The Obama Thread - Original Vintage Edition

by **Big Ben** » Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:16 am

michelle o'bumma as president? The following article raised the idea:

http://news.yahoo.com/president-michell ... itics.html

And one of the posted comments to the article is reprinted below:

A brief history lesson on this nasty looking, racist leech.
She originally attended Princeton University, later enrolling at Harvard, where she was awarded her jurist doctorate.
Both acceptances were the result of Affirmative Action racial quota mandates in higher education. She was awarded her law degree in 1988.
Her first try a the Illinois state bar was a failure at 64%.
She did manage to pass her 2nd attempt at 80%.
On average, gradutes of Harvard law pass bar exams (nationally), on the first try, with a 94% average score.
Her attempts at the Illinois bar put her in the lower 5% of Harvard graduates.

Even with these dismal credentials, she was given a position at the Chicago law firm of Sidley and Austin, in the Intellectual Property division.
That's the cellar at any law firm, along with wills and probate.

This is where she met Barack, serving as his mentor in a legal apprenticeship program.
Barack left the firm shotly after, beginning his " community organizer" phase, which resulted in his successful run for state Senate.
In 1993, Michelle resigned her position at Sidley and Austin, And surrendered her law license voluntarily.
She would later say in a NY Times interview she did this because " She wanted to engage in more relevant challenges and causes, things more important to myself than money."

The same year she took a 316 thousand dollar a year taxpayer funded position at the University of Chicago Hospital, as" Vice President of Community Outreach,"
It was 5 times as much money as she had ever earned as a law firm junior associate.
And it was a new position, never held by anyone else.
Whem Michelle resigned that "job", to assume the role of First Lady, the position was discontinued, and stricken from the hospital budget.

None of this is conjecture on my part, and can be easily documented.

by **gwanjis54** » Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:21 am

you actually go after the duaghters of the president? children? this is one of the most racist, offensive things i've read, ever. you should be ashamed of yourslef. i am finished with this thread. enjoy your cross burnings.

by **Big Ben** » Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:37 am

gwanjis54 wrote:you actually go after the duaghters of the president? children? this is one of the most racist, offensive things i've read, ever. you should be ashamed of yourslef. i am finished with this thread. enjoy your cross burnings.

You aren't American, are you? An American, or anyone well-informed about American politics would know that michelle is not the president's daughter.

The poster quoted above, who responded to the article linked above, did some research and posted his findings. What part of his findings can you prove is untrue? Just because you don't like what he said and what he found, doesn't make it racist.

Bye-bye! I'm sure the regular posters here won't miss being called an idiot by you. Save yourself some stress and be finished with this thread. Don't let the door hit you on the way out! :wave:

by **jaxxx** » Fri Apr 27, 2012 3:24 pm

gwanjis54 wrote:
so to the last post, some facts. yes, there are almost 50 million people on food stamps, but that number actuallly increased by 14.7 million during the Bush administration and 14.2 million by Obama.

That is a nice way to skew the information to give Obama a winnable benchmark...

The reality is, the Bush administration lasted 8 years and added 14.7 million. The Obama administration has been in office a little over 3 years and has added 14.2 million.

Thus:

Bush: 8 years / 14.7M = 1.83M per year
Obama: 3 years / 14.2M = 4.73M per year

It is without question, Obama deserves the title of The Food Stamp President more so than Bush.

by **gwanjis54** » Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:16 pm

I am an American, Ben. At least as American as you are, if not moreso. I see you edited (Last edited by Big Ben on Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:23 am, edited 1 time in total.) after my post and deleted the heinous, racist references to the President's daughters, knowing i was not referring to Michele Obama. even now, you can't help but play manipulative games and change your own stupid, racist rant to try to make me look bad. now i am gone baby gone, and i don't give a rat's ass whether you miss me or not. there are some decent well-meaning folks on this thread, with whom i may have strong disagreements with in terms of philosophy and politics, and i'll miss going back and forth with them. but you are an ethically bankrupt bigot, and i am finished with you. i hope others here follow my lead and leave you to your pitiful pap.

by **ZiaAries** » Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:19 pm

gwanjis54 wrote:I am an American, Ben. At least as American as you are, if not moreso. I see you edited (Last edited by Big Ben on Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:23 am, edited 1 time in total.) after my post and deleted the heinous, racist references to the President's daughters, knowing i was not referring to Michele Obama. even now, you can't help but play manipulative games and change your own stupid, racist rant to try to make me look bad. now i am gone baby gone, and i don't give a rat's ass whether you miss me or not. there are some decent well-meaning folks on this thread, with whom i may have strong disagreements with in terms of philosophy and politics, and i'll miss going back and forth with them. but you are an ethically bankrupt bigot, and i am finished with you. i hope others here follow my lead and leave you to your pitiful pap.

