View Full Version : Cain couldn't look much worse.
I can't believe this guy. Thank heavens all this stuff came out. Seems like he's one heck of a liar. Can it be possible that all these accusations are lies/unfair? I don't think so. I think its possible that he's so far into denial of some of his actions that he might really believe he is innocent.
Gosh............and running for president. I can't believe him.
Does anyone NOT have skeletons in their closets? I do, but if I were running for pres, I wouldn't lie about it......or I'd realize ahead of time that all these things were going to come out and just not run.
HappyHiker
11-30-11, 10:54am
Yes, I agree, this fellow appears to be pretty amazing. I feel sorry for his family. And what hubris, to run for president with all those skeletons in his closet...did he think they would not emerge? I just cannot fathom this..
He is beginning to look rather Clintonesque.
He is beginning to look rather Clintonesque.
True - but apparently running as a Republican makes the issue irrelevant to a lot of people. Newt's track record in this area isn't so great, either, but he's gaining on the other candidates.
He is beginning to look rather Clintonesque.
Yea, he's just like Clinton...except for the intelligence, political savvy, knowledge of history, knowledge of world events and politics, compassion, willingness to learn, and of course Clinton didn't sexually harass anyone, just had a mutually consenting affair, but otherwise, exactly like Clinton. ;)
iris lily
11-30-11, 11:31am
While I really wish that the peccadilloes of Presidential candidates were moot since I think it is unlikely that a pool of candidates exists where dalliance with women are absent, Cain is still operating in a world where people (media whipping up frenzy and the like) are concerned about this. To some extent the concern is justified, but for me it's not a deal breaker. But if he is lying about his affair at this stage, he's out in my eyes.
I wish President Clinton had said, back in the days of the blue dress, something like Cain's attorney said (paraphrase) It ain't nonya business what consenting adults do. Shuddup.
The Weiner story was so funny and HOW can the media ignore that god given name for it (Weiner!) but in the end, it should have been a one day story.
iris lily
11-30-11, 11:33am
Yes, I agree, this fellow appears to be pretty amazing. I feel sorry for his family. And what hubris, to run for president with all those skeletons in his closet...did he think they would not emerge? I just cannot fathom this..
He took a page from John Edwards' playbook. That guy was practically in the White House with an illegitimate baby pawned off as someone else's. Now THAT is hubris, my friend.
..... of course Clinton didn't sexually harass anyone, just had a mutually consenting affair, but otherwise, exactly like Clinton. ;)
Ask Juanita Broaddrick or Kathleen Willey or Gennifer Flowers about that.
True - but apparently running as a Republican makes the issue irrelevant to a lot of people.
I disagree, it appears to me that he's pretty much finished at this point. Clinton on the other hand, he maintained the support of NOW right up to the end of his multiple terms.
puglogic
11-30-11, 12:27pm
He took a page from John Edwards' playbook. That guy was practically in the White House with an illegitimate baby pawned off as someone else's. Now THAT is hubris, my friend.
True. There are a lot of nauseating skeletons that come out when the bright light of politics is shone on folks with flaws. Which is just about everyone.
I still tend to vote against those who lie, cheat, and dishonor others, regardless of whether they are in "my" party. Whatever that is. Call me wacky.
iris lily
11-30-11, 12:32pm
I disagree, it appears to me that he's pretty much finished at this point. Clinton on the other hand, he maintained the support of NOW right up to the end of his multiple terms.
The apparent double standard and leeway given to progressive candidates is astonishing indeed.
Gennifer Flowers gave a press conference about Clinton harassment and the mainstream media didn't pick it up for days. With Cain women, AP flies all correspondents and practically rents the ballroom at the Ritz. Well, I am exaggerating. But there is no expense too high to bring those Cain news stories out to he public. Republican antics are more fun to them than the antics of Democrats, but to that I just have to say: Weiner? ha ha ha ha.
goldensmom
11-30-11, 1:09pm
True - but apparently running as a Republican makes the issue irrelevant to a lot of people.
