quack.
Oh yeah he sure doesn’t…
lists of top donors for Obama from the last election in 2008.
Goldman Sachs ($1,013,091)
JPMorgan Chase & Co ($808,799)
Citigroup Inc ($736,771)
WilmerHale LLP ($550,668)
Skadden, Arps et al ($543,539)
UBS AG ($532,674), and…
Morgan Stanley ($512,232).
Lupin:
Please. Per capital GDP in Germany is $35,700 (2010 est.)
Per capita GDP in the U.S. is $47,200 (2010 est.)
Check out the CIA World Fact Book at https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html
Tons of liberals think Europe is doing better than us…it’s just not true.
Regards, John
This is simply A LIE which has been thoroughly debunked by THE GUARDIAN.
See the link I provided above.
Repeating your lies doesn’t make them true.
You’re a fraud.
PS: People who use and abuse the word “unAmerican” as you do should be arrested & sent to Gitmo promptly. There’s nothing more “unAmerican” than the word “unAmerican”.
DING! DING! A WINNER!!!
Is it just me or are birthers getting even crazier the last while?
Lupin:
Karl Marx’s philosophy inspired some of the most horrific mass murders of the 20th century including the violence of Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. I don’t think we are doing anyone any favors by mimizing the violence and slaughter associated with Marxist philosophy. It makes no sense to separate Marxism from the results produced by Marxism since Marxism is based on the idea that class conflict – even violent class conflict – is normal and to be expected by us.
The fact that Obama’s friends in the DSA hung a banner celebrating Karl Marx should be a chilling warning to everyone who studies President Obama. I don’t think the American people in 2008 fully understood his ties to Bill Ayers or to radical Marxist socialist thought. Luckily, in 2012, they will have a lot more resources at their disposal to study and understand the real Barack Obama.
For a chilling look at the violence in Weatherman Underground movement led by Bill Ayers, please check out this frightening YouTube video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWMIwziGrAQ
You handpicked the ONLY statistic that might help your case. The main reason the US is richer is, first of all, because a higher proportion of Americans are in employment and, secondly, because they work about 20% more hours per year than Europeans. When we adjust for both these factors and look at GDP per person per hour worked, there is virtually no difference between Germany, France and the US.
Economists speak of this as revealing different American and European social preferences for work and leisure. In truth, both the employment rate and how long the average person works are explained mainly by political history. Until the late 1970s total hours worked were falling both in Europe and in the USA; since then, total hours worked have continued to fall in the EU, but have risen again in the US.
Equally, if we look at employment data by age group, Americans join the work force earlier and leave it far later than Europeans. The key to understanding why this has happened is the change in US income distribution over the past 30 years. Since 1979, the bottom 40% of income earners in the US has been treading water, while the bottom 20% has become poorer. US workers have needed to put in more years and longer hours simply to maintain their real income position.
I could make nasty comments here about the decreasing quality of life in the US and your race towards becoming a third world country, but I won’t. The truth is that, expressed on a per capita basis, GDP growth rates in the US and the EU are virtually the same over the past decade. The same is true of labour productivity growth.
As for unemployment, if we compare employment rates in 2005 of the 25-55 age group, there is again virtually no difference; e.g., the employment rates are 86 and 88 percent for the EU-15 and the US respectively — ignoring differences in how the data are recorded because in reality we should use the U6 figures for the US, not the U3 as quoted in the press, in which case the EU wins hands down.
Finally, US growth is funded by a dangerously high mountain of foreign debt (cough China cough), driven by the US financial bubble, enabling US consumers to spend more than they earn. How much of your GDP is real wealth and not “casino chips”? No one can say for certain. My guess: about 25% of your GDP is worthless monopoly money.
In conclusion: you’re full of fecal matter. Personally I don’t care when American right-wing ideologues like yourself lie about your President, his sex life, the posters he hung in his student pad, etc. It’s your business.
But I DO care when you lie about Europe, and use these lies to try to convince weak-minded people in your own country that you are somehow correct when you’re not.
Wow. Just wow. If *that* the takeaway conclusion you came from that, then you are truly beyond hopelessly delusional. You are just plain stupid.
No fear whatsoever at all on the “issue” you obsess on.
It is meaningless. It simply crossed over into “ban” territory for clear reasons:
1. It was pretty much the same theme post over and over again from you, without anything new to add and no regard for the responses or feedback you got the first, second…or xth time you said the same darn thing. Simple proof – look at the vast history of this blog site and see where other posters have been called out and eventually banned for that same thing. This simply is not a forum to be cluttered with a broken record that contributes nothing.
2. The one “slight” correction, to be accurate, is that when I say added nothing, it added nothing of value or meaning to any issue of consequence. There was some “variation” of your weird obsession – but that was only to go further into the creepy factor of a bizarre sexual obsessive nature. So your whole concept was what didn’t change, but you became more depraved in your pushing it, despite being told that no one cared. You started adding weird Larry Sinclair and even weirder Richard Nixon garbage. It just became a weird sexual deviant fantasy on display from you. Quite sick and creepy and your personal sexual fantasies are definitely out of bounds or taste for the topic rules of this blog.
This is not some slash/fic S&M site for you to stroke off to. There *are* places on the internet for that sort of thing. Go there if you are going to have those kinds of moments. Your hangups are simply innappropriate for this blog.
3. Your vile unsolicited attack and going after the personal and private rights of another poster on this site is one of the most serious violations of this sites rules and ethics that can be committed. That behavior is grounds for immediate and permanent banning.
It simply comes down to that. If you’ve actually learned anything of “values”, the take away should be expectations that rules of behavior and conduct are followed and that lies and unsupported accusations are not. Evidence is valued over speculation. That pretty much covers it.
If you are really dumb enough to think there is any fear of your crazy and sick sex worries, than I encourage you wholeheartedly to do some real work and petition every GOP candidate you can to make it an issue. Please do try! Call into every radio and TV show you can and scream your unhealthy little obsessions as loudly as you can! See how well that goes over. I’d love for you to get some GOP office holder to take up your claims loudly and publicly – the ensuing ridicule and revulsion they will receive will be the same you have and it would kill their credibilty, just as it does yours.
There is a reason such muck and nonsense has gone nowhere. It is not for lack of sad sacks like you trying. It is because no one cares and more importantly, anyone who pushes such bizarre and meaningless issues like you is instantly a non credible and creepy person.
So call up WND or Orly Taitz or any of the other ODS sufferers that are most susceptible to run with any crazy thing they here, simply because they hate Obama at all costs. Please get them to start shouting your “theories” as well. As if they weren’t utter laughingstocks and failures already, I’d get a huge kick out of seeing them take up your cause and just damage themselves further.
So yeah, please do. Just do it somewhere else. This is NOT the forum for such dreck.
That is correct but as I said Jesus Christ inspired Torquemada.
If it makes no sense to separate Christianity from the results produced by the Inquisition, then the Pope should be treated like Pol Pot and all Christians in the US should be immediately rounded up and locked up.
Marx is an important and respected philosopher and the first political scientist just as much as Kant, Locke, Weber, etc, etc.
Rousseau and Voltaire inspired the French and the American revolution but the bloody excesses of the Reign of Terror do not cause any serious person to hurl accusations of “Rousseauism” at any one.
Only in Americas is there that unfounded, ignorant, and frankly appalling use if “Marxism” as a scarecrow. You don’t find it in Eastern Europe — and they would have plenty more reasons than you to be afraid Marx. The difference, of course, is they’re intelligent and educated — and you’re not (despite your claims).
As for Obama, considering that he’s been Wall Street’s Best Friend as illustrated in Ron Suskind magnificent book ‘Confidence Men’, calling him a “Marxist” (if only it were true!) is utterly ridiculous. You come across as mentally deranged.
Oh, the American people understood. They heard these rumours and false association claims all throughout the last election cycle and still decided to vote for him in overwhelming numbers.
There are NO real meaningful ties to Ayers. Nor is Obama a Marxist.
Again, this is the same violation of the site’s terms as the others. You’ve repeatedly made this line of claims over and over and over again without providing any evidence to substantiate it.
You don’t seem to learn, do you? This is NOT a site for simply endlessly repeating unfounded propoganda.
If you can not back up and support your claims and just resort to thinking you can say the same lies over and over again after repeatedly being called out on it, that you simply are a brick wall and beyond reasoning with.
What you are doing is mindless trolling and not sincere dialogue or debate. The rules are the rules.
Again, you’ve just done the same thing for which you’ve been repeatedly been warned about.
Futher, you have still FAILED to post ANYTHING in regards to the actual topic of the blog, despite repeat reminders of the rules. You are simply persisting in intentionally derailing the thread of conversation
Again, I call on Dr. C. to ban the hopeless Troll. So many of your rules have been repeatedly violated here that there is no justification for further tolerance.
Don’t we have any women here? Most of the folks poking pointed sticks into this cage seem to be males. (Well, nbc might count himself with the women now.)
Educated women with families and careers don’t generally come out of the woodwork saying that they have slept with famous men in the past, unless it’s to show what a hypocrite the cheating slime is. Look what happens when they do. Whatever the circumstances, the women get labeled as “loose”.
Where has any woman claimed publicly to have dated pretty much any former candidate while they were in college? Some of those men certainly got around, but since they weren’t married at the time and there wasn’t a scandal involved, why would anyone be interested? Unnamed allegations look like cheap shots, named allegations have no positive outcome for the woman. Women don’t tell, friends don’t name names, and reporters don’t report unless there’s a story. Dating single people when you are single isn’t a story.
It’s not you.
I understand that these things need to be systematic, but in Taitz’ case I’d make an exception and talk about Miga-Taitz (Russian migalka i the alarm device normally used on a police car, but some politicians like Zhirinovski have them too) and Gaga-Taitz (the Lady I cannot now see a video of withouth thinking of Taitz). Tera-Taitz is OK, because teryat’ in Russian means to lose (though it is pronounced “tirya”in Russian and Tira would preserve Orly’s connection to Tiraspol).
Excellent suggestion.
He’s nothing more than a bully and a self-obsessed troll who staggers into a privately run blog, proudly craps on the rug and then cackles like a maniac into the face of the host and insults every guest.
It’s time to ignore the troll.
+1.
That was disgusting.
Dating single people when you are single isn’t a story . . . unless you’re a self-absorbed crank with a political agenda desperate enough to lie, nitpick and spin meaningless history to anyone who will listen.
Whatever and Will: I’m a woman, though I don’t quite see the relevance of the gender of a blog poster. I’m also almost seventy (as you can tell from my user name), old enough to be able to ignore the antics of someone like John, who’s apparently about the same age as the President. Adolescent tantrums carrying over into middle age … President Obama, in contrast, always seems like the most mature man in the room, as well as the most intelligent.
– Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog it’s too dark to read.
– Politics doesn’t make strange bedfellows – marriage does.
– Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
I actually mentioned him (and deliberately) in the main article. What I thought Dr. Drew really doesn’t understand is that there are modern folks so biased and hanging off the right side of the political discussion that they think Barack Obama is a Marxist based on what he says and does today. How much more easy for someone to apply those same biases to 30-year-old-memories. Looking at Dr. Drew’s comments he certainly seems pretty far to the right. There is no reason to think that Drew’s recollections and the reporting of them are objective, nor, if accurate, that they mean anything.
What I came to see from his writing here is that his soul is dark, not just biased.
I ask this kind of question repeatedly of people who claim Obama is a marxist. “What are the major tenets of marxism and how do they apply to Obama”, everytime I get back crickets.
Chill out. You’re hyperventilating.
My apologies to the community and to Slartibartfast for not catching the abusive comments from John. Drew. While It’s not reasonable for every visitor to this site to read and become familiar with the Visitor’s Guide and Editorial Policy, I think that it is reasonable to expect a modicum of decency from everyone. Specifically the Editorial Policy states (in the most bold faced of terms): “Posting personal information about private individuals is prohibited.” Drew violated the hell out of that.
It becomes clear why he is a defender of Jack Cashill: they are both users of smear tactics. As readers may know, I have a deep moral to the use of smear attacks and believe that it is evidence of deep moral corruption on the part of those who use them.
In any case, Drew has been placed in moderation, meaning that all of this comments will be screened for editorial policy violations before they are allowed to appear. However, being in moderation is a little more than that. Dealing with moderated comments is tiresome and irritating and I’m not beyond just deleting stuff I don’t like.
In this instance, I have removed 17 comments by Drew or in reply to Drew that contain his prohibited personal attack.
I give John C. Drew, Ph.D about six months before he changes his story again and starts claiming that he, himself had a homosexual affair with Obama when they were students.
I believe he hates Obama more than he hates the thought of being known as gay.
First that guy has gotten precisely no media attention for that book, just like a guy recently published a book claiming Rick Perry was gay and no-one really gave a toss and he got little or no media exposure. And what the hell are you doing trawling through gay and lesbian websites anyway?
Second the only thing I care about the private life of Nixon can be surmised by one sentence on page 8 of Worse than Watergate, by John W. Dean (another white guy more successful than you)
“Through sheer determination, [Nixon] made himself smart.”
That’s all that matters in a President. And by the way I actually admire Nixon’s presidency in a lot of ways. Not a popular opinion and he was personally an odious man to be sure, but he was a pretty decent president who, unlike you, worked very hard at his job.
This is pretty weird. How is someone pointing out a resume gap (and a small one in a time of high unemployment) on an obscure blog on the Internet going to harm their ability to get a job, and what kind of evil person gets happiness causing trouble for others?
As someone who has hired a number of professionals over the years and who has read hundreds of resumes, I don’t need a third party to point out gaps. It’s one of many things one notes and asks about. It is not in and of itself important, particularly these days!
However, if I were a prospective employer and John C. Drew came for an interview, and I did an Internet search and found his comments on this blog, not only would I not hire him, I would have security escort him from the building.
Where is the thumbs up smiley around here?
No doubt, Obsolete, he does appear to be headed in that direction! The best part is how behind the times such accusations are. Amongst his own, sexual allegations may have traction. To me, it’s crickets. I hear this Elightenment thing is catching on.
