I'm pretty sure being narcissistic is a prerequisite to running for the president of the united states.


No humble human being has ever thought to himself, "hmmm....I'm probably the best person in the entire country to run the US properly."

6/18/2012 10:08:00 PM

it's almost a mandatory prerequisite for any politician. most of them think very highly of themselves.

6/18/2012 10:29:22 PM

Quote :

"Bush said God told him to do things. You point is invalid."

Because Bush = Obama? That's a very ignorant assumption.

Oh yes, I must have loved Bush because I cracked on Obama.

Maybe in your little polarized world of left and right that applies.

How naive.

Quote :

"hmmm....I'm probably the best person in the entire country to run the US properly."

The problem now is that the guy running the show most definitely said that and still thinks that despite ALL evidence to the contrary.

And his followers are in Michael Jackson mode--praising him and reinforcing his belief that he really can walk on water and make the sea levels recede.

6/18/2012 10:30:24 PM

you're fucking retarded.

6/18/2012 10:55:17 PM

Quote :

"And his followers are in Michael Jackson mode--praising him and reinforcing his belief that he really can walk on water and make the sea levels recede."

Maybe in your little polarized world of left and right that applies.

6/18/2012 10:56:27 PM

he still remembers that one video where the lady said that Obama would pay for her gas.

but seriously, where are these die-hard supporters that you speak of? are they in this thread?
or are you saying that anyone who recognizes that most politicians are narcissistic douches is a moon-walking Obama die-hard?

6/18/2012 11:08:12 PM

Astute responses, JHC.

You have just illustrated another point common among liberals: when you can't refute the facts, resort to name calling.

6/19/2012 1:55:10 PM

and you just illustrated a point common with hacks. anybody who doesn't agree with you is a ______ (liberal, in this case), and all ________ (liberals, in this case) possess the same negative quality (name-calling, in this instance).

and sometime it's hard to refute hacks when they make crazy genearlizing statements, such as "people who recognize that most politicians are narcisitic must be michael-jackson walking obama lovers". how do you refute that? it's easier just to say that you're being a hack.

[Edited on June 19, 2012 at 2:15 PM. Reason : ]

6/19/2012 2:15:00 PM

6/20/2012 2:44:10 PM

if you are a liberal and can't refute the fact that willy just posted you will resort to name calling...it's science

6/20/2012 3:07:54 PM

i think the nixon/obama composite looks like mick huckabee, lol.

6/20/2012 3:20:24 PM

I agree with that photo, Obama is being unfairly persecuted by conservatives just like liberals did to Nixon.

6/20/2012 3:49:13 PM

i agree with you, but i think matt drudge was thinking a little more simplistically.

executive privilege abuse.

6/20/2012 9:37:50 PM

since when is using a privalage for the first time considered abuse?

6/20/2012 11:06:04 PM

Do you really need to be reminded of how the Bush/Cheney administration established this level of executive privilege as precedent?

6/20/2012 11:52:02 PM

hai look ders dat bush werd a'gin.

6/20/2012 11:58:52 PM

Quote :

"Do you really need to be reminded of how the Bush/Cheney administration established this level of executive privilege as precedent?"

I think he meant "the first time that Obama has done it" (which I'm not even sure is accurate but anyway).

6/21/2012 9:00:06 AM

6/21/2012 12:44:32 PM

Quote :

"hai look ders dat bush werd a'gin."

that's a great agrument in support of your "executive privilege abuse" claim!

6/21/2012 1:06:45 PM

He has no argument. He's just a dumbass troll making dumbass claims that he can't back up.

6/21/2012 1:38:00 PM

Quote :