Who are these people you are referring to? Where are they? From what I read and hear on the news, it appears to be a very relevant issue.
I disagree, it appears to me that he's pretty much finished at this point. Clinton on the other hand, he maintained the support of NOW right up to the end of his multiple terms.
I think he is also - but I was also pointing out Newt is up and coming and his indiscretions appear not to be an issue.
Who are these people you are referring to? Where are they? From what I read and hear on the news, it appears to be a very relevant issue.
Maybe people can support him while and at the same time treating this as a relevant issue.
The apparent double standard and leeway given to progressive candidates is astonishing indeed.
Gennifer Flowers gave a press conference about Clinton harassment and the mainstream media didn't pick it up for days. With Cain women, AP flies all correspondents and practically rents the ballroom at the Ritz. Well, I am exaggerating. But there is no expense too high to bring those Cain news stories out to he public. Republican antics are more fun to them than the antics of Democrats, but to that I just have to say: Weiner? ha ha ha ha.
Many guys (girls too but lets be honest, it's mostly guys) in power fool around, true that. And powerful men on both sides fool around. Again true. maybe a bit of a double standard, but comparing Clinton to Cain is disingenuous, in that Clinton was very competent in everything else, and Cain is pretty much clueless in most things required of a President, so I guess it's a bit of a piling on in the 'what next!' kind of way.
But, between democrats and republicans here's the difference. Democrats aren't in your face shaking their finger and telling you how you should live and who you should marry or shouldn't marry, or which religion is the right one, all while sanctimoniously chest beating in faux moral outrage. Democrats don't question your god, your patriotism, your choices or choice. This is why we snicker and gawk when they fall. Glass houses and all.
He took a page from John Edwards' playbook. That guy was practically in the White House with an illegitimate baby pawned off as someone else's. Now THAT is hubris, my friend.
Oh, Edwards was more than that. He was/is scum. The way he treated his wife is completely unpardonable. And the only one who could forgive him his sins is dead.
HappyHiker
11-30-11, 2:56pm
Perhaps I'm naive or a Pollyanna, but I want a leader who LEADS...and sets a moral compass for our country...from whichever party...why must these folks have such feet of clay...? Are none of them faithful to their spouses? My gosh, what a crew...
I wouldn't have voted for Cain anyway, but I bet Mitt and Newt are glad he was there for a while (and heaven knows Mr. Obama should be thankful).
I still tend to vote against those who lie, cheat, and dishonor others, regardless of whether they are in "my" party. Whatever that is. Call me wacky.
Call me wacky too! Newt G. is the same to me as Cain,(if true), Edwards, Clinton. Here's some infamous Newt quotes & info:
"We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, 'I never slept with her.'" - Anne Manning (who was also married at the time.)
"We would have won in 1974 if we could have kept him out of the office, screwing her [a young volunteer] on the desk." - Dot Crews, his campaign scheduler at the time
[In the book] "Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them", [I] "found frightening pieces that related to my own life." - Newt.
"I think you can write a psychological profile of me that says I found a way to immerse my insecurities in a cause large enough to justify whatever I wanted it to" - Newt, speaking to Gail Sheehy.
"According to L.H. Carter, his campaign treasurer, Gingrich said of Battley (his wife): "She's not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of the President. And besides, she has cancer."
"I don't want him to be president and I don't think he should be." - Newt's wife Marianne.
"If the country today were to move to the left, Newt would sense it before it started happening and lead the way." - Dot Crews, his campaign scheduler throughout the 1970s.
in 1993, he taught a class, Renewing American Civilization, at Kennesaw State College in Georgia.[18] The class was the focus of the House Ethics Committee inquiry that ended when Gingrich was assessed a $300,000 penalty for misusing tax-exempt funds for partisan purposes and providing untrue information to a House committee. "It was the most severe penalty ever imposed on a Speaker by the House."
"Gingrich himself was among the 450 members of the House who had engaged in check kiting; he had overdrafts on twenty-two checks, including a $9,463 check to the Internal Revenue Service in 1990."