No problem, it kinda all blew up overnight. Besides, if you hadn’t seen his prior interactions with me (which only the 3 readers of his blog are privy to… ;-)), there was no way to know the direction that he would inevitably go when I joined the discussion. Contrary to his belief, I don’t believe that I was harmed by the incident–I never quite understood why I should fear information that I had posted about myself mixed with baseless speculation, but it seems like Johnny thought it was a devastating attack in his delusional world.
I agree.
I’m glad you put him in moderation rather than banning him–I’m convinced he wants nothing more than to say that he was run off by the “ebil libruls” to try and build his conservative street cred. I’m sorry you have to deal with moderating the clown, but, quite frankly, I believe he lacks the character to even understand what he did wrong, so I’m guessing that he couldn’t be prevented from fouling your blog one way or another otherwise.
Thank you. And thank you to everyone who defended me (or just pwned Mr. Drew for their own entertainment ;-)), as I noted above, in addition to trying to smear me with unsupported speculation and facts that I willingly revealed, he has also taken to repeating lies made up by KBOA in her attacks on members of the Fogbow verbatim–which is the kind of thing I think we all should take seriously.
Anyway, it’s been fun stopping by here–I’ll have to do it again sometime soon…
J. Potter,
How is your Marxist experiment going? 😉
Good to hear from you, Slarti. Do come back soon.
Drew’s constant references to his award-winning thesis are reminiscent of the former high school football star who never made it in college but keeps bringing up the touchdown he scored in the big game.
As for Fulsom’s book “outing” Nixon, it hasn’t been published yet but it can be previewed at Amazon. From what I can see, there is nothing new in it about Nixon’s sexual preferences. Most of what Fulsom reports is covered in Anthony Summers’ 2000 book, “The Arrogance of Power: The Secret World of Richard Nixon.” I would think that a prominent political scientist such as Drew would know about Summers’ book.
Finally, Drew has not responded to my question about whether he made advances to Obama at Occidental which were rebuffed. Drew has repeatedly demonstrated that he equates silence with assent, so it would seem that we are left to draw our own conclusions.
Well, Papa Marx has been proudly on display for 3 hours now, in a position of honor in my humble cubicle of capitalism. To set the stage, please understand that I am deep in Deep Red territory here: blue collar environment in a very red state. A hard-drinking, hard-working, hard-parying, casino-hopping crowd. Thanks to class confusion, no love for socialism here.
So far …. no one has noticed. My office pool picks for the bowl games seem to be hogging the limelight. If still no response, I’ll post Karl over the picks to reduce his competition.
I also random emailed the same image to several personal contacts, w/o comment. Again, no response. To be fair, email is all but dead, and the recipients probably assumed it was spam. An image w/o text probablhy went straight to spam boxes anyway. I have utterly failed my socialist comrades on the digital front.
So far the conclusion is that Karl might attract vitriol from an audience conditioned to object to him (say, when a gaggle of frightened wingers gather for their two minutes hate), but amongst the GP …. nobody cares. Do they even recognize him?
Richard M. Nixon was one of the most intelligent men to ever hold public office. On the other hand, it would not surprise me at all to find that he was somewhere on the spectrum of autism, or that he had any number of eccentricities in his personality that are typically associated with high intellect. It strikes me profoundly to know just how excellent a musician Nixon was. Probably he and Condaleezza Rice share the distinction of being the most skilled pianists to ever hold public office. Nixon gets an edge over Rice, because he was mostly self-taught, where she had formal training and Fine Arts degrees and so on.
I disagree. It is perfectly reasonable and not a tall order by any means.
The stylized visage of Ernesto “Che” Guevara might garner more recognition.
And they would be probably confuse Friedrich Engels for Alexander Graham Bell.
Well that’s the big question do they even know its Karl Marx and not some random trucker? You might want to add his name below the image.
If you get them to do anything of the sort, that is, nailing down a hot buzzword to a definition, they would lose control of the buzzword and be forced to map to their definition of it. Even the ones who could make a reasonable stab at explaining “marxism” or “socialism” won’t do it. They need these words to be vague, and applicable to anything they choose.
By the way, the whole “rule of three” here seems to derive from Lenin’s written analysis of Marx, and not really from Marx (most of whose work was in the analysis of *capitalism* and the identification of universal issues that affect all economic systems.) It’s unfortunate that most of his analysis is more directly applicable to the issues of nineteenth century society, with different labor dynamics especially in agriculture, but that doesn’t mean his observations aren’t universal.
Few people who accuse a politician of being a “Marxist” really understand the things Marx actually wrote about. I’ve never seen a person making this sort of accusation against an American politician follow through with specific citations from Marx’s opus that explain what they are referring to, or even explain their objection in terms of some specific policy.
Power to the people, J! And Will, I’d be happy if they could recognizeAlexander Graham Bell (even if they they were wrong…).
Actually, Marx would probably have abhorred it himself. He once wrote to a French socialist that he was not a Marxist.
Now who was it that said “From the first day to this, sheer greed was the driving spirit of civilization “? One hint: it was not Adam Smith. Though, of course, it might as well have been.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations#United_States
Inside the echo chamber, accusing a Democrat of being a Marxist makes that politician untouchable. It’s not important among them to know what the word means. It’s nothing more than a label that is universally understood to be so damning that it cannot even be discussed. Few if any who use the label, intended to stop dialogue more than anything, could actually offer a summary of topics on which Marx wrote. They would not do this even if they could, because offering a definition weakens the value of the label. Instead, they let the label carry a reality assumption that Marxist philosophy leads directly and inevitably to specific kinds of totalitarian government. They have a point, but, it’s also the case that *any* set of universal observations on labor and capital can be used to persuade people toward a totalitarian state “for the greater good.”
But this kind of dialogue is not possible to have among people for whom the simple act of *reading the literature* is a taboo. It’s worse than a taboo. There is a belief that reading the literature will poison your thinking and brainwash you.
I agree, but, as explained above, the story was that a picture of Marx was publicly displayed. No other detail given. I don’t want to influence the non-existent response by hitting viewers over the head, much less by adding an epithet like: “Enemy of the State, Karl Marx” “Our inspiration, Karl Marx” “Rot in Hell, Karl Marx” or “My hero, Karl Marx” … much less “Barack Hussein Obama, 44th President of the United States”.
Simply trying to replicate Drew’s story, as sparsely as it was presented. I do concede he would probably be more recognized on a college campus. But I also counter that this is (stereotypically speaking) where he would be expected to draw a negative response, when recognized.
You’re just jealous because they have teeth.
I am going to have to revisit Nixon.
I think it is proper to revile him for the damage that his actions and lies did to our political system- I think much of what is happening today is a direct descendent of Nixon’s actions. And subsequently, the private conversations of his have revealed how petty and racists he was.
But he was brave enough and smart enough to reach out to China. Can you imagine a Republican today doing something like that? It would be as if Bush had unilaterally ended the embargo with Cuba and established formal relations with Cuba. i can’t remember all of his domestic accomplishments, but I do remember that many of them would be considered radical socialist marxist proposals in todays environment.
I don’t think you could look at a single President without finding some actions that you would condemn(Trail of Tears/suspension of habeas corpus, etc) and find some actions you would applaud. Its good to try to keep things in perspective.
Well said…
Have you googled the answer?
This is what I wanted you all to find:
http://www.cs.utsa.edu/~bylander/cs3343/chapter9handout.pdf
Oh I loved just saying ‘name the three principles of Marxism’ because I suspected that John would refuse to actually respond to substance.
I have no concrete idea of what the ideals of Marxism are- though I know promoting private enterprise is not one of them. Which is pretty funny, since Marx was supported by Engels, who was ripping of his family’s big business to support him.
But I would expect that a Doctor in Political Science, who speaks so much about Marxism, should be able to respond without even bothering to look it up on Wikipedia.
And Doc- thanks for putting him in moderation- I don’t want John banned either. He will likely declare victory and claim he was banned by being put in moderation but I would prefer he keep coming and we keep challenging him on his actual claims.
May I make one more suggestion to G and others?
If John ventures back- don’t respond to his own personal story, don’t get bogged down in fights about his claims to victory on Fogbow but relentlessly focus on challenging him to produce facts to support his claims about Obama.
I despised John’s personal attacks, but at points there became a fine line to me, that the only substantive difference between the attacks John made against Slart and the ‘attacks’ on John’s personal story is that John has chosen to make himself a public figure. But John’s personal story is in the end irrelevant to this website.
John has never really managed to provide any substantive evidence of his claims about Obama or the discrimination he believes he faced when he was informed that he had failed to impress them with his academic progress and was not granted a path towards tenure. Drew’s publication record supports such a decision, there may have been other reasons but as usual, Drew insists on assertion rather than logic, reason and evidence to make his claims.
Drew is a bitter person, easily upset by the success of others, and thus feeling the need to inflate his own accomplishments.
Sad really
Nixon supported the Clean AIr Act and founded the EPA to enforce it and other environmental laws.
Nixon proposed comprehensive health insurance, including an employer mandate. Ted Kennedy worked with him and it would likely have passed if not for Watergate.
Nixon proposed a Negative Income Tax, which would have given low income families direct cash payments based on their income. This idea came from conservative economiist Milton Friedman and was later used by Reagan in modified form as the Earned Income Tax Credit.
It’s amazing to see how people like Niixon, Reagan and Friedman would be drummed out of today’s Republican/Tea Party
“My story helps explain why Obama went on to hang out with people like Rev. Wright, Alice Palmer and Bill Ayers.”
Jack Cashill has referred to Bill Ayers as the President’s mentor (http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/how_obama_lost_his_postmodern_groove.html).
mentor
noun
1 his political mentors: adviser, guide, guru, counselor, consultant; confidant(e).
2 regular meetings between mentor and trainee: trainer, teacher, tutor, instructor.
Why would an alleged journalist like Cashill make such a claim without any credible evidence whatsoever?
It’s the legacy of a tradition of saying 1 thing and doing another. The current crowd was raised on rhetoric and have swallowed it whole. If something is repeated enough and the audience wants to believe, to them it becomes true, no evidence needed. “When legend becomes fact, print the legend” is played out every day in our media, most notably (to me) on the right, where it finds its ultimate expression in the Cult of Reagan.
And once a legendary truth is accepted as truthiness, more new “truths” can be constructed out of them! See it over and over again coming from these ODS prophets.
When a “conclusions first” proponent tries to sell their shaky “truths” to an “evidence first” audience, they may as well be speaking an alien tongue. Complete clash of values.
The best is when they ultimately blame the crowd for not “getting” the truthiness of their truthy “truths”. Can’t you see? It’s so obvious! Just suspend disbelief, unplug, and go sailing on the seas of fantasy with me. Oh, and never mind that hand in your pocket 😉
Not sure how to reverse all the damage. How do you unspool decades of spin?
Just a note on former Marxists in power. The current President of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff was a Marxist in the 1960s. Not conjecture, but fact. She led an armed guerilla group and was jailed and tortured by the military regime. In effect, she didn’t just know Bill Ayers, she WAS Bill Ayers.
Today, her approval rating is 72%. Brazil’s economy, though slowing, is probably in among the best shape of any country’s. Under her mentor, Lula da Silva, a leftist, though likely never a Marxist, 25 million people were lifted out of poverty and into the middle class. He left office with 80% approval.
I never do it myself before commenting on other sites. But then, I try to be civil most of the time and take my lead from other comments.
Besides devouring all the usual classics on Watergate, two other books helped round out my understanding of Nixon- “Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail 1972” by Hunter S. Thompson, and the more recent “Nixonland”, by Rick Perlstein.
I also found Oliver Stone’s film “Nixon” to be engrossing. Although it contains some conjecture and fiction, all together it produces a greater truth (sort of like H.S. Thompson’s gonzo journalism). After all, it is how Stone experienced and perceived Nixon, not necessarily how the rest of the world did.
Another engrossing but less well-known film about Nixon is Robert Altman’s “Secret Honor” (1984).
In a world where people are reading up on whether or not Nixon was gay, I think it is fair to ask whether or not Obama is gay.
There are a lot of clues indicating that he is. 1) There hasn’t been a single interview of any of Obama’s supposed old girlfriends. Not one. 2) None of the photos of young Obama show him in anything like a romantic, sexual relationship with a girl. Instead, young Obama is always shown hanging out with other young men. 3) Michelle Obama herself questioned his sexuality and got feedback from her brothers regarding Obama sexual orientation according to Christopher Andersen’s book, Barack and Michelle.
Obama likes to pretend that he holds to traditional values. If the real Obama is actually a fan of enjoying sex and drugs in the company of male strangers, then I think there is a need to see the media investigate this issue in greater detail.
The mainstream media covered up the uncomfortable information about other presidents, it makes sense to me – as a political scientist – that they are doing that again now regarding Obama. As I’ve said, where is the proof that Obama dated girls?
So… anyone know what a Martian looks like?
Since the birthers like to chase meaningless shadows, let’s just say they look like this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Martian_face_viking_cropped.jpg
According to this story we do.
Clever. 😉
Same here. I have no respect for liars or smear merchants. I consider it to reflect an utter lack of character and substance and as you well put, evidence of deep moral corruption in their soul. I have very little sympathy or empathy for willfully bad people.
I have not been bogged down in his personal stuff. I have repeatedly said that I don’t care about that and wish people would stop wasting space here bringing it up.
He has yet to make any real “claim” of any sort, in my view. Being a casual smear merchant and just repeating the same unsupportable ugly conjecture over and over is not making a claim. It is merely one of the lowest forms of standard Trolling.
So, if he’s going to post here, I’d say that he’s got to actually have something supportable and of value to say and not just the same endless clutter being said over and over and over again.
I agree with Dr. C, but I also see James point. Unless a website policy is right up front on the screen when I’m reading it, I don’t think to check it, but I try to go to places with the intent of behaving properly and I never Troll the web. I just don’t get the juvenile and petty mindset of someone who intentionally goes around with that intent. That just makes them a low class loser in my book.
But anyways, I think the more important thing is that such policy is stated and made available somewhere on a site, like it is here. If someone is behaving inappropriately, they may honestly not realize that they are getting out of line unless someone let’s them know.
So, I think the right initial cause of action is to inform them of the policy and if they continue to behave out of bounds, to give them a warning or two in addition with that reminder. If they haven’t even tried to better behave after that, it is a pretty flagrant sign of wilful disobedience and deserving of coming down strict and hard on them at that point.
The key here is that John was given a lot of leeway before anyone commenting here – myself or otherwise, even felt the need to bring it to his attention. I not only tried to explain to him this site’s policies several times, but also told him where they were posted on the site.
What was telling is that he never once tried to moderate or behave better after being informed and warned. In fact, his behavior continued to deteriorate – perhaps even deliberately. He pretty much alluded to trying to get banned by intent and seemed to be bragging about getting banned at numerous other places.
Therefore, it seems clear that was part of his sad attention-starved goal all along. He wants to be a Troll. He wants to start fights and get kicked out of places. In his sad mind, he’s so used to engendering bad will and negative reactions that he’s convinced himself that failure and endless rejection by others is somehow a “good thing”…
Ah yes, the legendary “Face on Mars” photo!
That sure started quite an uproar and movement. It truly was a source of question and intense speculation for years, until we finally got new satellites up there that gave us much clearer resolution and realized that the face we saw was just a result of shadows being cast in the lower resolution image…
Richard C. Hoagland was quite the super-star media figure during those whole “Face on Mars” mystery years…
*sigh* Now those were the days… When the conspiracy kooks were well-intentioned, harmless, charming and fun to listen to…
Hoagland is still active and one of the main space-related conspiracy proponents out there. Some of his stuff is way out there…some of it is pretty interesting (I always liked the “Tetrahedral Physics” angles). Alll of it is entertaining. So for those who like some light, fun space-based conspiracy, here’s where you can find Hoagland. He’s still a hoot!
http://www.enterprisemission.com/
Don’t forget what happens when you put astronauts vs. conspiracy nutjuobs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU
Or we could save everyone some time and just copy/paste from his previous trolls.
For example, from July 4th, 2011:
http://www.quora.com/U-S-Politics/What-is-White-Rage/comment/77032
Aldrin rocks. And he added a terrific, new twist to the word buzz kill.
Good idea. If we just made a bot to cut and paste randomly from his previous posts I’m sure it would be able to pass any Turing test that John himself could pass…
Used similarly to the phrase “Hulk smash“, I presume? 😉
Turing or Tourette’s?
Only if you add that really cool forlorn and walking away down the road at the end music.
I love that video & Aldrin’s response. Classic! Good for him.
Good point! Sure seems like a bit of the latter…
FYI: Here’s some more great evidence that the Obama marriage is not what it seems to be. See this shocking report from Politico, http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/01/flotus-wanted-to-stay-in-chicago-109914.html
As I’ve said, if Obama lives my traditional values, then why are there no interviews with his ex-girlfriends prior to meeting Michelle? We can ask about Nixon’s sexuallity, but not Obama’s? What’s up with that?
Sorry Johnny, but that article is hardly even interesting, let alone “shocking”. And President Obama doesn’t live your traditional values–he lives his own. That, after all, is what American values are all about–each of us choosing what is important to us. It is sad that the “values” you hold to are hypocrisy and slander, but fortunately our first family has infinitely more character than you…
She didn’t want herself and her children to live in a fishbowl. Perfectly reasonable.
I read the comments. All the commenters would be right at home at a
KKKCouncil of Conservative Citizens rally. It confirms what I believe is behind the BC nonsense.Just watch when Cory Booker announces in ’16: He’s not a NBC because he was born in DC, which is not a state. When confronted that Gore was born in DC, it will be ‘that’s a different case.’
Popcorn.
Gingrich sets the standard on that issue.
Sorry Misha, but I think Elizabeth Warren will be getting the nomination in 2016–Booker would make a great VP though–there’s a ticket that would make the RWNJs’ heads explode… 😉
I never thought about that. I’m basing my prediction on what I posted before:
“While at Oxford, he became friends with Rabbi Shmuley Boteach and became President of the L’Chaim Society, the local chapter of Chabad, and brought together a diverse community there.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Booker
You call that shocking? That Michelle Obama actually gave some consideration to the fact that the Obama girls would have to pull up stakes and leave their friends in the middle of a school year?
As for Obama’s ex-girlfriends, they obviously have class and discretion. Come to think of, who did John McCain date while he was at Annapolis? Who did Bill Clinton date while he was at Georgetown? Who did Sarah Palin date before she married Todd? I don’t know, and I don’t care.
Full disclosure – I went to high school with one of the women who dated Clinton while he was at Georgetown, something she has mentioned to friends but she has never gone public with it.
I’m trying to find the link, but I read (not 2nd hand), that McCain lived with a stripper for 6 months after graduating. McCain was also one of the Keating Five. McCain is a successful graduate of the Spiro Agnew School of Public Administration.
Amen to that! I 100% agree.
A few months back, my wife & I were talking about how Elizabeth Warren would make a great dream candidate for 2016 too!
Not that we seriously have any idea what the landscape or candidate pool will really be 4 years out…but it is always nice to harmlessly speculate like that, similar to how Misha has picked Booker for the pool and how on the right, they’ve already been talking about 2016 for several years now and names like Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal and Marco Rubio are often bandied about…
True story – Back in 2004, when my wife and I were introduced to Obama for the 1st time, hearing his historic Keynote Speech at the 2004 DNC; I turned to her right after the speech and said the first thing that came to my mind – “one day, that man is going to be President!” And she agreed that would be an amazing thing…
Dude,
You stink. As a human being, you stink. Really. And you have less credibility than the National Enquirer.
Look at this crap, for example – “I think it is fair to ask whether or not Obama is gay. There are a lot of clues indicating that he is.”
There are no clues, you just made that poop up.
Here’s more crap – “Here’s some more great evidence that the Obama marriage is not what it seems to be. See this shocking report from Politico”
That ain’t shocking, and it ain’t evidence of anything except concern for children. I would think a “family values” kind of a$$hole would care about children, but I guess you’re not that kind of a$$hole.
Did your career really sink so low that the only way you can make a living these days is to milk birthers with BS?
Not that I care that much but..you seem obsessed about Obama’s ex-girlfriends yet as I keep pointing out- we don’t have a single piece of actual evidence that you ever had a girlfriend. You claim Boss was your GF in college, but she refuses to acknowledge that you were involved- whats up with that?
You can ask about Obama’s sexuality- like you can ask about Nixon’s- but it is pretty crass, pretty sleazy- and when you go from ‘asking’ to speculating it becomes pretty disgusting.
John- your last post makes it clear that you are more interested in salicious gossip than actual discussion.of substance.
I have asked 2 times now for you to elaborate on your ‘Marxist’ claims but you keep avoiding that.
Isn’t it odd, that a self proclaimed ‘renowned’ political science would rather speculate about a President’s sexual preferences than discuss what Marxism is and how you believe a President is a Marxist?
I’m very sorry, but you have libeled the National Enquirer. That newspaper excels as a liner for Max’s litter box. You owe my cat and the entire staff at their Florida headquarters, an apology.
If an apology is not immediately forthcoming, you will be hearing from my personal attorney, Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. She will be accompanied by Israel’s Foreign Minister. Don’t forget Avigdor Lieberman was a bouncer before being elected, and he doesn’t take kindly to insults.
I guess there was a good reason for Williams to deny you a path for tenure after all. A scholar you are not.
Hugs and kisses from your favorite pink cheer leader 0x0x0
I think it is obvious to all here that “John C. Drool” is a charlatan and a poseur.
His various statements about Europe, Health Care and Marxism were a mixture of lies, distorted half-truths and deranged rants, easily disproved.
His strange obsession with your President’s sex life is “icky” and his use of the word “unAmerican” evokes a dark period in your history.
He only deserves our contempt.
I think it is a fair question to ask whether or not Obama has really lived up to the traditional values that he presents to the American voters. It makes sense to me that he wrote Dreams From My Father, in large measure, to make himself a sympathetic public figure. A lot of young politicians write books about themselves as part of a larger effort to build their charisma.
The media, however, seems to be awfully slow in testing Obama’s claims against the truth. If he was really as popular with the ladies as he asserts he was in his book, then what is wrong with asking the president to give us their names and allow some mainstream reporters to investigate their stories.
Right now, however, we have zero evidence that these relationships really existed as Obama asserts they did. The one girlfriend mentioned in detail in Dreams is actually a dead ringer for Bill Ayers’s old girlfriend Diane Oughton – right down to the eyes and the family owned lake. When I interacted with young Obama, I can report I never saw him with a young woman, certainly not with two girls sitting on his lap as Lisa Jack asserts.
We seem to demand evidence and proof of claims from everyone else in Obama’s life – including me. What’s so terrible about having Obama open up the doors to his past a little more and helping us understand if the traditional image created by him and Michelle to win votes is, in fact, a truthful image or just an act that they put on to promote a political marriage?
One photograph of young Obama with a girlfriend. Just one interview with one girlfriend. Is that too much to ask?
Gaah – I read far too much of this – with a morbid fascination! I guess it’s all been said – the Dr obviously is an immature person who keeps shouting “The President is a gay commie” on no evidence whatsoever.
One thing which struck me was the PhD’s lack of civility and empathy. I am a European who lived in the US for several years, in the eighties. At that time I was impressed by the high level of politeness which most Americans showed. My countrymen used to say “It’s all superficial, they are not really interested how you are”, but I found the general effect rather positive.
Contrast this with Dr Drew’s reaction to misha’s report on his terrible illness. In total, it was “Tell me about your stroke” and “Do you smoke and drink now?”
I guess there were other reasons besides “Publish or perish” why Dr Drew did not get tenure.
And, misha: I do hope you recover completely – and soon! It would be awful if, additionally, you had to fight with the consequences of the election of one of the current crop of GOP presidential candidates.
Wait a minute. I thought they had feuded over the Russian elections. Avigdor calling them honest and fair. Orly fasting one full day (of twenty-four full hours) over the plight of a dehydrated Stalinist fringe politician.
Of course, with all those trials all over the country (and just you wait, she has not started anything in London, The Hague or Geneva yet) , she may not have the time to read Avigdor’s e-mails.
Either that or the sovershenno-sekretnye instructions on how to deal with the Russian elections got stuck in her Yahoo.
I also want to second Bromm and wish Misha full recovery.
On this day, which for my family is really Christmas Day, I wish everybody new happiness and health in the coming year.
The current crop of GOP candidates is a mix of crackpots, Neanderthals, and religious extremists. I’m waiting for the reincarnation of William Jennings Bryan to complete the show. He’d be right at home.
Just curious, where do you live? My e-mail is in my profile. I have lived twice outside of the States: one year in a Negev kibbutz, and six months in Kaohsiung, Taiwan with my wife’s family.
By most people’s lights, traditional values would counsel that you remain celibate until you meet the love of your life and then marry that person and remain faithful until death. So, a lack of premarital lovers would in fact be traditional values to a tee. Other traditional values, such as chivalry, would dictate that you keep who you have slept with to yourself. So anyone who was involved with someone who later became famous and keeping that to themmselves would agaiin be following traditiional values.
John’s “traditional values” seem to involve multiple pre-marital dalliances, probably serial marriages a la Gingrich (with plenty of fellatio from random strangers on the side) and immediately blabbing about said goings-on on Twitter, Facebook and the Springer show.
Given that I find Nixon to be an intriguing character to study, a study of great contrasts, I have spent more time reading about him then most any other president. Yet, it is not until reading Drew that I found anybody really interested in asking about his sexuality. I see an rather unhealthy obsession in this thinking,
As for Michelle considering what is best for the children and the family, it sounds like she understands family and traditional values much better than those who are obsessed with hate.
Isn’t the stereotype for that group known as “trailer trash”?
It’s probably all that premium pancake syrup that’s gummed up her Yahoo.
My goodness, Dr Droop is STILL around and being slapped around….
I feel I must add to my previous statement abut him
The entire set of this individuals posts lead one to the inevitable conclusions that he is a fabulist with at best a tenuous grasp of facts a particularly bad case of passive-aggresive entitlement and masochistic desires to go with his barely cloaked homosexual tendencies
bovril,
I also find it interesting that Mr. Drew’s “traditional values” don’t seem to include children (or he’s a flaming hypocrite–but what are the odds of that?). I think that President Obama is more in line with mainstream America than Johnny on this one, too…
Yes.
They always said when I was growing up that the preacher who harangued about one particular sin all the time was likely to be guilty of it himself.
Can we have an interview with one of your girlfriends from 1980?
It would seem to me that yours is a particularly stupid remark, given that Barack Obama was not a pubic figure when he wrote the book.
There does seem to be a morbid fascination with the subject.
John,
Yes, it is too much to ask. For over 3 years the birther movement has been making a demand (one never made to a previous president) that boils down to “papers please”–and has willingly associated itself with blatant and despicable racism. In light of this history, your sad, Quixotic quest to smear President Obama with your own projected sins is too much to ask. Is it too much to ask that you do us all a favor and slink back to the rock you crawled out from under?
Still avoiding substantive discussion John.
Still preferring salacious gossip over discussing Marxism.
I think the reason you didn’t get tenure is that they wanted a serious academic, not an office gossip.
I think it is a fair question to ask whether or not you can produce any actual evidence that any of the stories you tell are true. It makes sense to me that your story about the Palo Alto debate was, in large measure, an attempt to make yourself a public figure.
Chalk that up as another failure.
Now, in the midst of mentions of family values, seems a fine time to steal from Borowitz again…
“When asked whether he would quit the race after Iowa, Gingrich responded, ‘Does it have cancer yet?'”
Does this mean New Hampshire and South Carolina are getting diamond necklaces from Gingrich’s account at Tiffany’s?
True, but McCain never gave out her real name and as far as I can tell no one has ever interviewed her.
Given his past track record, I believe that the answer is simple: Of course not… Even when confronted with the research by scholars who attempted to find evidence and found none, our poor friend will not be swayed.
Williams apparently understood this when they asked him to finish his final year and then to look for employment elsewhere.
Business in grant writing must be particularly slow… But as a self professed scholar, he does seem to take pleasure in any attention, negative or otherwise. What I find so fascinating is how he continues to fail to show much evidence of substantive scholarship qualities.
Fascinating though…
It’s a fair question that can be answered by looking at the facts. But they do not really support Drew’s beliefs and thus absence of evidence is turned into evidence. Speculation and rumor are preferred over facts, reason and logic.