"FORMER LAWYERS? I knew they had both lost their law license, but I didn't know why until I read this. I check it out at https://www.iardc.org/ Stands for Illinois Attorney Registration And Disciplinary Committee. It's the official arm of lawyer discipline in Illinois ; and they are very strict. (Talk about irony.) Even I, at the advanced age of almost 65, maintain (at the cost of approximately $600/year) my law license that I worked so hard and long to earn. Big surprise. Former Constitutional Law Lecturer and U.S. President Makes Up Constitutional Quotes During State Of The Union (SOTU) Address. Consider this: 1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a "lawyer". He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order to escape charges he lied on his bar application. A "Voluntary Surrender" is not something where you decide "Gee, a license is not really something I need anymore, is it?" and forget to renew your license. No, a "Voluntary Surrender" is something you do when you've been accused of something, and you 'voluntarily surrender" your license five seconds before the state suspends you. 2 Michelle Obama "voluntarily surrendered" her law license in 1993. after a Federal Judge gave her the choice between surrendering her license or standing trial for Insurance fraud! 3. Facts.Source: http://jdlong.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/pres-barack-obama-editor-of-the-Harvard-law-review-has-no-law-license/ 4. A senior lecturer is one thing, a fully ranked law professor is another. Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago . 5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) "served as a professor" in the law school-but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008. 6. "He did not hold the title of Professor of Law," said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago School of Law. Source: http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/03/sweet_obama_did_hold_the_title.html ; 7. The former Constitutional Senior Lecturer (Obama) cited the U.S. Constitution the other night during his State of the Union Address. Unfortunately, the quote he cited was from the Declaration of Independence ... not the Constitution. 8. The B-Cast posted the video: http://www.breitbart.tv/did-obama-confuse-the-constitution-with-the-declaration-of-independence/ 9. Free Republic : In the State of the Union Address, President Obama said: "We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal. 10. Um, wrong citing, wrong founding document there Champ, I mean Mr. President. By the way, the promises are not a notion, our founders named them unalienable rights. The document is our Declaration of Independence and it reads: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. 11. And this is the same guy who lectured the Supreme Court moments later in the same speech? When you are a phony it's hard to keep facts straight. "

New chainmail being passed around FB.

6/21/2012 3:46:42 PM

http://factcheck.org/2012/06/the-obamas-law-licenses/

6/21/2012 3:55:58 PM

genius, have you seen that several of these claims have been refuted in several threads in the last several weeks?

6/21/2012 4:00:11 PM

First time seeing it, personally.

While chainmails are completely stupid and misleading 99.9% of the time, they DO contain half-truths which make them believable to many people.

For instance, jaZon posted that link and in the link it says:

Quote :

"Other Claims The email also claims that “Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago.” That’s technically true."

It takes a lot of time and energy to dissect these stupid chainmails because the truth isn't going to pop up in any library. There is gold in the dirt, you just have to sift through it.

6/21/2012 4:16:50 PM

too easy to get hands dirty...I'll just wait until MSNBC tells me if there is any truth to the rumors

6/21/2012 7:51:30 PM

kdogg, you're such a rebel man. you don't watch msnbc, unlike everybody else who isn't a libertarian, they all get their news from msnbc. but i don't watch it either. where do you get your information from? chain emails like the one above? they're much more reliable than the lame stream media!

[Edited on June 21, 2012 at 8:09 PM. Reason : ]

6/21/2012 7:57:10 PM

Quote :

"they all get their news from msnbc"

does not compute

I watch FoxNews, of course.

Fare and Blanched Fair and Balanced

6/21/2012 8:01:29 PM

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/study-watching-fox-news-actually-makes-you-less-informed-20120524

6/21/2012 8:04:38 PM

he's joking, he's too smart to get his info from foxnews, he knows they're just as bad or worse than any lame stream media. but he's being evasive about where he actually gets his info from. come on man, spill it!

[Edited on June 21, 2012 at 8:11 PM. Reason : ]

6/21/2012 8:10:43 PM

Lush rambo
Han Shantitty

Real Clear Politics, usually

6/21/2012 9:25:24 PM

that rolling stone article is actually pretty funny.

6/21/2012 9:32:03 PM

http://news.investors.com/article/615581/201206201901/obama-tells-stories-to-support-radical-agenda.htm

6/22/2012 9:03:24 AM

I feel so sorry for you.

6/22/2012 9:39:57 AM

Hey man, no need. I'm vertical, breathing, and I feel FIIIIINE!

And...I support a man with conviction, principle, and facts on his side.

To say you feel sorry for someone like that says something about you.

6/22/2012 10:49:58 AM

I feel sorry for you because you're too stupid to look past your own biases and see that the information you take in is tailored to your pre-conceived ideas, which is why you consume said information. No source of information will be perfect, but you can do better than whatever crackpot website you pulled this bullshit from.

6/22/2012 11:07:51 AM

that's what really gets me. he constantly berates anyone who doesn't agree with him as getting their info from MSNBC, he loves to say that. then when asked where he gets his "news", he won't say. then he posts articles like this. i guess he thinks these are the straight "facts"?

6/22/2012 11:27:18 AM

I don't watch MSNBC either and I've told my mom to stop watching so much Olbermann and Maddow before. In fact, I don't watch any cable news. I don't even have cable. Most of my news comes from online newspapers like NYT or WaPo. Reuters is good stuff too and Al-Jazeera is surprisingly unbiased. Those last two give you news you can't even get access to in the US. I used to read Newsweek a lot in high school when Fareed Zakaria was the editor but it sucks now. The Economist is probably the best magazine, presently.