"Eighty-four ethics charges were filed against Speaker Gingrich during his term. In the summer of 1997 several House Republicans, who saw Gingrich's public image as a liability, attempted to replace him as Speaker. The attempted "coup" began July 9 with a meeting of Republican conference chairman John Boehner of Ohio and Republican leadership chairman Bill Paxon of New York."
Ok so I'm not a Newt fan. Even without the many other personal ethical issues, he is just to conservative for me - who has many conservative leanings.
San Onofre Guy
11-30-11, 8:04pm
Lindi,
You need to write material for John Stewert and Stephen Colbert
iris lily
11-30-11, 8:26pm
... Democrats don't question your god, your patriotism, your choices or choice....
That you honestly do not see the daily badgering, lecturing, and chastising here by some people of a progressive political view astounds me.
Progressives do not question certain choices, as long as they are on the approved list.
That you honestly do not see the daily badgering, lecturing, and chastising here by some people of a progressive political view astounds me.
Progressives do not question certain choices, as long as they are on the approved list.
I'm not talking about individuals Iris. Who cares what I, or any one else on a discussion forum thinks. I'm talking about our elected leaders who actually have the power to act on their pontificating. I'm talking about the up front representatives of our country. The faces we, the nation and the world, see on the news every day. Whether you or I have an affair doesn't mean squat. But when sanctimonious a--clowns try to impeach the President of the United States for having a consenting affair while also having an affair, then, yea, that means something. Hypocrite come to mind. That's what I'm talking about. And that's why, yes, i take a personal glee in seeing them fall when they start the water works when they get caught, or have to resign in shame when the moralizing finger pointer is found doing little boys behind the alter. if they weren't so obnoxious with their moral superiority, then people might have a little more compassion for their human frailties.
Or they can simply take a cue from Rush "every other drug addict is scum except for me, of course, because I'm special" Limbaugh.
So who exactly are you talking about Peggy?
DocHolliday
11-30-11, 11:52pm
... comparing Clinton to Cain is disingenuous, in that Clinton was very competent in everything else, and Cain is pretty much clueless in most things required of a President, ... Democrats aren't in your face shaking their finger and telling you how you should live ...
Or course, Clinton had his professional goon squad to go on the attack against the women he messed around with when the truth started coming out. "Drag a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park and there's no telling what you'll get"-James Carville on Paula Jones. Cain appears to be a rank amateur when it comes to dealing with this type of stuff.
As far as Democrats not telling us how to live, are you familiar with Al Gore? There are plenty of dems that want to tell us what kind of light bulbs we can use, how many mpg our cars can get, what kind of guns we can own, ad infinitum...
With gas near $4.00 a gallon a lot of people are glad the government told auto manufactures how much mpg cars should get years ago. I also like the savings I get on my electric bill with my CFL blubs.
With gas near $4.00 a gallon a lot of people are glad the government told auto manufactures how much mpg cars should get years ago. I also like the savings I get on my electric bill with my CFL blubs.
$4.00 a gallon? That'd be nice!
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-EPPpmTUPKUo/TshgsntxjmI/AAAAAAAAEQw/wg9ijmFc6TY/s576/IMG_0255.JPG
Still, it's not the business of the government to dictate how many MPG my vehicles ought to get, or what kind of light bulbs I am allowed to use.
So who exactly are you talking about Peggy?
Glad you asked.
Mark Foley, US representative
Ted Haggart, no less than the leader of the National Association of Evangelicals
Larry "wide stance" Craig, US representative
Bob Allen, Florida house of representatives
Glen Murphy, ooh, national chairman of the young republicans (ouch!)
Roberto Arango, Puerto Rican state senator (ok, not a big player, but republican and, of course, anti-gay, so naturally has pics posted on a gay site)
And these are just the anti-gay, gay sex scandals. I don't have time to go through all who simply cheat on their spouses. How many of them were on the 'let's get Clinton' bandwagon. And then there's Newt. How many ethics violations did he rack up? All the while cheating on his various spouses, one critically ill at the time.
$4.00 a gallon? That'd be nice!
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-EPPpmTUPKUo/TshgsntxjmI/AAAAAAAAEQw/wg9ijmFc6TY/s576/IMG_0255.JPG
Still, it's not the business of the government to dictate how many MPG my vehicles ought to get, or what kind of light bulbs I am allowed to use.
Yea, the government shouldn't be looking out for us! After all, it's not there for us, is it. And they shouldn't be telling meat packers what to put in their hamburger, or baby formula, like China. And I really wish they hadn't specified the spacing in crib bars, cause, you know, overpopulation and all. And speaking of light bulbs, why do we even have electrical codes anyway? I mean, it's not like you can see the wiring in a house when you buy it so, no problem. Out of sight, out of mind! And with cars, hell, why do we let the government intrude with yearly inspections? If it rolls, it's good, i always say. Who needs two headlights anyway, I can see just fine with one. And all the other s---cans on the road? Just makes driving more interesting.
Yea, we don't need the gov looking out for our welfare and pocketbook. That way they can spend more time with really important things like anti-gay legislation, anti-choice legislation, and reaffirming 'in god we trust' on our coin.;)
Ever consider what the price of gas would be without all the heavy government subsidy? And I'm not talking about tax breaks for big oil...
http://www.iags.org/n1030034.htm
As you think about $5.28 gas keep in mind that this report was from 2003. The average price of gas that year was $1.56.
Ever consider what the price of gas would be without all the heavy government subsidy? And I'm not talking about tax breaks for big oil...
http://www.iags.org/n1030034.htm
As you think about $5.28 gas keep in mind that this report was from 2003. The average price of gas that year was $1.56.
And you get stuck paying for these subsidies no matter how little oil you use. OTOH, corporations paying little or no taxes see huge benefits from these subsidies.
And you get stuck paying for these subsidies no matter how little oil you use. OTOH, corporations paying little or no taxes see huge benefits from these subsidies.
Although there is a strong argument that the support for the oil industry exists thanks to the will of the voters (we all like cheap gas, right?), that statement is pretty much true. So, in terms of our government, we can either tell our representatives to phase out the "subsidies" and pay $10 or $12 or more for a gallon of gas or we can tell them to get off their butts and create an environment conducive to developing EVERY alternative to foreign oil. Or both. I vote for both, but want to trade in my truck first.
I only drive 3 or 4 thousand miles a year, so I'm in favor of eliminating price subsidies, and allowing transparent pricing for energy ASAP.
I'd love to have an all-electric vehicle with a range of maybe 50 miles and a top speed of at least 45 mph, that seats 4. That would cover 95% of my driving needs. I'd like for electric pricing to be transparent though, as well as the life cycle costs for the batteries and so on, so I could make a proper decision and not be taking money out of the pockets of my fellow citizens.
Lindi,
You need to write material for John Stewert and Stephen Colbert
Ha Ha - where do you think I got that info :-)! But I'd vote for Newt over Cain based solely on political experience. And he DID do some good things during his term - they're just not as fun to talk about :devil: Will stick with Obama and the hope for universal healthcare for all someday.
Although there is a strong argument that the support for the oil industry exists thanks to the will of the voters (we all like cheap gas, right?), that statement is pretty much true. So, in terms of our government, we can either tell our representatives to phase out the "subsidies" and pay $10 or $12 or more for a gallon of gas or we can tell them to get off their butts and create an environment conducive to developing EVERY alternative to foreign oil. Or both. I vote for both, but want to trade in my truck first.
Of course if we do eliminate the subsidies and gas goes that high then people will start to make the transition to compact cars, alternative fuel vehicles, public transit, walking and biking. Nothing spurred the purchase of compact cars (and sale of gas guzzlers) more than the rise in fuel price a couple of years ago (basic consumer suppy and demand). As well as more research and production into alternate fuel sources. Necessity is the mother of invention after all. I'm a fan of doing away with all govmint subsidies and letting business function soley on it's own merits - succeed or fail based on consumer sentiment rather than govmint intervention/funding to shore them up.
I only drive 3 or 4 thousand miles a year, so I'm in favor of eliminating price subsidies, and allowing transparent pricing for energy ASAP.
I'd love to have an all-electric vehicle with a range of maybe 50 miles and a top speed of at least 45 mph, that seats 4. That would cover 95% of my driving needs. I'd like for electric pricing to be transparent though, as well as the life cycle costs for the batteries and so on, so I could make a proper decision and not be taking money out of the pockets of my fellow citizens.
I'll take a car like that please.
I'll take a car like that please.
We all like the thought, but the question is whether or not you are actually willing to buy a car like that. Not trying to be snarky to you peggy, just trying to make the point that if consumers put their money where their mouth is there is absolutely no doubt that more and more choices will become available.
We all like the thought, but the question is whether or not you are actually willing to buy a car like that. Not trying to be snarky to you peggy, just trying to make the point that if consumers put their money where their mouth is there is absolutely no doubt that more and more choices will become available.
But it comes back around - with subsidies making gas so cheap, why would anyone choose anything else?
And even if they want to, they'll get whacked twice - even if they buy the car, they're still on the hook for supporting subsidies - and with subsidies limiting demand for these vehicles, less choices will be available and those choices will be much more expensive.
We all like the thought, but the question is whether or not you are actually willing to buy a car like that. Not trying to be snarky to you peggy, just trying to make the point that if consumers put their money where their mouth is there is absolutely no doubt that more and more choices will become available.
Agreed but unfortunately the cost to buy an alternative fuel vehicle is just too expensive for most people. Maybe we should be subsidizing those instead of fuel :-)!) Oh wait.. Solardyne! Seriously though, My Hyundai Accent sedan (close to 40 mpg) recently died and now I have a gas guzzling Ford Ranger extra cab with a V-6 that gets less than 20 mpg so I wnt to buy something else. Even the cheapest hybrid is in the $25K range - way too much for frugal old me. And if I wanted something truelly fuel efficent - like a hydrogen cell vehicle - you are talking in the $100K plus range. So I'll be sticking with something that gets less gas mileage but costs less to buy (or maybe I'll just buy another motorcycle). I just don't see the average person being able to afford any kind of alternative fuel vehicle in the near future - thus being unable to create enough demand so that more will be made (leading to prices dropping). Maybe pushing public transit (or alternative transit like biking, ride sharing, car sharing) rather than alternative fuel vehicles is the way we should be heading.
we pay $2.06 per liter, which is $7.79 per gallon here.
small, new compact hatch backs cost $17k (that's the starting price for the fit or similar).
Since 1 nzd = 1 nzd, it's important to realize that people are spending NZD in a wholly NZD economy. people like to then add in the exchange rate,
but it works like this. YOu make $35k USD per year, and you spend $13k on a new hatchback, and you spend $4.50 per gal (just say). So, that's how it fits in your budget.
live in NZ and you make $35k NZD, and you spend $17k on a new hatch back and $7.79 per gallon here.
Still, i say quality of life is better. And people are far less object oriented. :)
I wish also that they'd bring in the VW Polo with the Blue Motion 1.2l diesel, and other such highly-efficient small diesels as well. People around here would snap them up.
We all like the thought, but the question is whether or not you are actually willing to buy a car like that. Not trying to be snarky to you peggy, just trying to make the point that if consumers put their money where their mouth is there is absolutely no doubt that more and more choices will become available.
No snark taken. :) I would love to buy one of those but, one, I expect my car to last another 10 years or so and two, those are just too expensive. Hopefully, by the time i am ready to buy another car, I can get an alternative car of some sort, and yes, I would be willing to spend a bit more for this but if it's a whole lot more then, well, I can't justify it. That's the problem. People keep saying folks don't want solar panels and other alternative energy because if they did they would buy it. Well, that's just a bit arrogant in that most people just can't afford it. If you don't have the money, you don't have the money, period. I think most people would absolutely go for these things if they were even a little bit affordable. I think most people are willing to go a bit over budget for these alternative energy products, but as long as they are so outrageously expensive, they won't, or we will be on another thread in this forum yucking up all superior over people who spend money they don't have! KWIM?