Show it to me where he makes any racial references to the President's daughters. :shock:

I've reread it twice and I can't find it. Point it out, please.

by **ZiaAries** » Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:28 pm

Ben, where do you get the notion of Michelle Obama ever being a POTUS. :shock:

Snoop Dogg has a better chance, and I'd vote for Snoop. Michelle has been muzzled since she made the "for the first time, I'm proud of my country" comment. :lol:

The President's people don't let her say anything... with good reason. Even Lena, wasn't a big fan of Michelle. Anyway... what's the point? I don't think anyone see's this First Lady as a future presidential contender. You been in Granny Clampett's reumatism medicine again. :rotflmao:

by **DanMc** » Sat Apr 28, 2012 1:04 pm

ZiaAries wrote:Ben, where do you get the notion of Michelle Obama ever being a POTUS. Snoop Dogg has a better chance, and I'd vote for Snoop. Michelle has been muzzled since she made the "for the first time, I'm proud of my country" comment. The President's people don't let her say anything... with good reason. Even Lena, wasn't a big fan of Michelle. Anyway... what's the point? I don't think anyone see's this First Lady as a future presidential contender. You been in Granny Clampett's reumatism medicine again.

Shades of Dennis Thatcher. It was rumoured that he was under strict instructions to keep it zipped at all times for fear of a good handbagging.

by **ZiaAries** » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:50 pm

DanMc wrote:
ZiaAries wrote:Ben, where do you get the notion of Michelle Obama ever being a POTUS. Snoop Dogg has a better chance, and I'd vote for Snoop. Michelle has been muzzled since she made the "for the first time, I'm proud of my country" comment. The President's people don't let her say anything... with good reason. Even Lena, wasn't a big fan of Michelle. Anyway... what's the point? I don't think anyone see's this First Lady as a future presidential contender. You been in Granny Clampett's reumatism medicine again.

Shades of Dennis Thatcher. It was rumoured that he was under strict instructions to keep it zipped at all times for fear of a good handbagging.

Dan, what does "good handbagging" mean? I've never understood the censoring of the word "h@ndbag" or the meaning in this case.

I had a giggle when Pippa Middleton was in the "news" about the toy gun in Paris. How silly of a thing to report. But the funny part was when Buckingham Palace gave comment to something like, "She's not one of ours. It not our problem". :lol:

I loved that response.

by **DanMc** » Sun Apr 29, 2012 8:13 pm

ZiaAries wrote:
DanMc wrote:
ZiaAries wrote:Ben, where do you get the notion of Michelle Obama ever being a POTUS. Snoop Dogg has a better chance, and I'd vote for Snoop. Michelle has been muzzled since she made the "for the first time, I'm proud of my country" comment. The President's people don't let her say anything... with good reason. Even Lena, wasn't a big fan of Michelle. Anyway... what's the point? I don't think anyone see's this First Lady as a future presidential contender. You been in Granny Clampett's reumatism medicine again.

Shades of Dennis Thatcher. It was rumoured that he was under strict instructions to keep it zipped at all times for fear of a good handbagging.

Dan, what does "good handbagging" mean? I've never understood the censoring of the word "h@ndbag" or the meaning in this case.

I had a giggle when Pippa Middleton was in the "news" about the toy gun in Paris. How silly of a thing to report. But the funny part was when Buckingham Palace gave comment to something like, "She's not one of ours. It not our problem". I loved that response.

I don't know if the term was used before, but it became associated with Thatcher because she always carried one and was notorious for her strident and belligerent manner. There is no evidence to support it, but the mythology was that if Dennis embarrased her she belted him with her handbag.

