[quote]polo77j wrote:
if by stability you mean +8% unemployment for the last 3 years , then you’re absolutely right.
I know I know, the rate has dropped, but so has the labor pool, which means people are just giving up looking for work and aren’t being counted…[/quote]
Then why is consumer spending and housing up?
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Hold on, so you’re going to tackle a completely objective question like ‘is he intelligent’ with a stupid, ignorant and biased article?
[/quote]
Regardless of the tone of the article, you are ignoring the known facts that this article mentions. This stuff is in the public domain.
“Intelligence” is an abstract thing. I used the word “wisdom” deliberately. Although it is difficult to talk about such an abstract thing I clearly discern different types of intelligence and wisdom. Obama has what my grandfather would’ve called ‘rat cunning.’
Absolute nonsense as I have shown.
Oh please!
Actually they do. And only 23% of courses at Harvard even have examinations.
"Since the 1970s, it has been virtually impossible to flunk out of American colleges. And it is an open secret that “the best” colleges require the least work and give out the highest grade point averages…The most successful neither write books and papers that stand up to criticism nor release their academic records. - Codevilla
'In 2010, Thomas Espenshade and his colleague Alexandria Radford produced an analysis of applications for eight highly competitive colleges and universities. What was most revealing was the way “affirmative action” has progressed from mere race bias to ideological apartheid. Espenshade and Radford found that participating in “red state” activities such as 4-H. ROTC, or the Future Farmers of America substantially reduced a student’s chances of being accepted by these colleges. “Being an officer or winning awards” with such groups had an even more severe impact, reducing your chances of admission by 60 to 65 percent.
No, he wasn’t. He was lying about that. See link above.
Those aren’t good things.
They’re not brilliant either.
[quote]
Herman Cain has one of the most impressive credentials/resume out of any Presidential candidate I have ever seen, clearly evidencing he has some sort of intellect. But then you get to know him more and realise how much of a complete idiot he is.[/quote]
No, Herman Cain is a business man with life experience. He produces things. He has wisdom and intelligence within his field of experience. He contributes to society and the economy. Obama is a privileged, product of an entitlement society and he has never produced anything. He’s a taker. Unlike the first black editor of the Harvard Law Review(Charles Hamilton Houston,) Obama did not get the job due to his merit. In fact, Obama is the first Harvard Law Review “editor” who never wrote an article or published a single paper. You really know nothing about what’s going on the world.
I’m not going to quote everything you replied but you need to understand the article you posted doesn’t actually show any facts but attempts to highlight the lack of facts. The facts are in his biography (what ever source you want to read), which you can read and study if you want. What you should derive is his vast knowledge in numerous issues ranging from domestic community problems to international affairs. And most importantly, his ability to understand and connect with people.
Frankly, you’re being dishonest by alleging he isn’t smart because you haven’t read his thesis. It’s obvious you don’t agree with his political views and that’s making you attack his character. The guy is smart, everyone knows he’s smart and now you’re changing the conversation to semantics by using “wisdom.”
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
I’ve said it a million times, people want stability.[/quote]
True, and they don’t have it. Don’t believe me? Go ask small businesses why they aren’t hiring. Quiet a few will tell you they have no idea how much a new employee will cost because of the uncertainty caused by ObamaCare (and its yet to be written regulations).
The private sector has been craving stability since 2008. Instead of introducing calm and stability, Obama introduced the opposite.[/quote]
Recent economic data contradicts your statement.
Actually, if you want to talk about small businesses you have to start by analysing their true impact on the macro economy. Not surprisingly, the media has made people to believe small business are the be end of economic performance. While yes, small businesses are important to the economy they aren’t as relevant as people think. I won’t go into detail but just to say that mid to large corporations, especially in our times of globalisation are probably more important to economic activity.
I also disagree with you when you say he hasn’t brought stability. Are people purposely trying to ignore the massive financial crisis of 2008/2009? The bailouts and financial reform after that crisis calmed people and the markets to some extent. Things are finally stabilising from that traumatic period of time. Plus, Romney, Gingrich and Santorum would all have had some sort of fiscal response to the global financial crisis if they were president at the time.[/quote]
I’ll be sure to let my family and several others know that their small business isn’t important to economic activity!
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
I’m not going to quote everything you replied but you need to understand the article you posted doesn’t actually show any facts but attempts to highlight the lack of facts.
[/quote]
That is a fact in itself. Obama did not produce a single piece of work of any sort. He did nothing. In fact, his lawyers have suppressed his academic record. His private sector legal work consisted of putting newsletters into binders.
He couldn’t even do that by himself. Ghostwritten by the terrorist William Ayers who funded Obama’s campaign. Obama is an extreme narcissist. Who publishes an autobiography before they’ve done anything? Obama hasn’t done anything.
A radical “activist.” His views on “international affairs” straight out of Pravda - his closest associates terrorists and extremists. As a Senator he was on the far-far-left. I remember in 2007 Hillary Clinton was voting yes on a bill to impose sanctions on Iran - Obama was vehemently opposed to the bill. But he didn’t show up because he was busy campaigning for his Presidential bid. He voted “present” 130 times to votes that were presented to the Senate. He did nothing as a Senator.
Agreed. He did do that.
[quote]
Frankly, you’re being dishonest by alleging he isn’t smart because you haven’t read his thesis. It’s obvious you don’t agree with his political views and that’s making you attack his character. The guy is smart, everyone knows he’s smart and now you’re changing the conversation to semantics by using “wisdom.” [/quote]
Not so. I could name many ideological opponents on the extreme left who I think are very intelligent. And regardless of what you say the concept of “intelligence” is an obscure thing.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Go ask small businesses why they aren’t hiring. Quiet a few will tell you they have no idea how much a new employee will cost because of the uncertainty caused by ObamaCare (and its yet to be written regulations).
[/quote]
I have sat at the decision making table of the companies I’ve worked at for over twenty years. We hire when we have more demand for our product than people to produce them. Employee costs are certainly interconnected with any number of other factors that effect price, that effect sales, and so on, but if demand exists we have always hired to meet it.
We are doing so at this time.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
…he’ll use executive power more and more to try and achieve these ends, because he has proven he doesn’t govern well when challenged by differing ideas by people who also have authority to affect the outcome of policy, and he’ll have to go his own way where he gets to preside over an adminsitrative fiefdom.
But, I don’t necessarily think that would be a bad thing long term - it would force a (bigger) national discussion over the use (and abuse) of the regulatory state (which we are way overdue on).[/quote]
This is what is out of hand.
A review of just the last 100 years demonstrates how each adminstration, regardless of party, used the ceiling of the previous administration as their floor and proceeded to build from there. Of course Congress and the Judicial don’t have anything to boast about either.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Actually they do. And only 23% of courses at Harvard even have examinations.
[/quote]
Where exactly did you come by this statistic?
Personally, I’ve never understood how or why people “demonize” “the other side.” There has come a debate about whether or not Obama is “smart.” To me, it’s silly. The man became president. Obviously it takes a lot of intelligence to do this. Honestly, I think it is silly to argue that he is dumb/unintelligent/unwise.
For what it’s worth, I think the same of Bush/Palin/Rumsfeld/etc.
eh, my 2 cents.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
[quote]polo77j wrote:
if by stability you mean +8% unemployment for the last 3 years , then you’re absolutely right.
I know I know, the rate has dropped, but so has the labor pool, which means people are just giving up looking for work and aren’t being counted…[/quote]
Then why is consumer spending and housing up?[/quote]
Because consumers are spending more … which doesn’t explain much about the drop in the labor pool which is one of the reasons unemployment has decreased. A reason which is grossly overlooked by economic reporting in the mass media … don’t skirt the issue or try to spin it … it’s a fact that one of the main reasons unemployment isn’t higher is because less are being counted in the labor pool
Over the past year, there was a 2.45% decrease in the labor pool (BLS), which means, numbers wise, there are over 2,000,000 people not being counted in the labor pool that were being accounted for before to calculate the unemployment statistic being reported in the news. These numbers were last estimated on March 1st, 2012
If you really want, and if I really want I guess, I could run a regression model and a coefficient of determination statistic to see about how much that number explains the decrease in the unemployment statistic…
I guess my real point goes back to your assumption that things are peachy keen and “stable” … and by stable I assumed you meant people being so used to not having jobs (around 2,000,000) that just plum up and quit looking. That technically IS stability by definition. But probably not the type you really wanted now is it
[quote]pushharder wrote:
The fact that it’s NOT a foregone conclusion that Obama will get slaughtered this November tells me many Americans just “don’t get it.”[/quote]
Always good for a smile 
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
US Economy is good and getting better (manufacturing, jobs, property, financials), things are finally stabilizing…
[/quote]
Incorrect.
[/quote]
You tell him Puss , let’s ignore the facts
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Personally, I’ve never understood how or why people “demonize” “the other side.” There has come a debate about whether or not Obama is “smart.” To me, it’s silly. The man became president. Obviously it takes a lot of intelligence to do this. Honestly, I think it is silly to argue that he is dumb/unintelligent/unwise.
For what it’s worth, I think the same of Bush/Palin/Rumsfeld/etc.
eh, my 2 cents.
[/quote]
Agree.
Mufasa
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Plus, how can you say a guy who captivates people like no one in history,[/quote]
So did Hitler.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
nails every interview and gives high-quality speeches is not smart.[/quote]
Truly an eloquent speaker.
Some of these are normal speech bloopers, which there are nothing wrong with. People make mistakes, so do presidents. But when Bush made a mistake, we never heard the end of it. Here in SF, the local station played Bush’s fool me once mistake over and over again throughout his presidency. However, if it had not been for youtube, at least here in SF, no one would have seen these gaffes. Yeah, no bias there…
The rest, however, show that he is either an idiot who can’t get facts straight, or a flat out liar, I’ll let you decide which you prefer your savior to be.
Here’s a little story for you, and it’s true. A couple got married 20 years ago. Both college grads, one with a Master’s degree. They worked very hard, 40-60 hours a week each. They bought used cars for 15 years , “vacations” were staying with family for the first 15 as well. They lived well below their means, invested in mutual funds and saved and invested more. They sacrificed their “couples” time, “me” time, and fun time. They raised a daughter who they sent to private school, as the tax money is wasted on shitty sub standard education. They will be paying for her to go to a university out of the country so she doesn’t get more brain washed. Their effect tax rate next year, thanks in part to ObamaCare, will be 43%.
Does this sound right to you? Does this sound like America? If a couple makes over 250K a year, filing jointly, they are in the highest tax bracket. The same as millionaires. Here’s the catch though, so shut the fuck up. The millionaires get their compensation through channels that end up being claimed as capital gains tax, so they do only pay 15%. Said couple pays 36% and then the 15% on income from investments. This couple is the vilified 1%.
Obama is a smart man who really cares about his ideal America. It just so happens to be in direct opposition to what I think is good for America, ie; me and my family.
My bad, sorry…^
concurred.