I believe that Drew’s real problem with Obama is that his former ‘friend’ of two fleeting meetings, has managed to apply himself and become successful in politics. Drew himself tried once or twice but failed to achieve much traction. Our President not only became State Senator, but US Senator and then President. Some people may admire someone for this kind of success but I believe Drew sees success of others as a failure on his part.
What is worse, Obama and Drew, at one time found themselves in much the same position in life and look how quickly their paths diverged.
Anything that has no relevance to his job performance, and which is none of your damn business to boot, is too much to ask.
But you don’t seem to have the intelligence to understand that. I sincerely wonder how you managed to graduate high school.
Reading these comments, I’m really startled at our reaction to the obvious problems created for Obama when there is zero independent collaboration of the claims he makes in Dreams to having had girlfriends.
Ironically, people posting here see nothing inconsistent in looking the other way regarding Obama’s claims to heterosexuality while demanding mountains of evidence from me about whether or not I was really interviewed by David Garrow, whether or not young Obama’s friends were Marxists.
All I’m doing is demanding the same level of detail to back up Obama’s claims in Dreams that you are demanding of me regarding my meeting young Obama,
We know about Abraham Lincoln’s girlfriends before he met Mary Lincoln. Folks like Gore Vidal seem fascinated to identify possible examples which demonstrate Lincoln was gay.
What is so terrible about asking a sitting president to verify the claims he made about himself in his own book. This is an issue of honesty and integrity. It is an issue of whether or not Obama is a serial liar willing to deceive the public about the smallest details of his life simply to win elections.
Obama is the sort of nut who didn’t quit smoking until he was in his 40s. This alone, by the way, shows there is something questionable about his intelligence. Obama also lied to reporters about his smoking according to Jerome Corsi. Obama is clearly the sort of person who feels no guilt when he hids the truth from others in order to gain political advantage. Think about it. Obama was smoking cigarette even after he was living in the White House. No one of intelligence smokes cigarettes – we know they cause stroke, heart attacks and lung cancer.
I can’t believe you put Obama on some sort of pedestal as being smarter than the rest of us when his actual behavior demonstrates a deep and abiding history of lies and dangerous risky behavior. The fact that Obama was still smoking cigarettes in his 40s ought to be proof to many that he is the sort of deviant, risk-taking guy described by Larry Sinclair and not the traditional values guy he pretends to be to the American voters.
Since Dr. Conspiracy isn’t printing my best comments anymore (I’ll publish this at my own Anonymous Political Scientist blog site too.)
If there were publicly identified early love interests of Obama’s, John Drew and other RWNJs would surely be engaging in talk of hidden baby mamas and other racist dog whistles. On the other hand, if Obama were a right-wing politician, they would say that his lack of publicly identified early love interests was a sign of his dedication to God and how he lived a properly chaste life before marriage.
For the poor unfortunate former girlfriend and her family (and possibly children) who would be hounded by the press and libeled by the birthers, all because she dated another student 30 years ago, I believe the answer would be a resounding, YES!!! You and other birthers have quite the cavalier attitude towards the privacy of innocent people whose only crime was knowing the President at an earlier time in their life. Many people are self-assured of their own worth without having to be validated by former associations with a famous person.
Bingo!
But let us return the favour with John- and ask why? Why all of this? Some have already suggested John may have a problem with homosexuality.
But let me be Sherlock Holmes here for a brief moment. The big “why” is also “WHY does John so vividly remember Obama – after all he only met him twice (let us forget that he once siad “once”)?
I am sure I would not have such vivid memories of a guy I nmet only twice, and who then disappeared from my circle of friends and the public eye for almost 25 years!
The born detective in me now goes looking for a connection in later years. Of course, it is possible that John read about Barry or Barack in newspapers – but since Obama was not on the first page until 2004, he must have been looking for news about Obama. Still leaves us at “why?”
The only connection between John and Obama in the time span after those two casual meetings is John’s girl friend at the time. Did she have sex with Obama – or worse still, did she when she broke up with John tell him “By the way, I tried to seduce that black guy from Hawaii and he told me that he could not have sex with someone who had been in a relationship with a loser liked you.”
Before I cast away the pipe and the violin, let me just say that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
Also we should remember that people who obsess over the inconsequential rarely, if ever, have anything consequential.
– Paul Pieniezny
I’ve been very honest in my public speeches that the primary reason I remember that debate with young Obama, Boss and Chandoo has a lot more to do with my disintegrating relationship with Boss than with my memories of the young Obama.
I remember being surprised by both Obama and Boss at their reaction to my suggeston that their view of Marxism was limited and inaccurate given contemporary realities. As I’ve said, I was still a Marxist at the time myself and I felt they were suggesting I had become some sort of cold-hearted reactionary after 1 1/2 years as a grad student in political science at Cornell University.
I think anyone who has been in love will understand why I have a vivid memory of that evening’s debate. No matter what, I would think a brief reading of David Remnick’s book, The Bridge, ought to be more than enough to convince an objective observer that young Obama and his friends were Marxists.
You have to be careful, many people overestimate the “waste” in the Anerican economy. It is a Luddite argument anyway – “waste” was an argument used by people who thought agriculture and artisanship created wealth, but industry and commerce did not – and later it was used by “industrial” nationalists who could not bear the thought of an economy based on service industries with all the industrial jobs gone abroad.
Actually, the Wikipedia article on GDP per capita
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita
mentions two other statistics which put the USA above Germany (the most important Euro country). The World Bank, who are probably better than the CIA at evaluating the local purchasing value of national currencies, actually puts the USA at number seven, rather than number nine. Probably connected to the fact that the World Bank also takes a better view of the BRICS (most of whom have a policy of undervaluating their currency against the dollar).
However, your argument about debt is unrefutable. You need to be blind or not be watching much television to not know that the average German has more to spend or save after paying for real or possibly imaginary necessities than the average US citizen. The reason why Germans (on average) do not have debt problems are obvious:
1) the health service may not be as socialized as in Britain, but it is long established (goes back to Bismarck) and the average German knows he can depend on it – he will not go bankrupt when he falls ill just after losing his job or when contracting a costly disease that is not covered by his health insurance company
2) Germans have been paying into pension funds since Bismarck as well. Pensions that are paid out now are not a redistribution of the money that is paid into the system now (as is happening in a lot of other European countries) but capital that was accuimulated in the past.
One nice side effect of 2) is that Germans do not buy a house when they are 25 and mortgage themselves to the hilt, as often happens in the US, but increasingly in the United Kingdom as well, but are perfectly comfortable renting an apartment (oops, did I say that the rising of residential rent in Germany is by law tied to the offical cost of living index). Germans have nice holidays (it is healthy too) and save whatever remains to actually buy that drem house when they are 50 and do not need to take out steep mortgages.
I was 52 when I bought my house. No problem getting a 15-year mortgage term – the bank knew I would still be able to pay from my pension, and I only needed to borrow 50% of the price mortgage anyway.
To catch up with the expected competitiveness increase in the BRICS, the Euro would have to lose 25% of its value against the currencies of these five countries, but the dollar would have to lose 50%. (and now use a calculator and re-compute the figures in the wikipedia article)
It will probably happen in some mixed way or other, BRICS will revalue, unwillingly, the dollar will decline as well and the rest of the equation will be picked up by higher interest rates in the countries that refuse to devalue.
Still, I do not think 2012 will be the end of the world.
“You and other birthers”
I haven’t read anything that indicates he’s a birther.
Despicable almost beyond belief? Yes, but not a birther. Is there something I missed?
In his time in the Fogbow it was clear that John is many things, but a birther is not one of them. By the way, John is posting his whines (that Doc isn’t letting through) on his very own blog. No link as I can’t imagine anyone cares…
Which is actually kind of interesting. Someone with an obvious personal and political agenda who doesn’t hesitate to go down very dark paths and lie, spin and insinuate to anyone who will listen draws the line at birther b.s. Go figure.
>John is many things, but a birther is not one of them.
I think that he could be called a birther in a looser but appropriate sense. Birther twaddle includes a number of delusional assertions concerning President Obama that have little or nothing to do with his place of birth, such as the social security number follies and the “never attended Columbia” fantasy.* Drew’s role as a star witness in Manning’s “trial of the century” earns him the appellation “birther” in the larger sense.
_________
* I suppose the purported connection between the circumstances of the President’s birth and his social security number is that it was his lack of good “papers” that led to the ss number “fraud” and … I’m sure that there’s some equally strained train of thought that leads to the Columbia fantasy, but I can’t bring it to mind. But in any event, the connection of these claims with the circumstances of the President’s place of birth is attenuated, to say the least.
If you think buying young and overspending is nuts—and yes, I vividly recal working with 20somethings in Vegas back in ’04 who were killing themselves racing after $400K cloned McMansions—a 72-yr old neighbor of mine bought a house in 2006, 30-yr mortgage, $0 down, ~5%. She is a dear woman and a great friend …. but no sane, conscious entity would underwrite such a loan!
Getting back on topic, did Obama have time to check out the real estate situation on Mars? Perhaps he had time to make some long-term investments there?
High Plains Grifter Lucas Smith might have canal front property if you don’t mind that it’s haunted.
His birther buddy Bruce will set up a seance for you but be forewarned that he only communicates out of his butt.
Paul, that was EXCELLENT analysis! Thank you!
I think a simpler way of viewing this is saying that John suffers from an extreme form of ODS (Obama Derangement Syndrome) and that Birtherism is just one particular subset of that manifestiation and John is clearly another…
And to follow-up on what Slarti mentioned – yeah, I definitely don’t care at all what that extremely damaged loser posts on his own obscure blog. He’s just another random hateful twit and simply not worth lookin up or reading. He can continue to fling poo within the confines of his own lonely walls until his dying day and the rest of the world can simply go on without notice.
Paul:
I agree with everything you wrote, but you might have misconstrued my meaning.
I was referring: (a) to the % of the financial sector in the US GDP. For more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization
and (b) how much of that is worthless, ie: what’s commonly referred by some economists as the “big sh*tpile” or “cr*p assets”.
Reasonable people may agree to disagree on the numbers, but there is no doubt a not insubstantial portion of the US GDP is basically worthless.
Which is why people who use that metrics to impress me on how well the US is doing, don’t.
It’s gonna be rough on you but maybe in some screwed up way, that’s the best thing that can happen to you…stop trading for the quick buck and go produce something with your life, create, don’t live off the buying and selling of others…
Oliver Stone tried to tell us, Lupin, but we didn’t listen. Gekko just seemed so much cooler 😉
(I know it isn’t funny)
A simple analogy I have used successfully with my friends here is to compare it to betting on horses.
Suppose you bet $1 million on the poneys; can you take these betting slips and put them on your balance sheet as assets worth $1 million? No. Can you go to the bank and borrow, say, $800,000 secured by these same slips? No.
Yet, this is what Wall Street (and the City of London) have done.
There are possibly over a trillion dollars in “betting slips” — ie CDOs and other more complex instruments based themselves on said CDOs — infecting the financial system.
That’s why I believe that using GDP as a metric of anything presently is misleading.
Clearly there is room for arguments and experts may disagree, so I’m not going to be dogmatic about it. But it’s a far cry from John Drool’s pathetic little lies.
Let me add that although there were a lot of evil Frenchmen (such as the egregious Fabulous Fabrice — google him up) and Germans and Italians participating in the global looting, institutionally speaking the blame (as it were) lies squarely with Wall Street & the City.
Thrifty is going to take me to task again, but your financial elites have conducted economic warfare against Europe that is arguably far more reaching in consequences than Bin Laden’s war against the US. The “Let’s doom Europe” meme was going on actively in anglo-saxon financial circles since at least 2003 as far I can recall.
That war hasn’t been conducted with bombs, guns, drones and jumbo jets, but it’s been pretty devastating nonetheless.
Obviously the 99% in America are not only innocent of this, but victims too. But then how many Iraqis were really guilty of Saddam’s crimes?
Oops. Having heard the same style argument coming from birthers, I fell into the same labeling trap that various trolls use here (liberal, marxist, obot, socialist, etc.) without checking the correctness of my statement. It probably does not help that I skipped over many of his comments and missed his full background. My bad.
I correct my statement to be: “You and others, such as some of the birthers, have quite a cavalier attitude toward…”
why? does it make one iota of difference which way he swings?
do you think that we´ll see something like this….`
`mr president, the iranians are blocking the straights of homuz!´
`sorry guys, but i´m off to a bathouse to pack some fudge for the next 3 days, you sort it out´.
get real!
i don´t give a tinkers damn what someone does with their bits, it´s none of my business, and if they´re doing their job it´s none of yours either. when it becomes your business under those circumstances we call it obsession.
the poster his freinds hung up…..yet again, big deal. i have had associations with the extreme right wing in england, not from my own political standpoint (which was mostly opposite), but because some of my freinds were that way inclined. you´d probably find a photo of me and some of them in a flat under a swastika flag if you looked hard enough, but i was in no way shape or form a nazi.
likewise, big deal if he did some dope in his younger years. at the beginning of the 80´s i was running around on bikes, doing dope, shagging anything with a pulse, and generally beinga pain in the arse to all and sundry. now i´m running a suscessful small business, married and monogamous with a family, and considered a valued person in my community.
still got a bike though 😀
your president may have done some stuff you don´t like in his younger days, but that was then and this is now. what we experience makes us who we are and gives us different persectives on life. better he went wild young and settled down later when it was all out his system
better still having someone in a powerful position who has plenty of real world experience.
Thrifty is not the only one who will take you to task Lupin. No doubt there are speculators in London and New York who saw an opportunity to make money shorting Euro-zone debt or buying CDSs and took it. But, the problems of the Euro-zone are 100% made in Europe. They chose to set up a currency union without common fiscal or taxing authority. Such structures have never worked (eg,, the US under the Articles of Confederation) and have always ended in either collapse or a real federal union. The Europeans were warned about this by many, including Americans such as Paul Krugman.
Moreover, once the crisis hit, European leaders persued policies almost exactly designed to make matters worse. The ECB raised rates several times as the crisis was developing, exactly the opposite policy followed by the central banks in the US, the UK, and Canada. They have had countless summits, which have failed to solve the problems and often made them worse. This, despite being begged to change course by Geithner, Bernanke and others.
Sorry, but your thesis that doesn’t wash. The Euro was poorly designed from the get-go and was designed by the Europeans and no one else. Look in the mirror, mon ami.
Again, I do not agree that all these new financial products are necessarily crap. A lot of it is obviously (se JPotter’s example).
A lot of it is also “dangerous” non-crap, as based on the looting of commodities from less developed countries. If that means your country needs an army that can fight two wars at the same time, that cannot be good for a country’s wealth in the long term (it would be interesting to try to find out what The Wealth of Nations said about that).
But a financial product that allows poorer people to buy their home – AND actually provides a way for them to indeed repay the loan, even if the taxman pays part of the interest, must be a good thing.
Of course, relaxing bank rules to the point where a bank can get away with loaning a mini-fortune to a 72-year old refundable in 30 years, cannot be part of that deal.
In the end, you cannot have a healthy financial sector if there is no guarantee that almost all, or let’s say 95% of the money earned, saved and entered into the sector (mostly from China) will be paid back by the people who used the money (mostly American lenders). The supporters of bank regulation claimed you could actually insure against the risk. Smoke and mirrors, really and it became double smoke and mirrors (sh*tpile) when they turned even those insurance policies into a financial product
I was a bit afraid that you were going for the simple approach I found here:
http://dieoff.org/page11.htm
though I agree that even that one (it dates from 1995) ominously mentions the growing dependence of US GDP on borrowing from abroad.
The Hanseatic League is a counter-example. No one knows how long they would have lasted, if it had not been for the rise of Spain and England as a result of the discovery of America, and for the religious wars in the 16th century. Think about this: protestantism owes its very existence to the Hanseatic League.
Of course, most of the Euro’s problems are the results of mistakes made by governments and banks in the Euro zone. When the time came to evaluate the losses caused by subprime (of course, European banks too hd invested money in these “financial products”, banks were told to get their house in order. That is when their over-exposure to loans form Greece, Portugal and Italy was discovered. And then it turned out that Greece had been a bad boy, like Lehman Brothers had been.
But there is a war aspect here, as Lupin claimed. American rating agencies who only ten years ago considered Lehman Brothers a safe “bet” (and we now know why we call it a bet, right?), now rank Greece a worse risk than several countries in Africa. That cannot be right.
And even that dwarfs against the crocodile mentality of the London City, where some people still dream about the pound as a world currency, and are hoping that if the Euro disappears, they will have their ancient toys (francs, marks, pesetas and liras) back to speculate against.
That last hope may be the reason why it is not going to happen.
As for the European Union not being able to react in time. Remember, Lehman Brothers (the first sign something was amiss) went down on September 16th, 2008. Compare this to the Great Crash: the Dow Jones had its “Black Thursday” on October 24, 1929. Virtually nothing was done to help the US economy until April 5, 1933 when FDR signed Executive Order 6102 making the private ownership of gold certificates, coins and bullion illegal, reducing the pressure on Federal Reserve gold – a measure both the Keynesians and the monetarists applauded (even Hayek at one time claimed it had become a necessary antidote to the money tightening during the first two years after the crash).
It is not like a centralized government body is always going to take the necessary decisions within the first three years.
Paul-OK, I guess the Hanseatic League is a counter-example, though today’s economy is so different from the late Middle Ages that it is hard to draw too many conclusions. The fact is that when the Euro was being formulated, a great many economists warned of the potential for exactly the type of crisis we are seeing today.
The ties of the current Euro sovereign debt crisis to the US sub-prime are quite weak, other than in the case of Ireland. Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain are not in debt because they bailed out banks from losses on US MBSs. Also, Spain and Ireland (and the UK) had property bubbles at least as big as the US did. Now, of course the global recession of 2008-09 was a big factor in stressing the Euro system. But to design a monetary union on the basis that a global recession would never happen is surely a great folly.
As for African countries with soveriegn debt rated higher than Greece, that may well be justified. Many African countries have hard commodity exports with ready global markets. What does Greece have to sell (unless they auction the Parthenon)? Also, check out current growth rates in many African countries. They are quite high, while Greece and much of Europe are contracting.
Certainly the US blew the response to 1929. But they obviously learned their lesson, as shown by the response to Lehman. 2 days after Lehman, AIG was rescued. TARP was proposed a few days later, voted on a few days after and when it failed, voted on again and passed a week or so later. The number of actions taken wiithin a month of Sept 16 was quite astounding. If Europe chose the example of the US in 1929-33, rather than 2008-09, whose fault is that?
Remember that one? That makes him a neo-birther. At least.
Good point.
(Brought to you by Birther Lite. Zero sense of a regular birther but with zero taste as well.)
Overhere, you will not get a mortgage without a special life insurance policy that will pay back the bank in case you die within the period you have to pay the mortgage.
A bank that would not insist on it, would be held by the courts to have acted criminally, since speculating that your client will NOT repay would be a crime.
And the government refuses tax exemtions for mortgages if you do not have such a life insurance.
Intolerable governmental intervention?
Well, I have it on good authority that there is one (1) Hawaiian living there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars,_Pennsylvania
I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree here. But you may want to look up info on Dexia Bank. They did get into trouble over subprime, and before 2008 diverted part of the risk into Greek bonds. Too late NOT to be hit by the subprime crisis at all, however. I suppose they went for Greece because they did not dare to tell their customers that they would have to be content with lower yields.
The subprime crisis (and you are right, that was when Ireland and the Baltics got into trouble as countries) did cause the European Central Bank to look at all the risks involved with bank lending. I do not know how much Spanish banks lent to Portugal and Greece, but that was when Spain was added to the countries in trouble, with France and Belgium joining the “almost” list.
So, it is not like nobody is doing anything. Hungary and Latvia prove that you do not need the Euro to go virtually bankrupt in the Greek way, and strangely both Estonia with and Lithuania without the Euro are closely following market trends in Germany.
Oh, we have the same here, but not as a reasonable requirement; it’s offered as an additional profit center for the bank! Similar to overdraft “protection”. From time to time, my mortgage company includes a flyer for just such a policy in the monthly statement, offering to sell me a policy that will pay off my mortgage in case of death, and only the outstanding mortgage balance, fixed premiums (setting up a diminishing return) at rates that, if compared to a term policy purchased independently, are beyond usurious!
So yes, the concept is not foreign, but unregulated, and offered in ways not at all in the borrower’s interest, in my experience. Retail banks here are shamelessly willing to fleece their customers. Again, short-term thinking, grab the quick buck now, $1 today beats $3 later.
Don’t leave Iceland out of the discussion of banks run wild!
Surprisingly perhaps, I completely agree with you vis vis the horrendous policies of the ECB, and also on the critics made by Krugman amongst others. Like economist Duncan Black (Atrios), I also think the current policies pursued by our governments are terrible.
That said, I’m looking at the overall destabilization of the financial world order that preceded the current European crisis, Lehman Bros, AIG and the likes, which began with the financial deregulation in the US. Wall Street has insured or bet on all kinds of derivatives connected to Europe – on energy, currency, interest rates, and foreign exchange swaps. Robert Reich mentioned the figure of $2.7 TRILLION.
One of the ironies is some European nations (Ireland for instance) went deeply into debt in the first place bailing out their banks from the crisis that began on Wall Street.
No, mon ami, Wall Street is at the center of this, and the wealth being siphoned off our countries isn’t going to our people but to your (and some of our) bankers.
I will heartily agree with that, but will add that both responses are deeply wrong; yours simply enrich your bankers more quickly and more blatantly.
Johnny,
Do you understand that you just completely discredited your observations of President Obama? By your own admission, your perceptions were colored by your highly emotional state. You were obviously in no condition to make objective observations–especially regarding any other males in your soon-to-be-ex’s life. I’m sure you believe that you are accurately recounting your memories, but I am equally sure that those memories have been significantly edited (unconsciously) to make them more palatable to you.
Congratulations, you’ve just proven that your opinion is worthless in any serious discussion about President Obama! Way to go, John!
Well, I’m a little creeped out at your prurient interest in President Obama’s sex life–are you trying to convince yourself that he didn’t get between you and Ms. Boss or something?
You are trying to make extraordinary claims without providing any supporting evidence–let alone extraordinary evidence. I don’t care whether or not President Obama is gay, straight or bi–as long as his answer works for him and Michelle, that’s fine. I don’t care whether or not he is Christian, Muslim, or atheist, either. His mother had very nuanced views regarding spirituality (not surprising for an anthropologist) and I’m sure his own religious views are as well (as opposed to what I’m sure are your own simpleminded and hackneyed views on religion…), but I don’t need to know about it and I certainly don’t have a right to force President Obama to talk about it any more than he chooses to. What I do care about is how he does his job–you know, like making a bunch of highly popular recess appointments to spotlight the Senate’s obstructionism. On the balance I like what the Obama administration has done (with a few exceptions), and I think that a second term would be far better for our country than any of the Republican candidates.
President Obama is observed to have a happy and healthy family, so claims that he is heterosexual are ordinary and require minimal evidence to be presumed true. No reliable source says that President Obama is gay and there is no evidence of it whatsoever, therefore your claims are exceedingly weak and should be ignored.
Gore Vidal is speculating about something that has merely philosophical and historical implications while you are trying to smear President Obama with lies in a blatant attempt to damage him politically which also seems to include a good deal of projection on your part–as well as some ego defense as you seem to associate President Obama with ideas that came between you and Ms. Boss even if President Obama didn’t actually come between you and Ms. Boss romantically. See the difference?
I would think that someone who calls themselves a political scientist would understand that background matters most the first time someone is elected president and job performance matters most for re-election. That you want to focus on his past and his character tells me that you really want to avoid focusing on the actual issues of governance. Why is that?
Now your an expert in addiction as well–and asserting that only people of questionable intelligence are addicts? Personally, I question the intelligence of a person who continually reminds everyone of how good he was 30 years ago, but that’s just me.
Jerome Corsi is known for lying about President Obama. “Liar lies” is “Dog Bites Man”–in other words, completely unremarkable (and unconvincing).
Funny to hear you say that, as all you’ve been doing has been obfuscating the truth in an incompetent attempt to gain political advantage…
Right wing hacks like yourself (and the birthers) are the only ones I see talking about putting President Obama on a pedestal. He’s the president, not the messiah and expecting otherwise is idiocy–and right now your ilk has nearly cornered the market on idiocy. By the way, please continue attaching your credibility to Larry Sinclair–it will help it sink faster…
Boo-hoo! It doesn’t really matter as I doubt your blog has much of a readership–beyond people that think your idiocy is comic genius (like me) and people who have been brainwashed to think your type of idiocy is genius (like birthers). I hope you enjoy your future of insignificance as there is really no reason for anyone to care what you think.
As I pointed out, that is true in the case of ireland. But Greece is not in debt because Greek banks suffered sub-prime losses. Greece was running deep deficits before the crisis and lied about them to get in the Euro. Their fundamental problem is the complete lack of an industrial base. What do they produce besides olives? Similar (though not quite as bad) for Portugal.
Spain has an industrial base, but it had a homegrown real estate bubble just as bad as the US (so did Ireland). The regional governments also have run bad deficits. Italy? They have not grown since 2001. Through boom and bust, no growth. A political system that produced mostly bunga bunga parties. Italians voted for their clown, not Americans, who have their own clowns, AKA the Republicans.
I’d like to discuss the thoughts embedded in this phrase a little.
It implies that you were once a Marxist and that you are no longer a Marxist.
Exactly what does it mean to be no longer a Marxist? What does an ex-Marxist believe in as a political ethos? Does it mean you are now comfortably to the right of Genghis Khan? Or perhaps you are now a Maoist? A televangelist? Perhaps a Johnson liberal? Or a Goldwater Conservative?
I’m asking because if, as you seem to be claiming, Obama was a Marxist in College, or at least Marxist-curious, or even perhaps only interested in Marx because he thought it would help him get close to your girlfriend, it would be great to know what an ex-Marxist Obama should be espousing.
What I mean is, if you were a Marxist and now you aren’t then maybe Obama was a Marxist and now he isn’t.
If that is the case, then we need to know exactly what every ex-Marxist should believe so we can measure Obama against that standard and decide if he is an ex-Marxist or not.
A couple of years ago, in another forum, I related the fact that the (at the time) conservative Government in Australia was seriously considering regulating CDO’s as a gambling activity. The suggestion actually came from the Australian Finance sector.
The reason that the Finance sector wanted it was because profits from gambling is not taxed in Australia unless you are a ‘professional gambler’ and derive a majority of your income from gambling (guess how much of a hurdle that would be for a bank).
It seemed pretty much a goer until somebody pointed out that Australia also forbids gambling on overseas internet sites and has even gone so far as to try to get Visa and other credit card companies to refuse to allow Australian accounts to pay into overseas gambling sites. Oops.
On that other forum, a Chicago corporate lawyer who helps package CDO’s went apoplectic that CDO’s could possibly be considered gambling. It’s insurance he said. I said, but the Australian Finance Sector thinks otherwise, he said that the Aussie’s didn’t know their butt from a hole in the ground, its a form of insurance. I said the Aussie’s recovered from the Global Financial Crisis inside of 6 months, and the USA isn’t going to do it inside of 6 years. He shut up.
Hilarious…. Poor John, a scholar he is not but he surely despises our President and is willing to avoid reason, logic and fact when making his foolish claims.
Was that not obvious from the start. It took me less than a few postings at the Fogbow to establish this… John fell straight into the ‘trap’ and basically made himself a very unreliable source.
My work was done. Now I am just having fun with the poor sod…
You have to remember that John is just a hysterical little man, not a wise woman like yourself–while his credibility issues have been clear to everyone else from the start, I don’t think that he’s been able to figure it out… 😉
Excellent analogy, Lupin! Very good and valid points. Thank you! 🙂
– Slartibartfest
It is unfair for you to attack me personally in an environment where – apparently – I’m not allowed to hit back at your personal attacsk by raising issues about you and your flaws. Kindly limit your comments here to the pertinent issues regarding whether or not it is reasonable to ask Obama to verify the claims he made about his life in Dreams From My Father.
Gore Vidal is asking questions about Lincoln’s sexuality. Another author is asking questions about Richard Nixon’s sexuality today. Why are you uncomfortable asking questions about Obama’s sexuality? The sexuality of a sitting U.S. president seems infinitely more important that asking these questions about Lincoln and Nixon.
Don’t you find it puzzling that of the four people who were part of that Marxism debate of 30 years ago that Obama is the only one we don’t know much about in terms of his sex life? My romantic ties are the object of scrutiny here, Boss’s ties are a matter of public record, Chadoo’s old girlfriend, Margot Mifflin is in the news all the time. (In fact, I think Mifflin and I offer some of the most honest and reliable comments on young Obama.)
Nevertheless, we don’t have a single person coming forward and discussing what it was like to be young Obama’s girlfriend. In other words, where is his Margot Mifflin? I also think it is odd that neither me or MIfflin can name any girl we ever saw young Obama with while he was at Oxy.
I have said, in my public speeches, that I thought he was gay when I first met him…this was long before the issue of Obama’s sexuality and lack of documentation of his girlfriends began to be a news item.
And this is not true just for his time at Oxy. There is no verifiable evidence of Obama having a girlfriend at Columbia, later in Chicago, or while he was starting out at Harvard Law School. There are no letters, no photos, no movies…nothing. We have movies of JFK with his college and graduate school sweethearts. Why is there nothing comparable for young Obama? He asserts he had sweethearts. It seems that Obama owes all of us information to help us determine if the traditional values story he tells about himself in Dreams is correct or not.
In my view, Larry Sinclair seems to offer a take on Obama that is a lot more consistent with the available evidence than the stories Obama tells about himself in Dreams. As I’ve said, where is Obama’s Margot MIfflin?
😉 Valid points and well put!
Kudos to you both for pointing that out.
Well what are our takeaways from Dr. Drew?
a) That putting a ‘Dr.’ in front of your name isn’t always a sign of accomplishment.
b) That anyone who still smokes an occasional cigarette at 40 is a deviant.
c) That he is more interested in gossiping about Presidents sex lives than in discussing political science.
oh and
d) he has absolutely no corroboration for his story that he ever met or spoke with President Obama.
I think corroboration is a moot point since he’s proven that his account can’t be trusted even if he is accurately reporting what is in his memory.
Yep.
There is no forum in which such rebuttal is moral.
Slartibartfast
Please… Thirty years ago doesn’t seem that long ago to me. I still remember conversations from my childhood.
My visit with young Obama was verified by Hasan Chandoo who was also interviewed by Ronald Kessler in 2010. Both Boss and Obama declined to comment on the story, but both were given a fair opportunity to shoot it down if they wanted to challenge it.
Hasan could have denied that the “debate” ever took place, but chose not to do so. I can document my relationship with Boss at that time and recently did so with a presidential historian, David Garrow.
My story came out prior to Remnick’s book so you can’t argue I got the idea that Obama and his friends were Marxists from Remnick.
Besides, my story is quite consistent with the events and ideologies reported by Remnick in The Bridge. Even nbc has to admit that in The Bridge one of Obama’s friends, Wahid Hamid, went so far as to say that Obama shared the same socialist thoughts as his friends.
Remnick also verified that Obama’s roommate, Hasan Chandoo, regarded himself as a Marxist. His girlfriend at the time, Margot Miffln, indicates he was a Marxist. Obama’s friends in the Democrat Socialist Alliance hung up a huge banner featuring Karl Marx in the Oxy quad. It’s not like I’m reporting anything that is, at all, inconsistent with what is being reported by David Remnick.
If anything, my story gives more credibility to Remnick’s book and suggests that he was on the right track but did not go far enough in studying and reporting on young Obama’s commitment to revolutionary thought. (Remnick, of course, is a liberal Democrat who would be expected to minimize Obama’s radicalism.)
I studied Marxist economics at Occidental College, studied political economy at Cornell University, and taught political economy courses at Williams College. It strikes me as bizarre that anyone would suggest I wasn’t capable of precisely deterimining young Obama’s ideolgocial views in 1980/1981.
Slartibartfest’s suggestion that I was not capable of having an accurate memory of these events is just silly – it was a highly dramatic moment in my own life for both intellectual and personal reasons. I can report that it appeared to have a dramatic impact on Obama’s views.
– Dr. Conspiracy
I’m just like you. I don’t read the forum’s rules before I participate. I simply mirror the sort of comments coming in from the other participants. I felt like you were allowing profoundly personal attacks against me, my truthfulness, my success in life, my scholarship and my job record and publication history. As I recall one person suggested that I didn’t have a traditional lifestyle simply because my wife and I were not able to have children. It looked to me like you were okay, intitially with me going after Slartibartfest on the same topics.
I feel like I’m in an awkward position where everything I write can, potentially, be used to harm my wife and myself and our small business. Many of my clients are liberals or others who do not vote the way I vote. Accordingly, I try to argue the facts regarding my face-to-face observations of young Obama and his friends, but then people posting here hit back with personal attacks about my “failures” as a political scientist and suggest that I went public with my personal take on young Obama for reason’s of jealousy, repressed homosexuality, or blind hatred of Obama. Give me a break! 🙂
I’m grateful that you are allowing me to post on a story that mentions my name. It is odd, however, to be in an environment where people are allowed to make the most extreme claims against me like suggesting I’m a birther, yet I’m some how the “dark” bad guy when I respond in kind.
I have a question for John Drew,
Obama won the election in 2008.
Did you speak out about Obama, and your concerns and prior knowledge, prior to the election? And will you provide links?
Or, is this all just a right wing operation throwing whatever dirt RW’ers can throw out there to prevent his re-election?
After all, if you knew him like you claim, and you thought he was gay, etc., surely you posted about this online 4-5 years ago…right?
The essential difference between you and the average poster here is that you are not a private individual, but rather someone who has by choice inserted himself into the controversy, someone asking us to believe in his personal testimony, and someone whose personal story is part of their argument.
The rule here is against using personal information about private individuals.
You’re a clever fellow and should be able to understand the distinction.
Your own writing here does more to damage your small business and your career prospects than anything someone else might accuse you of.
As for my innuendo about repressed homosexuality, that was to illustrate the invalid nature of the smears you make against the President, not to suggest anything about your actual sexual orientation.
Yes, it probably is unfair that I understand the ground rules here and you do not–life isn’t always fair. You have put yourself at issue with your unsupported allegations and I have questioned your veracity (as have many others) and you have proved either unable or unwilling to rebut any of the criticism, instead responding with straw man arguments (rebuttals to points that weren’t being questioned or weren’t relevant). It’s not my fault that you don’t have the wit and integrity to respond to challenges in good faith–which has nothing to do with you being a conservative and everything to do with you being a dishonest smear merchant. While I didn’t have a problem with your juvenile attacks against me (personally, I think they reflected very poorly on you…), it’s Doc’s site and he felt that they were inappropriate. I think you will find that if you address the arguments that other people make instead of the person making the argument then you wont have a problem. We’re all free to address your character because you have based your credibility and your arguments on it–on the other hand, I’m not asking you to take anything on my word or my authority, so trying to impeach my credibility doesn’t affect my arguments (which stand or fall based on their own merits). Furthermore, no one here has revealed anything about you–just discussed things which you yourself had raised (here and elsewhere). I hope this helps you understand the logical principles in play here–if you can’t figure them out, I suggest you slink away, as I sincerely doubt you’ve got a chance to win the game if you don’t understand the rules…
What happened when people suggested you were a birther?–I (and others) pointed out you’d never birfed, after which people discussed how the term should be defined and whether or not, in their opinion, you should be included. This is called rational discourse, maybe you should learn about it someday… That you even equate this to the things you said about me shows that you have no understanding of why your behavior was wrong–something I find very sad in a person who calls himself a Christian (which I feel certain you do).
Dr. Conspiracy:
Of course, I’m aware of the distinction. 🙂 I just don’t see Slartibartfest as a private individual.
SluggoJD:
Yes. I did everything I could to get out the word about young Obama’s Marxist perspective in 2008 including posting comments at the NYT The Caucus blogsite. Links to those blogsite comments are available in my “Even Republicans” article at American Thinker. See, http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/even_republicans_rejected_info_about_obamas_past.html
I’m still puzzled about why my take on young Obama did not create a greater stir in 2008. I feel I was vindicated by liberals like David Remnick in 2010. As far as I know, my take on young Obama was eventually featured in at least four books.
Kindly allow Doc to do the moderating.
The personal attacks on you arise specifically from the foolishness you are posting. Your attacks on Slartibartfast and others arise from vindictiveness and nothing else.
I understand that you will be incapable of seeing the difference, as you are incapable of seeing the stupidity of the drek you are posting.
Again, you just demonstrate how unqualfied you are to make the judgements you make.
How desirable is it for anyone to put a witness on any witness stand for an event that occurred several decades in the past? Not very. Why, because besides the simple reality that most memories fade, it is a simple common truth about how our brains work and recall information that which aspects we tend to remember in our live are very colored by a host of biases that cause them to be retained and that impact how we see them.
So no, perception bias is always a strong concern in looking at past memories. It is not really about the ability to recall as much as it is the human nature to color our perceptions of what transpired in the past as time marches along.
Second, of course it is absolutely absurd for you to claim you can “precisely determine” anything about someone else’s views based on the very limited and tangential exposure you had to that person.
Sorry, meeting a person briefly over 30 years ago during two college parties doesn’t qualify you to know anything about the man, how he lives or what he believes. Doesn’t matter that you claim to “know” other people who happened to “know” him either. Six degrees of separation games do not give you mystical powers of mind reading others.
You are simply delusional. Arrogantly so, but absolutely delusional and off-base in your absurd arrogance. You are certainly not qualified to make the snap judgements you make and you continue to demonstrate just how ill-qualified you are.
You are once again asking us to believe something extraordinary with no supporting evidence. By your own admission you were in the midst of a breakup with Ms. Boss that revolved around, at least in part, your (and her) self-identification as a “Marxist”. Obviously you would have been in a highly emotional state and your reaction to any male associate of Ms. Boss’s would have been highly prejudiced. This is pretty much a worst-case scenario for objectivity. Add in the demonstrated tendency for everyone to alter their own memories and the passage of 30 years and it is clear that your account has little to no evidentiary value. Although I believe it does provide insight into your psyche–and it isn’t flattering…).
Which certainly makes his belief that his career was derailed by affirmative action rather than his own incompetence ironic…
– Slartibartfest
Regarding my character, I think it is fair to point out that I have never spent a day in jail or a mental hospital. I don’t drink or smoke. I’ve been married for about 14 years to my wife. I’ve never been divorced. I run my own small management consulting business. I live in one of the safest and most beautiful parts of the nation. My clients are among some of the most prestigious charities and schools in the Southern California area. I’m a published author with an award-winning Ph.D. in political science. I’m an alternate on the Orange County Republican Central Committee. I have taught at public schools and worked at child-related charities, like Family Solutions, where I was subject to criminal background checks and child abuse background checks.
I just don’t see how anyone could look at my whole life and conclude, as you apparently have concluded, that I’m a “dishonest smear merchant” lacking in “wit and integrity.”
I mean really, do you even realize that I’m a human being with a family, friends, and business clients when you write something like that? My wife and I are risking everything we have (including our lives) to bring out the truth about Obama.
My take on young Obama was ridiculed by leftists in 2008. Today, however, is has been vindicated by liberal authors like David Remnick and Chistopher Andersen. It has appeared in numerous books and articles. I just don’t see how you can disregard my face-to-face report on young Obama’s ideological extremism by suggesting I’m stupid, illogical, immoral and dishonest. As a political scientist, I know that the left has a history of demonizing its opponents. I think you’re picking the wrong guy to demonize here…
Has anyone found a college girlfriend of Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, etc? Since they haven’t, it is clear they are all gay. Perhaps Ron Paul can request a waiver on the grounds that he is so old that anyone who went to college wiith him is llikely dead.
G.
I think you are not going to win over any swing voters with your argument. My take on young Obama was informed, in part, by my own listening to his views, by the comments about him made by both Boss and Chandoo, and by my knowledge of the Occidental College campus and the professors who were teaching young Obama including Prof. Roger Boesche.
You make it sound like I was some alien stranger who suddenly popped into Obama’s world, bumped against him, and had only a limited understanding of him.
When Boss indicated that Obama was “one of us” she was indicating a lot of things about Obama’s ideology and his commitment to Marxism and socialism. At this point, I would think that my detailed defense of my comments and the number of authors who have seen fit to publish my story would give you cause to doubt that my take on young Obama is simply due to my being “absolutely delusional.”
Frankly, at this point, if a person can’t tell that I’m telling the truth, then most likely they are the ones who are allowing their bias to overrun their common sense. My story is complex, multi-faceted and yet still a great fit with existing information regarding young Obama including his ties to Frank Marshall Davis and his later ties to Alice Palmer and Bill Ayers.
After all, as a grant writer, I could never make all this money for my clients if I was “absolutely delusional” as you assert. I make money by being ahead of the curve and extremely accurate in my claims and written expression. My comments here are evidence of why I was awarded the William Anderson Award from the APSA and why my management consulting business has supported me and my wife since 2002.
Really, I think it is unfair for you to write that I’m “absolutely delusional” given what you know about my public record. I would appreciate it if you limit your future comments to non-personal attacks that focus on the issue I raise instead of your take on my grip on reality.
Wasn’t Newt dating his girlfriends while he was married?
I’m sure Newt has no problem hanging the Nine Commandments in the courthouse as a morality reminder.
Newt once left his wife when she was dying of cancer (I believe for his current wife). Classy guy.
Just to be accurate, while she was being treated for cancer. She survived.
– scientist
We aren’t talking simply about there being no girlfriend for Obama at Occidental College, we are talking about why their is no collaborated evidence of him having any relationship with a girl at all prior to his meeting Michelle when he was 27 years old.
I have reported that my first impression of young Obama was that he was gay. Obama chose a very flamboyant, over-the-top gay professor, Lawrence Goldyn to be his mentor while he was attending Occidental College. See, http://www.reed.edu/reed_magazine/december2010/columns/alumni_profiles/gay_mentor.html FYI: I remember Goldyn to be an angry, creepy, controlling sort of guy.