6/22/2012 11:51:25 AM

I haven't read it in a few years, but I used to subscribe to the Christian Science Monitor. They're a whacky cult when it comes to religion and medicine and other things, but their reporting is surprising unbiased. It's kinda weird.

And yeah, I don't watch cable news either. I probably watch foxnews more than MSNBC or CNN, just for fun.

6/22/2012 12:20:45 PM

Quote :

"And yeah, I don't watch cable news either. I probably watch foxnews more than MSNBC or CNN, just for fun."

Same.

6/22/2012 12:36:49 PM

Quote :

"Real Clear Politics, usually"

I'm becoming a "fan" of Rachel Maddow, specifically how she is the only one on any "news" outlet still reporting on the gains Ron Paul is making.

And I've always been a great fan of Judge Napolitano, even more so when Fox pushed him out because of his--SHOCK--views on liberty.

MSNBC and FOX are two sides of the same coin.

But it's more like Fox on one side and MSNBC/ABC/CBS/CNN on the other side.

It's all crap, scripted BS.

Ever heard of whiteout press?

6/22/2012 1:14:37 PM

where do you get your "truthful facts" from? investors.com?

6/22/2012 1:57:24 PM

I like Obama's attacks on Romney about immigration, despite the fact that he has already in 1 term deported nearly as many illegal immigrants as Bush did in 2 terms.

6/22/2012 9:42:57 PM

Or that, had he really cared about this issue, he could have done it in the previous three point five years, as opposed to when his reelection chances aren't doing so well. Maybe he figures since he is doing so poorly among white men (who have no dedicated interest group), he needs to start promising enough people things (amnesty, DADT, free contraception, some of dat obama money) to overcome his deficit.

Wait wait wait...let's not mention the d-word and re-election in the same post .

6/22/2012 11:52:22 PM

It truly isn't fair to equate MSNBC with Fox News. As a republican-bred former Fox watcher turned Democrat, (who occassionally catches MSNBC morning/daytime programming and Maddow) I can say with a great deal of confidence that MSNBC is not as great a source of party-line propaganda as is Fox. We all realize that MSNBC leans to the left, but for the majority of the day there is a respectable quantity of reliable news and informative, fact-based discussion.

6/23/2012 4:26:17 AM

Are those MSNBC shows on from 12:00 until 12:01?

6/23/2012 1:10:54 PM

Quote :

"I can say with a great deal of confidence that MSNBC is not as great a source of party-line propaganda as is Fox. We all realize that MSNBC leans to the left, but for the majority of the day there is a respectable quantity of reliable news and informative, fact-based discussion. "

LOLOLOL, that network will not have a shred of credibility as long as rachel maddow, lawrence o'donnel, al sharpton, and ed schultz are still on the air. the only personality on that network that is the least bit tolerable is chris matthews.

i especially like rachel maddow's tirades where she spends 10-15 minutes at a time babbling about mitt romney, or any other evil republicans. earlier this week she had a segment called "what your uncle who watches fox news all day is currently mad about". so professional.

make no mistake. MSNBC is not a news network; it's a speakerbox for the democratic party.

[Edited on June 23, 2012 at 1:32 PM. Reason : i don't like fox news, but no way it has more spin]

6/23/2012 1:25:27 PM

I'm a democrat and I can't stand MSNBC (or Fox News, obviously.) It's kind of unsettling to be overtly pandered to like that.

6/23/2012 1:32:09 PM

MSNBC is actually slightly more offensive in it's level of political hackery than is Fox News. Fox at least occasionally has people on who don't tow the party line. MSNBC tolerates no such diversion from democratic speaking points and has people who make anyone on Fox look tolerant by comparison.

Neither one are news organizations, both are simply mouthpieces for their respective parties.

If you actually want news you have to look at things like CNN (not the best option) or foreign news sources like BBC or al-Jazeera. Kind of sad that in order to get an attempt at unbiased journalism on US affairs you have to look outside this country.

6/23/2012 2:12:54 PM

6/23/2012 7:59:40 PM

^^ I don't quite know about that. Joe Scarborough has his own time slot for a significant amount of time. Also, Dylan Ratigan was a very independent thinker and frequently went off the "script" with his views. It's a shame he got canned though.

At least MSNBC pretends to be neutral. They suspend their commentators for unethical donations to the DNC. Fox is an openly partisan soapbox for the GOP. I don't think either is very trustworthy or valuable, but Fox News is without a doubt worse.

6/23/2012 8:22:30 PM