But it comes back around - with subsidies making gas so cheap, why would anyone choose anything else?
Can't argue with you creaker. Time to end the subsidies, eh?
Oh BTW, and with the OP in mind for anyone who missed the news... Mr. Cain is done.
early morning
12-4-11, 12:41pm
I too would love to buy a car like that. And it's not a matter of simply having difficulty justifying an expensive purchase, but of flat-out not being able to afford one. I have a 6 yr old Hyundai Accent. He gets in the 35 MPG range, and cost me just under 10K. And we could barely afford that! He has 170+K miles. I hope to have enough to purchase another with cash in another 3-4 years- if he lasts that long, and the cost does not rise significantly. There is simply no way, barring a lottery win, we could afford a hybrid or other alternative fuel vehicle. The same problem arises when we consider solar or wind technology, or even simply adding more insulation to our home. And going into more debt to do any of the above makes little sense... although we are considering it, honestly, to upgrade the insulation.
Not to be too cynical but several reports have suggested that Cain was trying to build up himself as a motivational speaker since he had such a poor campaign plan and very limited fundraising efforts. Does this possibly make sense? Are motivational speakers that much in demand?
Are motivational speakers that much in demand?
Tony Robbins says yes.
Not to be too cynical but several reports have suggested that Cain was trying to build up himself as a motivational speaker since he had such a poor campaign plan and very limited fundraising efforts. Does this possibly make sense? Are motivational speakers that much in demand?
Another comentator suggested that his motive was to promote his books. Early in the campaign I remember seeing him holding up his book "This is Herman Cain", and wondering a. why he wrote a book before he was even president and b. why is he promoting this instead of campaigning.
Another comentator suggested that his motive was to promote his books. Early in the campaign I remember seeing him holding up his book "This is Herman Cain", and wondering a. why he wrote a book before he was even president and b. why is he promoting this instead of campaigning.
Books are a great way to get noticed. Remember when a little known state senator from Illinois "wrote" a few? Plus, they can still be great propaganda material years later, I believe various government agencies have been buying thousands of copies of the President's works for distribution across the world.
Your tax dollars at work.>8)
ApatheticNoMore
12-5-11, 1:39pm
When I last looked for a car (a few years ago, ok), hybrids were almost non-existent on the used market! I got the most fuel efficient used car I could that was not a hybrid and not a subcompact (it is a compact). Fuel efficiency was definitely on my mind when choosing my car. Do I sometimes wish I had sprung for a new hybrid at a cost of 10-15k more? Yes, I probably will next time (I see no point in giving up the perfectly good car I have now just to buy one, but someday it too will die, as is the way of all cars :~)).
By the way it is never just the cost of the car that is involved in buying a more expensive car. It is the cost of the sales taxes on the car new or used (ok those are 9-10% sales taxes in CA - so for a car costing 10k more it's really 11k more), it's the cost of the insurance (more insurance on a more expensive car, and that stuff is quite expensive as is), it's the cost of the yearly car tax being more every year (although this tax isn't a huge cost), and with a newer better car I think it's also more fear of theft. Of course theft is one thing you insure against, but even if you break even financially losing a car sucks (and car theft is pretty common).
By the way when I bought my last car I had NEVER bought something so expensive in my life before (this car was barely used, the car I had bought before this had over 100k miles on it when I bought it). I was literally shaking and trembling with fear to make the purchase ... omg so much money, so much money ... I've been happy with it, but still do sometimes wish I'd gone the hybrid route.
Books are a great way to get noticed. Remember when a little known state senator from Illinois "wrote" a few? Plus, they can still be great propaganda material years later, I believe various government agencies have been buying thousands of copies of the President's works for distribution across the world.