Likewise, none of the books written about young Obama have included an interview with an ex-Obama girlfriend. There are, as far as I know, no photos of him even hanging out with girls as a young man. Obama’s friend in Hawaii, Frank Marshall Davis wrote a bisexual porn novel. Bill Ayers has admitted to his own bisexual behavior in published reports.
Right now, as far as I can tell, presidential historians are mapping out the social relationships of everyone who knew young Obama including me and the girl I was dating back at Occidental College who was a classmate of Obama’s. In this intense time of scrutiny, doesn’t it strike you as extremely odd that there is zero evidence to collaborate the image Obama created of himself in Dreams From My Father?
And denied that they were Marxist. You keep on avoiding this fact.
Only in your mind my dear deluded friend… Obama does not even appear to remember someone who claims that he had a ‘dramatic impact’ on Obama’s views.
No my dear friend, you have nothing other than your ‘memories’ of two fleeting meetings with our President 30 years ago, which have led you to make assertions that are contradicted by Obama’s best friends, as well as logic, reason and fact. Combine this with what appears to be a need for revenge and a feeling that, contrary to fact and evidence, you were discriminated again and we may understand why your memories do not seem to line up with those who knew President Obama.
Impressive background.
From your study and experience, can you please answer my question I posted above?
Exactly what does an ex-Marxist ‘look’ like. What are the attributes that I can compare with Obama that would tell me whether or not he has cast off the Marxist dalliance of his youth or not.
Please I’m waiting. So are 67 million other people that he may have fooled into thinking he is a rather less flaming radical than he was at the age of 20.
I emphasis that I only ask, because you claim to have thrown off the blinders of youthful intoxication with Marxism, and if you could do it, I’d like to find out if Obama did too.
nbc
You’re just losing all credibility. Remnick reports at least two sources who assert that Obama’s roommate, Hasan Chandoo, was a Marxist including Chandoo himself and his college girlfriend Margot Mifflin.
I think if Chandoo says he was a Marxist at the time, we should accept his own self-description, don’t you?
Meanwhile, Remnick reports that Boss was the co-president of a group that hung up a huge Karl Marx poster in a very visible location at Oxy.
Please remember, I was saying Obama and his friends were Marxists long before David Remnick verified my point of view in The Bridge. When I first said that Obama and his friends were Marxists I was ridiculed and attacked by liberal Democrats. When Remnick’s book came out, however, my take on young Obama and his friends was vindicated by a liberal author.
Keith:
One of the key features of Marxism that I saw in young Obama included his belief that a Communist style revolution was inevitable in the U.S. This is what I remember we were arguing about that night 30 years ago. This is not the belief of a socialist, it is the belief of a Marxist who holds to Karl Marx’s famous scientific socialism.
Here, as far as I can tell, I was the first person to confront young Obama with the silliness of this simplistic, discredited view of Marxist theory. I made the case that it was more important to participate in Democrat party politics than to prepare for, or plan for, an upcoming Communist revolution in the U.S.
Young Obama also believed – and I think he still believes – that the wealth of the wealthy comes from exploiting the working class. The entire capitalist system, in Marx’s view, was organized around extracting surplus value from the workers. In this model, the rich are the enemies of everyone else because their wealth comes from taking surplus value from other people.
In addition, the young Obama believed in the Marxist concept of false consciousness. Hints of this belief are still evident whenever Obama asserts that people “cling to their guns and religion” in reaction to economic stresses in society. If you are familiar with Marxist philosophy, it is pretty easy to pick out the moments when President Obama is drawing on his roots in Marxist theory. This is why Obama was so interested in educating people about how they were exploited by the rich through a capitalist system.
Given my observations of young Obama, I can safely assert that he was a Marxist socialist in 1980/1981 according to the guidelines I’m indicating above.
Keith:
I consider myself an ex-Marxist because I no longer believe in the theory that wealth comes from extracting surplus value from workers, because I don’t believe in the concept of “false consciousness” or “alienation” anymore, and because I believe that later history demonstrated that Karl Marx was wrong in predicting an inevitable revolution of the working class and a transition to a pure communist society.
In my view, poverty is created – in large measure – by people having too many children too soon in life out of wedlock. This means that they do not invest enough in the intellectual capital of their children or themselves. I believe that a lack of child labor laws encourages parents to produce too many children – for their own economic benefit and security – but end up creating a poorer country overall.
Moreover, because they have too many children, there is not much of an inheritance to leave for later generations. I also believe that poverty comes largely as a byproduct of laziness, drug and alcohol use and related criminal behavior.
This is why most poor people in America are children. Poverty has nothing to do with the success of the rich. Anyone can be rich if they follow simple rules and save and invest enough to benefit from compound interest.
Insurance IS gambling, tolerated for social reasons, and regulated to prevent abuses.
Which is why “health” insurance (as opposed to fire, casualty, etc.) ultimately doesn’t make economic sense (unless you rig the pools, collect huge fees, etc) because unlike fire, a ship sinking, etc. EVERYBODY gets sick.
I realize I’m on a limb here. 🙂
I’m honestly not going to defend the Greeks other than to say that if they were addicts, which they were, their pusher was Goldman-Sachs. Ditto with Spain and the Brits.
I think we approach the problem from two different viewpoints. You are blaming the addicts (rightly so); I’m attacking the dealers who introduced them to crack. Who destabilized the entire system initially? Wall Street. Who profited from it? Wall Street.
Greece needs help, Wall Street needs a jail cell.
Either you must have been a terrible student, or these institutions must be a lot less competent than what I thought.
Accusing Obama of being a Marxist is the epitome of ignorance, because (a) all economics theories rely on Marx, Keynes, etc. for their analysis so every economist is to some degree a Marxist; and (b) Obama’s policies (or that of his appointees) are anything but Marxist — which is a shame, because a tax of financial transactions or the government takeover of some financial institutions would be IMHO quite justified (but that’s another discussion).
Insurance is not really equivalent to gambling. It is actually more akin to what the RW wants to mischaracterize as “socialism” these days.
Trust me, I spent 13 years in the insurance industry. I understand how it works pretty well. In simplest and noblest terms, insurance simply works on the theory of “spread of risk” in order to provide a product that is really “piece of mind” and truly meant to be a “safety net” for when life throws you a large loss situation.
Simply put, it is a form of social contract, where a large pool of people contributing small amounts on a regular basis are able to cover the comparatively infrequent bigger loss situations of a few people. It is a product that you hope to rarely if ever have to use, but if you need it, you are sure glad it was there for you to “make you whole” and restore you to where you were before X bad event happened. The primary intention of insurance was to be able to address putting you back together after some sort of big calamity hit you, that would otherwise be hard for you to deal with financially on their own. In many ways, in its purest form, it works like a “good neighbor” social contract in society and is a valuable and important financial tool necessary to maintaining a strong and stable middle-class. It really is similar to having a good “rainy day fund” to cover you in emergencies.
Well, until recently, most Belgian banks offering mortgages would compel you to take the protection policy with an insurance company which was part of the holding the bank belonged to. Belgian law allowed them to do that as long as the premiums were competitive (=more or less comparable to what independent insurance companies could offer). Some banks would even compel mortgage clients to take fire insurance, car insurance, hospital insurance and civil reponsibility insurance (a policy that insures you and your family against damages awarded against you by a court, when you have NOT made a conscious mistake) with their partner insurance company.
The European Union ruled compulsory “parallel selling of services” illegal, however, and since then banks in the EC should no longer be allowed to do this. The mortgage bank will check every year whether you paid your protection insurance premium and your fire insurance premium, and that is it.
Iceland? They wanted to be like Andorra, Liechtenstein, or even worse: Switzerland. If you have a look at that GDP per capita page on Wikipedia, you’ll know that those countries which are to all intents and purposes part of the EC, but not really (Andorra does not even have a euro coin of its own, I think, I did not see any special coins when I was there) are the ones who profit most from it. Lower sales taxes and stricter privacy laws in banking attract a special kind of tourist.
Iceland. not really counting on people actually coming to their island, found a niche amongst those people and institutions which were addicted to high yields for their savings, but did not want to invest in bonds themselves and somehow could not afford trips to Luxembourg or the enclave states. Thus a veritable internet banking economy was born. But anything that can boom, can also go bust and it turned out that the Icelandic banks had been investing their customers’savings in subprime. In an (of course criminal) effort to save the day, one of them, Kaupthing became a Ponzi scheme. So, you are right, this is not a purely American phenomenon.
Two days after Kaupthing had folded, billboards went up at the Dampoort in Ghent advertising Kaupthing Savings Bank. They were still flashing a week later. I half expected someone to commit suicide by jumping from the top of one of them, but it did not happen, as in the end every individual (but not the Dutch or English municipal funds, for instance) got their principal back as Kaupthing bank was taken over.
http://www.kaupthing.com/ (yes, they still have a website)
My internet savings bank is ultimately owned by Credit Agricole. How trustworthy are they, Lupin?
Hello Dr. Drew!
I have referenced you here multiple times:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/12/is-calling-someone-a-birther-libelous/
It is exciting to meet you in person.
You might find that thread interesting also. You can skim it by just reading my responses.
It is fun to debate the hoards of barbarians, but don’t expect to make much progress.
I am curious to know how much homosexuality existed at Occidental? My understanding is that it is widespread at Obama’s Trinity church.
Also curious to know what you think about Cashill’s thesis.
Wow…you two guys sure seem to spend a heck of a lot of your time thinking about homosexuality… just sayin’…
I was going to answer Lupin on this one too, but you said it much better than I ever could.
One thing however: a lot of insurance historically WAS gambling, negative gambling Lloyds was started by people who gambled that the ship they had bought to use in commerce with the Indies was going to be lost (to storm or pirates) and found “book makers” willing to take those bets.
Even the earliest example of life insurance was Scots gambling agsinst their own lives to provide pensions for their widows.
Of course, today, insurance is a complicated superstructure of mathematics and statistics. In order to saty competitive and solvent, insurnce companies must adjust their premiums to new data (although even that is similar to book makers adjusting their odds when a lot of people just before the race start betting on the same outsider).
And it is not clear whether insurance led to and promoted statistics or statistics led to and promoted insurance. But better statistics was a good thing, as it helped medical science.
Statistics proving that maternal mortality rates were lower in Britain thanks to doctors washing their hands, and the intriguing statistics at a Hungarian hospital led by the controversial doctor Ignaz Semmelweis, were instrumental in establishing Pasteur’s theories on germs and their relationship to disease.
Nevertheless, on the continent, doctors would for a very long time continue to believe that they had “healing hands” and that there was nothing wrong with delivering a baby immediately after investigating a cadaver.
Birthers are a bit like those doctors at the time, allowing a black man in the White House is completely contrary to their world view.
Those who will study the birfer conspiracy theory with its switch from the birth certificate to Vattel, then onto dualism and Indonesian adoption, should not forget to look up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semmelweis_reflex
Well, by all accounts I’ve heard, there is a great deal of toe-tapping going on.
Well, not very much, unless of course you rely on the “too big to fail” principle & assume the French gummint will step in.
Personally I’m among those (like Atrios) who would rather see the Governments give money to the people as opposed to the bankers.
I agree that an argument can be made that some insurance is just as you describe: a pool of money contributed by x people to cover the one who will suffer an accident. But you may agree that other forms of insurance are bets, ie gambling.
I’m not against it, mind you; I just think it should be regulated.
Dragons have hoards. Barbarian have hordes. And you sir are illiterate.
Er, no, you are Yankee-bashing. And actually, there is no way Wall Street could have done this on their own anymore. They are at the root of the problem, yes, like in 1929, but it was actually when the European banks started to guess something was wrong (long before 2008) and started to get out of the Wall Street bubble by buying Greek bonds that the Euro problem was created.
Those banks are at fault here. Perhaps also their customers who would have deserted their banks for the Iceland bubble even sooner if those banks had acted differently, which would have meant lower yields. And part of the blame goes to the Euro governments, who only started to re-regulate after 2008.
And today, as I have already said, the attack against Greece and the Euro is not only the work of the American ratings agencies (who were far more lenient when the possible and eventual defaulters were American) but also of the London City. Of course, it is not only British (and American) institutions who are trying to earn money there by speculating against the Euro.
Part of the investigation into the Dexia affair in Belgium has already revealed that the Holding was shorting its very own funds and shares on the London Stock Exchange. La politique du pire, free English translation, “whatever criminal or not, provided we get a fat bonus at the end of the year”. And though they are being wound up, the Dexia Holding bankster cum book makers did provide themselves with a healthy bonus at the end of 2011.
As for Greece, their problem is natural Greece-born. Unjust taxation system, they never had de-regulation, because there never was regulation and the Olympics. Lack of courage with the politicians, who saw the figures but did not dare tell the electorate. Until the last guy came around, a Socialist who turned out to be the perfect fall guy (the Greeks love drama, so he is going to be immortal one day). It does not exonerate his father, by the way.
Thanks for correcting me. It has been a long time since I’ve had to deal with barbarians so I forgot the spelling. To say that this mis-spelling makes me illiterate is foolish, however.
You ridicule me because you don’t like what I have to say. I’m familiar with it as a psychological tactic so it doesn’t work. Ann Coulter’s Demonic goes into this topic and I highly recommend reading that book.
I care about Obama’s homosexuality because it makes the case that Obama was a lover of Donald Young and had him killed more likely. Here is another interesting story (http://newsflavor.com/politics/us-politics/the-ulsterman-report-sex-and-murder-in-the-land-of-obama/)
So, your only interest is to try and find a way to “prove” that Obama is gay so you can then attach a murder to him. Classy.
This vile birther troll seems to be suffering from sickening issues. Apparently driven by a personal, deep seated hatred and bigotry, this fake concern troll also can’t distinguish rumor and innuendo from credible and verifiable evidence.
He or she doesn’t understand why sane people despise patronizing liars obsessed with unsubstantiated aspersions and then brushes it off as simple ridicule and defensiveness with repetitive, bizarre and laughable bravado.
Truly sad and pathetic.
More cockroaches like this are inevitably forthcoming.
Did you have all your records sealed, like Obama did? How much did that cost you?
You call yourself an academic and yet you make a freshmen-level non sequitir argument like this?: “Marx’s analysis of the source of wealth is wrong because he was wrong about revolution.”
I worked for a very successful grant writer for lots of years. He was a pathological liar. Whatever he needed to be true to make himself look good, or to make a sale, that’s what he said. It was quite an embarrassment for those of us who sat with him in meetings and had to patch things up afterwards.
There have been many successful delusional people in history, Hitler being the most ready example.
One should not ignore the contribution of agriculture and genetics to the science of statistics, particularly as it is applied to medicine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Fisher
You started out with “how widespread homosexuality was at Occidental”. That’s a highly non-scientific method.
You’re looking for an association chain of the type
* Homosexuality was wide-spread at Occidental
* Obama was at Occidental
* Therefore it is likely Obama was homosexual (1)
* ——
* X was homosexual (2)
* ——
* Combining (1) and (2), it is possible X was Obama’s gay lover (3)
* ——
* X was killed
* It is possible that X was killed because he was gay (4)
*——-
* Combining (3) and (4), it is possible X was killed because he was Obama’s gay lover
Note that not one of these conclusions, NOT ONE, is scientifically or even generally sound. And only if all were, you’d actually have a case with this entire argument.
Dude, even if 99 out of 100 people at Occidental had been gay, it wouldn’t mean Obama was gay, therefore making any assumptions what Obama “might have done because he was gay” are meaningless.
So you’re delving into politics-style innuendo, propaganda and smear tactics while pretending to try to evaluate the truth of certain assumptions.
I think the tabloids covered it extensively.
As a political scientist (supposedly) you should be able to avoid the trap that everyone to the left of Mitt Romney in his current incarnation (which would include Mitt Romney in his prior incarnations) is a Marxist. There is a gradation ranging from various stripes of true Marxists to democratic socialists, to social democrats, to liberals, to centrists to moderate Republicans.
I can’t know what is in Obama’s heart today, nor can you. I’m not even sure you can know what was truly in his heart 30 years ago. But we don’t have to. He has a governing record. And I submit to you that his record is somewhere in the spectrum between liberal and moderate Republican, more or less centrist, Let me demonstrate with a few issues:
1. Bank nationalization-Obama was urged by many economists to nationalize the banks, reorganize them and then privatize them, which worked well in Sweden in the 1990s. Joe Stigliitz and Paul Krugman, who are liberals but hardly Marxists or even socialists, argued strongly for that. But Obama refused and left the banks alone. He even sold off the shares the government acquired under those noted Marxists George Bush and Hank Paulson.
2. Health care-Many on the left favored and continue to favor a single payer system, that such Marxist countries as Canada and the UK (under conservative governments) have and are determined to preserve. Obama rejected that.and instead went with a plan to the right of the ones proposed by Richard Nixon and Hillary Clinton and instead chose one that the Marxist Mitt Romney put in place (which Romney is now against).
3. Extending the Bush tax cuts- This one democratic socialists, social democrats, liberals and even the few remaining moderate Republicans agree on. They should be allowed to lapse. The one actual Socialist in Congress, Bernie Sanders (not a Marxist), filibustered for hours about this. Yet Obama cut a deal with that Socialist Mitch McConnell and kept them.
So, I would like to find even a hint of democratic socialism, let alone Marxism in Obama’s record as President. And since I know you can’t, explain to me why that record as President should be trumped by your recollections of a couple of meetings 30 years ago.
Bravo! Sterling examples.
To that list I’d have the add the prt-Wall St stuff described in Ron Suskind’s CONFIDENCE MEN.
There is a ton of evidence of Marxism in Obama’s record. This article recounts the most recent example:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/285186/new-nationalism-old-liberalism-editors
The counter-examples you pick mean nothing and you actually get some basic facts wrong. Obama wanted to do a single-payer healthcare system: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ-6ebku3_E
Furthermore, Obama was forced into extending the Bush tax cuts. You are confusing wishes and political reality.
There are indeed many criticisms of Marxism. Wiki has an excellent entry on the topic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms_of_Marxism
But that is normal. All schools of economics engender criticism. And economists are particularly prone to be wrong when trying to predict the future.
That does not change the fact that a Marxist understanding of history and of society has been adopted by academics all over the world studying in a wide range of disciplines, including archaeology, anthropology, media studies, political science, theater, history, sociological theory, art history and theory, cultural studies, education, economics, geography, literary criticism, aesthetics, critical psychology, and philosophy.
I find this entire comment rather odious, possibly racist, and certainly extreme in the views it espouses.
Paul : I had always included the City of London as one of the architects of the current crisis, but dropped it my later postings out of laziness.
The current crises certainly has many fathers, and many hot spots, and I have also not been forgetful in blaming our own elites, and further I strongly disagree with the policies currently on the table in Europe.
I confess, however, to be more biased towards, shall I call it, the “anglo-saxon financial elites”? Seek to whom profits the crime. They created the ideological & theoretical foundation for the present situation, pushed it on the (often complicit) rest of us, enriched themselves beyond dreams of avarice, and now we all have to pay for it.
Even if they pay (a little), they’ll still be so much father ahead than when all this started. This was a massive transfer of wealth from Joe Q Public into the hands of a few.
Yes, children in poverty are lazy addicts & criminals.
Hatefull words from another fine “Christian”.
Single payer was never on the table. If he wanted to do it he would have offered it at the beginning of negotiations. But if you mean by “a ton of evidence” absolutely none at all then yeah I guess there’s a ton of evidence.
The 3 topics I picked were the 3 major domestic battles of the last 3 years. If that “means nothing” to you then you are proving even dumber than I had thought, which is saying something.
No, he said, “If I was starting from scratch, I would do single payer.” He then went on to say that he was not starrting from scratch, so he favored more or less what passed. And what passed and what he signed is the Republican alternative to what Hillary proposed and what Romney pushed in MA.
And excuse me, but now you wish to argue that single-payer health care is Marxist? So Canada, the UK, Germany, Japan, Taiwan and dozens of other countries are Marxist. The word therefore has no meaning other than “something that Kevin doesn’t like”. I suppose by that standard, broccoli could be Marxist.
I wonder how Johnny demonstrated his thesis to win his major award–I’m betting that he used the “correlation implies causation” fallacy to show that child labor laws decreased birthrate (because this is a nigh-impossible task otherwise and his behavior suggests that he is nowhere near the scientist necessary to pull it off…)
I can shoot down that theory easily–my name is also Kevin and I like broccoli, so it must not be Marxist… I’ve no idea on Doc’s* stand on broccoli or broccoli-like substances.
* another Kevin.
I couldn’t agree more.
The basic tenets of classical Marxism are so fundamentally embedded in every political economy theory that it is virtually like the “air” we breathe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_Marxism#Main_ideas_of_Classical_Marxism
Sweden or the UK are not Stalin’s USSR or Mao’s China. Kevin SB is a few french fries short of a happy meal.
Yes, the tough years after Williams asked him to move on were a byproduct of what again?
A scholar he is not…
Yes, like kids in reform school drink milk hence drinking mail turns kids into criminals. Wertham used that approach to condemn comic books in the 50s.
All of the fries, the toy, the burger, the soft drink and the colorful box short of a Happy Meal.
Any desperate birther who thinks the tabloids are right about want they want to be right about the President because of the John Edwards story is not the sharpest tool in the shed.
Johnny,
I would note that one of the groups with the lowest birthrate is homosexuals–does that mean that the best way to become rich is to be gay? Can you provide a link to your award-winning thesis so we might see your pro-homosexual argument in all of its glory? (This is a trap–if you provide a link, your thesis will be examined on its merits by posters here [me, if no one else] and, I suspect, found wanting–if, on the other hand, it is really as strong as you say, then there shouldn’t be any problem… or you could just take the coward’s way out and ignore this).
Ann Coulter is an anti-Semite.
“We just want Jews to be perfected,” Ms. Coulter said, explaining why she thinks a Christian America would be ideal. “People were happy. They’re Christian. They’re tolerant. They defend America.” Mr. Deutsch cut her off, asking if she thinks “we should all be Christian, to which she replied, “yes.”
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/11/coulter-christians-as-perfected-jews/
Colmes asserted: “You claim 1,000 Orthodox rabbis support you. I don’t know who they are, but I can tell you, you know the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Congress, and many others have condemned you for that. Do you care?” Coulter responded: “I wear it as a badge of honor.”
http://mediamatters.org/research/200710310011
Coulter hates Arabs. That’s an anti-Semite, too.
I’ll point out the mistakes in your latest posts soon, but I just wanted to say that none of you have yet responded to the National Review article about Obama’s recent Marxist speech.
So please read that article also and post your thoughts so I can deal with all of your errors at once.
I want to be fair. I really do. Please post your CV and publications. You lack the discussion style that I associate with a career academic, but I’m willing to set that aside.
It would be particularly compelling if you could point to an academic institution that hosts your CV, perhaps as part of a departmental site that holds you up as an honored professor emeritus, and references your research and your publications. I realize only very successful retired professors attain such an honor, but doesn’t that describe you?
You aren’t the only person on this forum with advanced degrees. Please post your CV so that others can understand the breadth and scope of your research and academic accomplishments. Perhaps then you will gain the credibility that you demand.
National Review did not call the President’s speech Marxist. That is your interpretation of the speech. You are free to have such an opinion, of course, but I have never seen how labeling people or name-calling advances debate.
Are you purposefully stupid?
The NRO article dies not mention Marxism ONCE!
It does however draw a comparison between Obama and that notorious commie, Theodore Roosevelt.
I will leave to others here far more competent than I to discuss the merits of such a comparison, but it has nothing or little to do with Marxism. (Refer to my wiki links above.)
If you believe that you have room temperature IQ.
Where in the article does it mention “Marxism”?
In Celsius, not Fahrenheit.
– KevinSB
I really enjoyed reading your comments here and elsewhere. I think you are having the same experience as me on this site. You offer strong, creative, interesting arguments and the best response you get is some personal attack on your IQ, your sexuality or your sanity. 🙂 My goal in posting here is that this exchange will be seen by reporters or independent voters. It may also serve to help liberal extremists understand the extent to which their views are undermined by the facts.
Regarding young Obama I can report that when I first saw him I thought he was gay. He appeared to have a very close relationship with Hasan Chandoo. Young Obama also picked the most flamboyant gay activist in the political science department to be his academic advisor. As far as I know, there is no evidence – photographs, interviews, documents – indicating that Obama ever even hung out with a girl prior to meeting Michelle Obama when he was 27 years old. I can report that I never saw him with a girl any of the times I interacted with him while he was a sophomore at Occidental College.
FYI: I’ll try to post comments whereever I see you posting comments on this site. Sometimes, I’ve found that the liberal hordes back off when there is more than one objective observer posting.
– Dr. Conspiracy: Please. I have met people who are delusional. For you to suggest I’m delusional is absolutely silly. The grant writers I have met over the course of my career are some of the most decent, kindly, honest people I know. The grant writing teachers I worked with have made a big difference in the quality of life in my community. For you to suggest that I have achieved so much in my life through ruthless dishonesty strikes me as a pretty demeaning comment giving the facts of the matter. As I’ve said, I have my own company, I’m married, I’m a published author, I still maintain an active teaching and speaking schedule. To suggest that someone like me is delusional makes me wonder about what is wrong with you.
Just reading the negative things said about KevinSB on this site brings a smile to my face. Many times, the same attack made on him are the exact attacks leveled at me. It strikes me that the liberals posting on this site really are acting like little robots. At a certain point, it makes no sense that BOTH KevinSB and me are insane, stupid, liars. 🙂 At a certain point, you have to admit that these are just things liberal posters say to avoid dealing with the painful facts regarding young Obama including the fact that he claims substantial heterosexual relationships, and yet there is zero evidence to back this claim up.
You’re tough! 🙂
Johnny,
I notice that you haven’t been able to rebut my theory that while you are honestly reporting what is in your memory, that your emotional state, President Obama’s status as a male associate of your soon-to-be-ex girlfriend, and the passage of three decades makes your account of the situation worthless in determining the objective reality of what happened and your conclusions regarding your interactions hightly suspect, at best. Why is that? Personally, I think your failure to address this or any other legitimate criticism is indicative of a lack of integrity on your part.
Sorry for confusing you. For various reasons, they use synonyms for Marxism. The specific words don’t matter, just notice the Marxist ideas.
For crying out loud, people, don’t you have anything better to do with your time than rehash this stuff endlessly, ad nauseam back and forth?
I keep getting the comments on my email, though I’ve tried to get rid of the automatic function. I have to admit I keep reading them. It’s a bit like Sarah Palin and her ilk — you can’t help reading about them, no matter how idiotic you know it is.
Dr. C: I know this isn’t your policy, but perhaps just this once you could exercise your authority and declare this particular item closed to comments. In over 600 comments, surely everyone who has anything to say has had their chance. In any case, the original topic Marsism) has long since been hijacked.
Excellent idea.
And it certainly has absolutely nothing to do with the requirements of eligibility for the office of POTUS.
Doc,
I would recommend against it–a topic with over 600 comments is clearly one that people are interested in (and since Johnny boy is mentioned in the original post, I don’t think discussion of his lack of integrity or the flaws in his claims can be considered a thread-jack).
– KevinSB
I read the National Review article and I can report you are right. Obama is holding to a Marxist perspective when he says that the struggles of the middle class are caused by the success of the rich. Obama’s comments are silly for any of us who have moved out of poverty and into prosperity over the course of our own lives. I grew up in a poor, overcrowded household. Thanks to my education and good decisions, however, I have earned a wonderful life in a safe, beautiful part of the nation. I got to where I am through hardwork and risk-taking.
As the National Review article indicates the real problem facing our country is high unemployment not inequality. Obama doesn’t want to talk about high unemployment. I don’t think Slartibartfast or Dr. Conspiracy want to talk about high unemployment either. Instead, they focus on matters which distract swing voters from the high unemployment of the Obama era.
LOL! Care to list the synonyms? You presented the article, the burden’s on you, sir.
Actually is is my policy to shut down threads that run much past 200 comments. I do it for performance and page load time reasons.
This isn’t meant to shut down discussion, just to keep things running smoothly. I’ll open another article to continue the discussion of anyone wants to.
Why? I’m having fun irritating conservatives.