Apparently Obama used to like to hang out with ’60s terrorists… unrepentant ones at that. This may seem bad, but if you look at the record of Ayers and Dohrn, the only people they ever successfully killed with their bombs were their own members. That makes them heroes.
Anyway, this seems about right for Obama: He’s too squishy to advocate violence, but he’s a dumb enough lefty to think its cool to hang out with those who do.
So where does hanging out with ’60s terrorists fall: Is it hope or change?
hey, there’s a Che Guevara poster in his HQ…that tells ya something.
It falls under ‘hope’ since their from the 60’s.
Seems like it would fall more under DOPE….
Damn, cats – chill out.
We was just hangin’ – you know. When I was at their house he only thing gettin’ bombed was us.
Sometimes I really hate my city…
Hey, he’s already on board with “…only criminals will have guns.” Apparently since this has worked so well in minority communities he wants to expand the program.
Stay tuned, this will be your government at work.
Does this mean that I can’t have guns, but bombs are OK as a means to a lucrative professorship? I promise not to blow up my friends.
During the debate the question of whether or not English should be the official language of America. My question: If the host country can no longer have its own language be its official language, doesn’t that mean the host country is basically an occupied country?
Alan,
You have to be pretty smart to be a professor. Not sure you have what it takes.
Nate you are half right. You don’t have to be smart at all to be a college professor – but you do have to be very, very liberal.
So, no, Alan does not have what it takes.
Wow. Why did Obama visit these awful people? Is he crazy like them? You are right DamnCat some professors are not smart. I guess I was thinking more of engineering and science professors being smart not like English professors.
I am Shocked… SHOCKED, I SAY!!!
This is like putting up a head line that says, “Pope found to be linked to Christians when he was a priest!”
C’mon, like this is surprise, right?
Aww… thanks, DC. I hope I can be as smart as nate someday. I don’t think I could do enough drugs to catch up to him though.
Alan, it’s not the drugs that render Nate as he is; it’s the methane from the 3 dozen free range cats that live with him and his mom. Okay, yeah, the drugs probably play their part as well.
Alan – dude – I can totally hook you up.
Alan, DC and Nate:
It is not a question of base intelligence, but one of useful intelligence. A professor of Womyns studieds with a Ph.D from Radical U most likely has a high IQ, but a low Useful IQ.
So it is only natural that there are more High IQ liberals in academia as there are few better paying jobs for Doctors of English Lit, Journalism, Womyns studies etc than a professor. And in the hard sciences and engineering, even lowly BS or MS flunkies such as myself, can make more money in industry for less bother than 90% of academics.
Therefore the highest IQ people in useless subjects get jobs in academia while more of the higher IQ people in useful subjects are out doing real work.
Since there is a well proven inverse relationship between useful and liberal behavior, it is shown that most academics should be liberal.
Now boys, you shouldn’t pick on Nate. He was educated in our gulags (schools) by liberal educators and apparently didn’t have anyone of a reality persuasion to help him navigate the mind field that is education today.
He should be pitied not pilloried.
Education is key. Teach your children today, so they don’t end up like Nate.
This has been a public service announcement.
#16 Brian-
I was trying to get people to read some of what Susan Jacoby said on PBS/Bill Moyers last week concerning liberal intellectuals. Essentially, she was saying that over the last 20 years, conservatives have purposely made it look like only the left has intellectual thinkers. In other words, we could only make the left seem intelligent by pretending to be dumb & that it was yet another VRWC.
Tell me if that makes any sense to you. Apparently, I’m not bright enough to see the logic supporting her claim.
Or maybe I’m just pretending…
Did you people not go to school or something? Are you all a bunch of weirdos?
Maybe we’re just pretending, Nate… although, I am a little weird by liberal standards; I like girls & think unborn babies have a better claim to the right to live than, let’s say, Wesley Cook or Angel Resendiz.
I went to school today. They gave us cookies and juice.
Alan WRT to Susan Jacoby, Ughhh.
What a steaming pile of bull excrement that interview was. The leftist academics have spent the last 40+ years smearing anyone who disagrees with them as an ignorant evil reactionary bigoted Ultra moron. And now it is a right wing plot that only leftists are intellectual?
Dude, the logical problem sure ain’t on your side of the interaction.
The most important thing I have learned over the years, in school and out is how much I DON’T know. The arrogance of people who think they have it all figured out is proportionate to their ignorance.
Education is important, but common sense is essential. That is what is missing in most liberal diatribes. They think therefore they’re right.
What many of them can’t or won’t understand is that today is not the be all and end all of time. We need to understand not only what came before but what might happen in the future in a given scenario.
For example the whole “Bring the Troops Home NOW” debate. So what happens when we do that, to the Iraqis, to the American people, to the soldiers? Do we have the jobs and such to absorb this influx? What happens when we are attacked again? What will we do if half the country freezes because there is no oil? These questions and many, many more beg to be answered but not by the political candidates.
They’re too busy coming up with sound bites and campaign slogans.
Oh, Nate, where is your ‘Green’, Demoncrat diatribe, lately?