Your tax dollars at work.>8)
Is there nothing at all this man can do or say that you won't try to twist and sully? I take it you don't think he wrote his books. Why not? And where is the link please about the 'various government agencies' buying thousands of his books. And no, Glen Beck does not pass as a credible link!
You just can't stand it that he is an intelligent, articulate man who just possibly pulled our butts from the edge of the free fall that George Bush set up.
The whole vehicle gas mileage fallacy makes me hot under the collar. I had a 1972 Toyota Corolla back in the late 70's. I think I paid $500 for it, but have no memory of how many miles were on that car (it was well cared for, but very well used). It was kind of squatty looking, mostly purple, a little loud on the highway, went from 0 to 60 in about a week and got close to 40 mpg no matter where I drove it. Forty mpg in a car that would be right at forty years old. Whether you blame big oil, big government, the big three or American's lust for big cars for our overextended run of 15 mpg land yachts the simple fact is that we don't seem to have made any progress in 40 years. Why do you suppose bailout funds weren't contingent on production of 40 mpg, or 100 mpg, autos?
Is there nothing at all this man can do or say that you won't try to twist and sully? I take it you don't think he wrote his books. Why not? And where is the link please about the 'various government agencies' buying thousands of his books. And no, Glen Beck does not pass as a credible link!
You just can't stand it that he is an intelligent, articulate man who just possibly pulled our butts from the edge of the free fall that George Bush set up.
Prior to his first book, the only published material he is ever known to have written consists of a short poem, "Underground":
Under water grottos, caverns
Filled with apes
That eat figs.
Stepping on the figs
That the apes
Eat, they crunch.
The apes howl, bare
Their fangs, dance . . .
Quite a leap from point A to point B.
Oh, and here's a link for ya:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/25/state-department-buys-70000-worth-obama-memoir/?page=all
The State Department (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/department-of-state/) has bought more than $70,000 worth of books authored by President Obama (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/barack-obama/), sending out copies as Christmas (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/christmas/) gratuities and stocking “key libraries” around the world with “Dreams From My Father” more than a decade after its release.
loosechickens
12-5-11, 5:06pm
Alan, you spend WAY too much time in those far rightwing circles, and it must just frost you completely to have President Obama be so clearly articulate, competent, educated and able. Not to mention, an excellent writer. Just too much accomplishment for comfort in your circles, right? SO much easier to denigrate him, pass on every canard you can find, etc., on such things as the authorship of his books, but........
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/us/politics/18memoirs.html?pagewanted=all
excerpt:
"Mr. Obama’s original plan was to write a book about race relations. But, sitting down to write, he found his mind “pulled toward rockier shores.” So the book became more personal — the record of an interior journey, as he put it in the introduction, “a boy’s search for his father, and through that a search for a workable meaning for his life as a black American.”
Mr. Obama was given an office to write in at the University of Chicago through a surprising connection. Douglas G. Baird, a professor who was head of the law school’s appointments committee, had learned of Mr. Obama from Michael W. McConnell, a conservative constitutional scholar then at Chicago whom President Bush would later make a federal judge.
Professor McConnell encountered Mr. Obama during the editing of an article he wrote for The Harvard Law Review, Professor Baird said recently. “He sent a note saying this person is really brilliant, we should have him on our radar screen,” Professor Baird said. Professor Baird called Mr. Obama at Harvard and asked if he was interested in teaching.
“I don’t remember his exact words, but it was something to the effect that, ‘Well, in fact, I want to write this book.’ What he really wanted was the Virginia Woolf equivalent of a clean, well lighted room.” So Professor Baird got him one, a small office near the law library, along with a law school fellowship that Professor Baird hoped might later lead to his full-time teaching.
By the time Mr. Obama landed at Times Books, he had a partial manuscript. He required minimal editing, said Henry Ferris, his editor, who is now a vice president and executive editor at William Morrow. He simply needed guidance in paring and shaping the sections already written and keeping the rest from becoming too long. The writing, Mr. Ferris said, “is very much his own.”
It's well worth reading the whole link... but you embarass yourself, Alan, with aspersions and attempts at indication that President Obama did not write his own books. Truly. I keep saying that I think better of you, but honestly, that is changing. Keep on if you like with that kind of stuff, but it really works against you.
Is there nothing at all this man can do or say that you won't try to twist and sully? I take it you don't think he wrote his books. Why not? And where is the link please about the 'various government agencies' buying thousands of his books. And no, Glen Beck does not pass as a credible link!
You just can't stand it that he is an intelligent, articulate man who just possibly pulled our butts from the edge of the free fall that George Bush set up.
Alan, you spend WAY too much time in those far rightwing circles, and it must just frost you completely to have President Obama be so clearly articulate, competent, educated and able. Not to mention, an excellent writer. Just too much accomplishment for comfort in your circles, right? SO much easier to denigrate him, pass on every canard you can find, etc., on such things as the authorship of his books, but........
Naw, just an opinion. Another one that just happens to bring out the worst in a few of you. >8)
By the way, when you guys make me the subject du jour, I know I must be doing something right. :moon:
... but you embarass yourself, Alan, with aspersions and attempts at indication that President Obama did not write his own books. Truly. I keep saying that I think better of you, but honestly, that is changing. Keep on if you like with that kind of stuff, but it really works against you.
If you're expecting a mea culpa from me, in order to get back into your good graces, I'm afraid you're wasting your time.
Might I suggest you place me on your 'ignore' (http://www.simplelivingforum.net/profile.php?do=ignorelist) list (link provided for your convenience) rather than let me disappoint you so. It would save you the aggravation and simultaneously spare the rest of us your inappropriately judgmental diatribes.
I don't see any reason to question Mr. Obama's command of the English language. I actually enjoy reading his prose and listening to him speak because he is quite eloquent (and I really don't care if he reads off a teleprompter or not). What becomes frustrating is the realization that the flowing pattern of speech tends to keep presenting the same ideas over and over. I wish Mr. Obama a long and fruitful career as an author, but when it comes to leading the country I'm starting to think we can sacrifice a little of the polish in return for some straight talk.
I don't see any reason to question Mr. Obama's command of the English language. I actually enjoy reading his prose and listening to him speak because he is quite eloquent (and I really don't care if he reads off a teleprompter or not). What becomes frustrating is the realization that the flowing pattern of speech tends to keep presenting the same ideas over and over. I wish Mr. Obama a long and fruitful career as an author, but when it comes to leading the country I'm starting to think we can sacrifice a little of the polish in return for some straight talk.
Yea, and what new ideas do the republicans have, tell me that? Give me these new ideas and I'll seriously consider voting for them. Not only do the republicans sound like a broken record on their 'ideas' but these ideas have been proven to not work, and in fact harm the country. Bush tax cuts? Where did that get us? More war? No thanks.
No president, congress, or white knight on a horse is going to reinvent the wheel. But at least President Obama is trying things that could work, where as the republicans just keep trying to convince us a square wheel really will roll.
Maybe not so much new as just different, peggy. I'm not convinced either party's brass would let a candidate generate an original thought, but what we're doing now isn't working. It's time to try a different approach before its too late. And I do think there are candidates out there who know what is going on and will be willing to talk straight about it when the time comes.
iris lily
12-6-11, 10:42pm
Yea, and what new ideas do the republicans have, tell me that? ....
You are welcome to look for "new ideas" but I am interested in going forward with a tried and true idea: live on your income and do not go into debt.
That is a beautifully simple idea. Carrying it out for this country is complicated, apparently. But the idea itself is pure simple gold.
In another post you credit Mitt Romney for Romneycare and say that it doesn't matter who thought of it, but I doubt that that was a :new idea". The Mass. citizens stole it somewhere, no doubt.
I don't look for the Prez to come up with new ideas, I want the PRez to provide leadership to this country to move on cutting debt. It's an old tired idea Obama voted for balanced budget only when he was in Congress and knew it would not happen. That's is weak.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.