Powered by TypePad

« Friday Afternoon Chat | Main | As They Stand Up We Will Stand Down »

September 06, 2008


Cecil Turner

No, and nothing that I've written contains any such suggestion.

Didn't claim you did. The point is that someone's good (or poor) opinion of someone else is as close to a meaningless datapoint as one can get. Extrapolating from that is a waste of time, not a telling metric of merit. Cheers.


.. and Palineo-cons, too.

I'm one of those!


Shoot. I missed Foo Bar's list of Obama accomplishments. Did he provide it and I missed it?


Hooray for Foo Bar! Argues with conservatives without flying off the handle. Is not a sophist. Pretty cool.

Barney Frank

Argues with conservatives without flying off the handle. Is not a sophist. Pretty cool.

That generally indicates an incipient 'road to Damascus' moment.

Foo Bar

Did he provide it and I missed it?

I don't have time to compile a laundry list from scratch all on my own, but you could start by looking here and here.


Thanks Foo Bar. Now I'll have to go explore exactly what his role was.


CBS on BO's Obama's IL state senate record:

If true, have did I miss this?...

"Obama regularly supported gun-control measures, including a ban on semiautomatic "assault weapons" and a limit on handgun purchases to one a month.

He also opposed letting people use a self-defense argument if charged with violating local handgun bans by using weapons in their homes. The bill was a reaction to a Chicago-area man who, after shooting an intruder, was charged with a handgun violation." Whoa!

JM Hanes


"False. Read my "defied" link again::

Yes, I did miss the mention of Obama. Maybe that's because your citation doesn't even begin to approach a basis for laying claim to ethics reform in the Senate. I crossed the aisle to vote on a Republican amendment to someone else's ethics bill! It doesn't really even sound all that good as the example Obama uses of doing heroic battle with his own party. His tacit admission that the Democrats were alligned against ethics reform is just a freebie. That probably pisses Reid off more than the actual vote did.

I don't blame you for bugging out when you have so little to work with here. Which is the whole point, of course.

JM Hanes


Can't believe I forgot to add that:

"My mistakes were was not material..."

...unless we count providing you with a convenient excuse for avoiding further discussion of the actual question at issue. But never mind. You clearly don't need my help to believe what you want to believe.


I want to thank you Foo Bar for leading me to a useful and instructive insight into the meaning of an honors degree from Harvard Law School, and in particular the suspiciousness of Obama's designation. What would induce Harvard to so cheapen their degrees, adverse to self-interest?

Foo Bar

unless we count providing you with a convenient excuse for avoiding further discussion of the actual question at issue


My "my mistakes were not material" comment was left at 12:40 last night and was in reference to the exchange Clarice and I had about how much evidence the HLS review presidency was of Obama's merit (specifically, our discussion of the contemporaneous 1990 NYT article). Since then, I've left 9 or 10 additional comments, with numerous links to evidence from conservative sources of Obama's ability. How does that amount to "avoiding the actual issue"? I'm sorry. I can't live my whole life on JOM (as much as I'm sure you all wish I would ;) ).

JM Hanes

Just in case FooBar lurks, here's something to toss into the Harvard pot. Discouraged by how hard it was to effect changes as a community organizer (which appears to require controlling the people you organize), co-worker, Mike Kruglik, reports:

“He said, ‘I need to go there [Harvard Law School] to find out more about power. How do powerful people think? What kind of networks do they have? How do they connect to each other?’”
Apparently, he found out -- although he credits Michelle with the best advice, doesn't he?


FooBar, You clai you didn't notice the Hotel California clause at thetop of JOM? Heh..Ignorance of the clause is no excuse.

JM Hanes


Didn't realize you were still here. I thought the comment which offends you was a perfectly obvious addendum to my post, immediately above it, which referried to my mistake. The quasi-quote was just an aide-memoire as to the apparent standard, set by you, for discourse here. Unless I'm mistaken, the issue we were discussing was Obama's claimed accomplishments, not his claimed potential.



Have you an idea why Obama left The Chicago Annenberg Challenge board position off of his resume given that his resume is a tad thin?

And do you have an explanation for the coordinated attacks on WGN radio and Dr. Stanley Kurtz at the behest of the Obama Campaign?

What is Obama trying to hide?

JM Hanes

I maybe went a little heavy on the italics there. :-)


"what is Obama trying to hide?"

Judging by the info Foo Bar Left in his 3:33 PM links, Obama is supposedly known for his work on openness in govt. Here is a man who is running for President of the US, but we can't find out what his birth cert says, what his name is, what he did at the colleges he attended, who he performed legal work for, what his medical records say, what he did in the Illinois Legis, etc, etc.
We are supposed to be dumb enough to believe that he represents some kind of committment to openness in govt? You've got to be kidding.
" passing a bill that created a searchable database of recipients of federal contracts and grant" Yet we can't find out which hospital he was born in.

Was supposed to have done something on lobbyists according to the link: "the strongest ethics legislation to emerge from Congress yet"
Here's some lobbyist who works for Obama:

"# Only one of 35 bundlers to raise over $500,000 for Obama, on par with Hollywood moguls Daivd Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg
# Not only a registered lobbyist, but Lobbyist of the Year (2006)
# Not only Lobbyist of the Year, but he played a lobbyist (himself) on HBO's K Street
# Did I mention he likes to lobby?
# And that Obama does not?


“I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more than any other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists — and won. They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president.”

— Barack Obama, Speech in Des Moines, IA, November 10, 2007"


From foo bar's link again: "and introducing legislation to criminalize deceptive political tactics and voter intimidation."

For studies of the 2008 caucuses won by Obama and the thug tactics used see the www.Lynettelong.com Under caucus fraud.

But the real intimidation apparently was in the effort to insure that a proper rollcall vote was not taken at the convention.

"WHAT ROLL CALL VOTE?" some of the most chilling voter intimidation stories ever told.

"KENTUCKY: Moretta Bosley: "I was overwhelmed by e-mails in support of Hillary. I want you to know that kept my word and voted for Hillary despite strong pressure to do otherwise."

A delegate: "Our Hillary delegation was shouted at, told that they would be perceived as racists, told that their careers would be over if they voted for Hillary. Perhaps because of this, Hillary had a private meeting to thank our delegates. Clinton won the state by nearly 40 points. Nonetheless, the roll call was annnounced as Obama 36, Hillary 24.""


Jim Baxter

Note: Obama displays a dialectic 'flop' on almost every issue. His
less recognized or publicized pose is a maintained position on
opposing principles.

Case in point: His support of humanistic collectivism & Marxist
Liberation 'Theology' at the same time he claims spiritual Christian
Individual Value.

He has earned the title; "Mr. Oxymoron."


I do not know how to use the flyff gold ; my friend tells me how to use.

The comments to this entry are closed.