Handbagging became a technical term for asserting oneself, if not literally whacking one's opponents. Most famously used when Mrs Thatcher reportedly banged her hands on the table in a European summit, demanding the UK be given a rebate on its contributions. She got it, and the UK still has it. It's worth £2bn a year. That was some handbag.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_repo ... 325857.stm

by **ZiaAries** » Sun Apr 29, 2012 9:12 pm

Thanks, DanMc! Interesting. I like it. I'm sure I've probably knocked someone, or a few, over the head with my purse... at sometime or the other. :oops:

But what about the word "handb@g" used on FF. Why do you think that is censored? I thought it meant something sexual, like... related to "teabagging". BTW, I first learned what teabagging was from FF. I remember posting a reply to a post and was telling them how to use the tea bag in a cup with hot water. :shock:

Of course, I was corrected. :lol:

FF continues to enrich my worldly education. :wink:

Again, what's the other meaning to it. Surely there must be one, unless it is censored due to a political related reason?

by **DanMc** » Sun Apr 29, 2012 9:52 pm

ZiaAries wrote:Thanks, DanMc! Interesting. I like it. I'm sure I've probably knocked someone, or a few, over the head with my purse... at sometime or the other.

But what about the word "handb@g" used on FF. Why do you think that is censored? I thought it meant something sexual, like... related to "teabagging". BTW, I first learned what teabagging was from FF. I remember posting a reply to a post and was telling them how to use the tea bag in a cup with hot water. Of course, I was corrected. FF continues to enrich my worldly education.

Again, what's the other meaning to it. Surely there must be one, unless it is censored due to a political related reason?

Almost certainly just because it's the kind of word used by spammers who use other people's forums to flog their stuff. The majority of them are selling clothes or fashion accessories. Obviously it's easy enough to get round it if you know how, but the spammers just want to post their crap on as many sites as possible in the shortest of time and many of them are probably bots anyway, so they wont be doing that. On some versions of forum software, including phpBB I think, it's possibly to set them such that any post containing a banned word won't appear at all.

Incidentally socialism was once a banned word, but WebMonkey changed it after a number of us asked him to.

by **ZiaAries** » Sun Apr 29, 2012 10:04 pm

DanMc wrote:
ZiaAries wrote:Thanks, DanMc! Interesting. I like it. I'm sure I've probably knocked someone, or a few, over the head with my purse... at sometime or the other.

But what about the word "handb@g" used on FF. Why do you think that is censored? I thought it meant something sexual, like... related to "teabagging". BTW, I first learned what teabagging was from FF. I remember posting a reply to a post and was telling them how to use the tea bag in a cup with hot water. Of course, I was corrected. FF continues to enrich my worldly education.

Again, what's the other meaning to it. Surely there must be one, unless it is censored due to a political related reason?

Almost certainly just because it's the kind of word used by spammers who use other people's forums to flog their stuff. The majority of them are selling clothes or fashion accessories. Obviously it's easy enough to get round it if you know how, but the spammers just want to post their crap on as many sites as possible in the shortest of time and many of them are probably bots anyway, so they wont be doing that. On some versions of forum software, including phpBB I think, it's possibly to set them such that any post containing a banned word won't appear at all.

Incidentally socialism was once a banned word, but WebMonkey changed it after a number of us asked him to.

Okay. I get it now. Thanks again. I don't know all the phpBB stuff and meaning. However... When I discovered FF, by Googling a question, it was female clothing related. Enough said about that. :wink:

"Pacific" as in Ocean is censored. :think:

Being in the US, (that waterway is near) I've used it multiple times in topics of discussions. I learned to manipulate the word.

by **Julie-Anne** » Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:52 pm

FF seems to censor some quite random words, "b-a-n-t-e-r" is another one that's censored.

by **Big Ben** » Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:43 am

ZiaAries wrote:Thanks, DanMc! Interesting. I like it. I'm sure I've probably knocked someone, or a few, over the head with my purse... at sometime or the other.

But what about the word "handb@g" used on FF. Why do you think that is censored? I thought it meant something sexual, like... related to "teabagging". BTW, I first learned what teabagging was from FF. I remember posting a reply to a post and was telling them how to use the tea bag in a cup with hot water. Of course, I was corrected. FF continues to enrich my worldly education.

Again, what's the other meaning to it. Surely there must be one, unless it is censored due to a political related reason?

I'm gonna stay clear of you - don't wanna get hit with a *a**a*! :mrgreen:

And speaking of teabagging, check out this article below to further enrich your wordly education :wink: