Finally A Liberal With His Eyes Opened!

Posted in the Keavy Forum

Courage

Houston, TX

#1 Jun 20, 2013
Finally, Matt Patterson and Newsweek speak out about Obama. This is timely and tough. As many of you know, Newsweek has a reputation for being extremely liberal. The fact that their editor saw fit to print the following article about Obama and the one that appears in the latest Newsweek, makes this a truly amazing event, and a news story in and of itself. At last, the truth about our President and his agenda are starting to trickle through the “protective wall” built around him by the liberal media.

__________

I Too Have Become Disillusioned.

By Matt Patterson ( columnist – opinion writer)

Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?

Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer;" a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.

He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking:how on Earth was such a man elected president?

Not content to wait for history, the incomparableNorman Podhoretzaddressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal:To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme,he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard - because of the color of his skin.
Courage

Houston, TX

#2 Jun 20, 2013
P2 Podhoretzcontinues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

Podhoretzputs his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of theObama phenomenon - affirmative action.Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, andespecially white liberals,feel good about themselves.

Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from theracist policy that is affirmative action.Yes, racist.Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin - that's affirmative action in a nutshell,and if that isn't racism, then nothing is.

And that is what America did to Obama.True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.

What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks?In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualificationsnonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character.Those people – conservatives included - ought now to be deeply embarrassed.

The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that's when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth-it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.(An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches)

And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles.Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess.Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence.(The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track.)But really, what were we to expect?The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will thecurrent erosion of liberty and prosperitymake sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.
Courage

Houston, TX

#3 Jun 20, 2013
Speakup?
uuummm

London, KY

#4 Jun 20, 2013
Do you know why Obama was re-elected?

Plain and simple-the Republican party could not come up with anything better.

If they stay on the same path a Hillary will win next election.

Republicans are so far out of touch on social issues that it is insane. And they don't seem to even want to try to understand. Their head is in the sand and they love it!
Punkinhead

London, KY

#5 Jun 20, 2013
uuummm wrote:
Do you know why Obama was re-elected?
Plain and simple-the Republican party could not come up with anything better.
If they stay on the same path a Hillary will win next election.
Republicans are so far out of touch on social issues that it is insane. And they don't seem to even want to try to understand. Their head is in the sand and they love it!
47% of the vote was bought and paid for with entitlements.

“smiling on a cloudy day”

Since: Jan 09

Shakedown Street

#6 Jun 20, 2013
uuummm wrote:
Do you know why Obama was re-elected?
Plain and simple-the Republican party could not come up with anything better.
If they stay on the same path a Hillary will win next election.
Republicans are so far out of touch on social issues that it is insane. And they don't seem to even want to try to understand. Their head is in the sand and they love it!
That's exactly right. Of all the contenders in the GOP primary, they went with the Mormon billionaire.

Not gonna happen.
uuummm

London, KY

#7 Jun 20, 2013
Punkinhead wrote:
<quoted text>
47% of the vote was bought and paid for with entitlements.
This is a perfect example of the head in the sand mode! Excuses, excuses, excuses. Give us something better.
Punkinhead

London, KY

#8 Jun 20, 2013
uuummm wrote:
<quoted text>
This is a perfect example of the head in the sand mode! Excuses, excuses, excuses. Give us something better.
Exactly. Anyone that can comprehend the article knows it to be true. Only the most disillusioned and malleable keep their head buried. Seems easier than giving up their entitlements.

SpeakUp

Harwood Heights, IL

#9 Jun 20, 2013
...and now for the rest of the story.

Matt Patterson is a CONSERVATIVE columnist and political COMMENTATOR. My how eRumors spread huh?

Fact, this was an article from the American Thinker dated Aug 18 2011. The cover of Newsweek is real but the article was not in that edition.

Actually it is a real article called "The Affirmative Action President 8/18/11.

Commentators are like as-holes because they are nothing but opinion. I pay no attention period. That term was only invented to make propaganda legal.

Real news reporters are a dying art.

Bronston is correct. The GOP is so weak, they couldn't even present a viable candidate. It wasn't a very good idea to elect one that had cost the country jobs instead of creating them.

Reports are showing the economy is getting better, confidence is better and the fat cats are putting cash into the market that has been sitting on the sidelines for political purposes. I knew in time we'd wear them down because if you want to make money....it takes money.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll go back to reading about the purse manufacturers who are being brought up for tax evasion...after they were given the biggest taxcut in American history. I told you people. Nothing's good enough for greed.
SpeakUp

Harwood Heights, IL

#10 Jun 20, 2013
Courage wrote:
Speakup?
I LOVE it! One of your Judges responded to your post "Brilliant". When my name is uttered, it's always brilliant. I guess I need to hit your Judge button and "Agree"? lol

“smiling on a cloudy day”

Since: Jan 09

Shakedown Street

#11 Jun 20, 2013
To be fair, 2nd term incumbent elections are chances for the opposing party to nominate the guy who brings in the cash yet has a longshot chance of actually winning.

The GOP knew Romney was set up to fail, just like the Democrats did with Kerry.
SpeakUp

Harwood Heights, IL

#12 Jun 20, 2013
Bronston Man wrote:
To be fair, 2nd term incumbent elections are chances for the opposing party to nominate the guy who brings in the cash yet has a longshot chance of actually winning.
The GOP knew Romney was set up to fail, just like the Democrats did with Kerry.
Are you kidding me? Romney thought he had it in the bag, so sayeth his running mate. He came out so powerful, as that big ole' elite, equity fund man, tellin' us all he KNOWS how to creat jobs while in fact he took companies down the tubes. However, he did always manage to come out smelling like a rose himself. When you take a govt. loan to get a company supposedly back on it's feet, pay back that "interest only" loan whereby the payment is 100% deductible, it'll create a false positive bottom line at some point, which means "hey dudes, we've seen a profit so let's hand out dividends to the yacht club executives"....then we can walk away in a year or two and say "well, we tried" ! lmao

You can tell none of these sweet Obama haters on here never saw the inside of a business school !
SpeakUp

Harwood Heights, IL

#13 Jun 20, 2013
Romney took "entitlements", but wait a minute...don't taxpayers furnish the govt. that funded Romney's loans that eventually wound up in his pocket? Nah...can't be!

“smiling on a cloudy day”

Since: Jan 09

Shakedown Street

#14 Jun 21, 2013
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you kidding me? Romney thought he had it in the bag
That's true, but if a man believes he will one day be a god himself with hundreds of celestial wives on the planet Kolob, he'll believe anything.

The party, who really knew better, pretended they still had a chance for one reason: to keep the fundraising dollars rolling in. The GOP even went so far as to openly deny every poll showing Obama beating Romney. Remember the "unskewed polls" website showing Romney actually winning by 5-10 points? LOL

Just like the NBA finals, if the Heat had been 3 games up on the Spurs no one would have cared and the ratings would had been at a all time low.

Instead, the GOP tricked billionaires into investing bucketloads of cash on a lost cause.
SpeakUp

Harwood Heights, IL

#15 Jun 21, 2013
Bronston Man wrote:
<quoted text>
That's true, but if a man believes he will one day be a god himself with hundreds of celestial wives on the planet Kolob, he'll believe anything.
The party, who really knew better, pretended they still had a chance for one reason: to keep the fundraising dollars rolling in. The GOP even went so far as to openly deny every poll showing Obama beating Romney. Remember the "unskewed polls" website showing Romney actually winning by 5-10 points? LOL
Just like the NBA finals, if the Heat had been 3 games up on the Spurs no one would have cared and the ratings would had been at a all time low.
Instead, the GOP tricked billionaires into investing bucketloads of cash on a lost cause.
Since you're one of the more intelligent ones, Bronston, I have to admit I somewhat agree with your clear and precise points. Romney indeed could pull in the bucks, even in "private" events in the Cayman's, and, Israel. The wealthy tend to admire another man of wealth and enjoy hearing about how he managed to scr-w the little guys, then make it look as though he was doing them a favor. Gotta love it. You know, sort of how the GOP does in the "southern comfort" demographics? Isn't that like "well, suck in that coal dust and die early and let your babies choke on it, but hey, we're supplying jobs fer ya"!

“smiling on a cloudy day”

Since: Jan 09

Shakedown Street

#16 Jun 21, 2013
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
"well, suck in that coal dust and die early and let your babies choke on it, but hey, we're supplying jobs fer ya"!
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”- John Steinbeck
SpeakUp

Harwood Heights, IL

#17 Jun 21, 2013
Bronston Man wrote:
<quoted text>
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”- John Steinbeck
I think the Dust Bowl refugees is what got Steinbeck originally all wound up.

Some see the working class as having political power. I do. Alot just don't realize that.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Keavy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Above the law 20 min Busch 5
does anyone know anything about goobers towing ... 56 min rudolf 1
Anyone "unbundled" by Windstream and Dish? 1 hr Snapple 2
David Mattlock 1 hr Please 1
best place for short trendy haircut 2 hr short hair cut 6
High quality diesel, low price at BP&Mararhon 2 hr local 3
Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 3 hr ChromiuMan 131,883
Keavy Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Keavy People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Keavy News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Keavy

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 12:39 pm PST

Bleacher Report12:39PM
Thomas Seeking Broncos Record for 100-Yard Receiving Games
ESPN 1:03 PM
Browns' Mingo fined $16,537 for hit on Dalton
NFL 1:47 PM
'Sound FX' spies Manziel's meeting with Marvin Lewis
Yahoo! Sports 2:09 PM
RT Eric Winston quickly settling in with Bengals
NBC Sports 3:14 PM
Losers of 13 of 14, Titans set for top draft pick - NBC Sports