View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
otis

Joined: 02 Jun 2006
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:28 pm Post subject: Obama a Coke-head? |
|
|
Well, it's true.
I wonder who leaked the story to the Washington Post?
Mmmmmm.
Hillary? Yes, I think so.
The Clintons play hardball. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Octavius Hite

Joined: 28 Jan 2004 Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, the current coke-head-in-chief doesn't seem to bother anyone, so I doubt voters will care. And yes the Clintons play to win, and have not lost in 20 years. Watch Primary Colors for proof of that. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
I googled 'obama cocaine' and got this:
....In the book, Obama acknowledges that he used cocaine as a high school student but rejected heroin. "Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though," he says.
Why did he make the admission?
In an interview during his Senate race two years ago, Obama said he admitted using drugs because he thought it was important for "young people who are already in circumstances that are far more difficult than mine to know that you can make mistakes and still recover.
A book and a two year old interview. Is there something newer than this? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003 Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
I googled 'obama cocaine' and got this:
....In the book, Obama acknowledges that he used cocaine as a high school student but rejected heroin. "Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though," he says.
Why did he make the admission?
In an interview during his Senate race two years ago, Obama said he admitted using drugs because he thought it was important for "young people who are already in circumstances that are far more difficult than mine to know that you can make mistakes and still recover.
A book and a two year old interview. Is there something newer than this? |
The book was actually published eleven years ago and it's been common knowledge since then. Of course, very few people bought the book when it first came out. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
khyber
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Compunction Junction
|
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
young people who are already in circumstances that are far more difficult than mine to know that you can make mistakes and still recover. |
There is NO WAY this guy will be president. That simply makes too much sense. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Adventurer

Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would vote for Obama. At least, he seems articulate, willing to listen to other voices (I don't mean inside his head), but I would have to hear about his economic policies, building bridges with other countries, working on America's competitiveness and boosting funding for education and scientific research. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stevemcgarrett

Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 1:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
So now the qualifications for being president are "willingness to listen" and "being articulate." Well, dang, then let's nominate Chris Rock, and he's funny to boot.
Obama's being bandied about (by Oprah and the rest of the sympathetic liberal media) for one reason only: he's black. If he were just another white guy with high hopes, he'd be, well, just another white guy with high hopes.
If Isaiah Thomas, the former Detroit Piston great, can say that Larry Bird wouldn't have gotten much notice if he had been black, then I sure as heck can make this claim about Obama.
And never trust Chicago politicos. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemcgarrett wrote: |
Obama's being bandied about (by Oprah and the rest of the sympathetic liberal media) for one reason only: he's black. If he were just another white guy with high hopes, he'd be, well, just another white guy with high hopes. |
No, he'd be John Edwards.
Quote: |
If Isaiah Thomas, the former Detroit Piston great, can say that Larry Bird wouldn't have gotten much notice if he had been black, then I sure as heck can make this claim about Obama. |
And you'd both be wrong.
Quote: |
And never trust Chicago politicos. |
He's not a Chicagoan. Just ask sundubman. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
SarcasmKills

Joined: 07 Apr 2003 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Obama never had a chance in hell to win the presidency in the first place.. those who believed that were just fooling themselves..
It's going to come down to this perception for American voters... woman(D), minority(D) or white guy(R)... and again, Democrats will be scratching their heads wondering how they blew another election...
Democrats HAVE to find a white, male canidate to have any serious chance.. sad, pathetic even, but very true. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Pligganease

Joined: 14 Sep 2004 Location: The deep south...
|
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 4:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
SarcasmKills wrote: |
Obama never had a chance in hell to win the presidency in the first place.. those who believed that were just fooling themselves..
It's going to come down to this perception for American voters... woman(D), minority(D) or white guy(R)... and again, Democrats will be scratching their heads wondering how they blew another election...
Democrats HAVE to find a white, male canidate to have any serious chance.. sad, pathetic even, but very true. |
Absolutely correct. As much as I'd like to see Obama as president, he'd never win. The Democrats know this, and they are setting up Hillary and Barack to take the brunt of the media slaughter so they can slip John Edwards in at the last minute unscathed. It's the same thing they did with Bill Clinton.
Hillary nor Barack can win. Period. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stevemcgarrett

Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
SarcasmKills:
"very true," is that like "very round?"
How about sorta pregnant
Maybe you need to stop beating your head on the keyboard.
And many well-informed news pundits believe that Colin Powell would have been president had he pursued it. So your claim that being black automatically excludes him from serious consideration is spurious.
Pligg:
"absolutely correct" (another piece of redundancy). Nice conspiracy theory there. Regicide would be proud of you. Sorry, but I doubt Hillary would (or Bill) would let anyone play her that way. She's too shrewd for that ploy. Get real. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
SarcasmKills

Joined: 07 Apr 2003 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 5:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemcgarrett wrote: |
SarcasmKills:
"very true," is that like "very round?"
How about sorta pregnant
Maybe you need to stop beating your head on the keyboard.
And many well-informed news pundits believe that Colin Powell would have been president had he pursued it. So your claim that being black automatically excludes him from serious consideration is spurious.
Pligg:
"absolutely correct" (another piece of redundancy). Nice conspiracy theory there. Regicide would be proud of you. Sorry, but I doubt Hillary would (or Bill) would let anyone play her that way. She's too shrewd for that ploy. Get real. |
Refer to my earlier "only fooling yourself" comment..
No way in hell Colin Powell would have been elected.. research articles from the past couple elections and you'll see many 'experts' who are convinced that McCain lost his earlier chances because the Bush cronies highlighted the fact that he had minority children..
are you sure you're American?
And for the grammar police in you, "very true" is perfectly acceptable...
what's with the hate-on lately? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stevemcgarrett

Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 6:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
"very true" as opposed to "somewhat true?" C'mon, perfectly acceptable in terms of what? informal English? Has nothing to do with grammar, by the way.
Your explanation why Powell couldn't win is a stretch, to put it mildly. Powell didn't run because his wife suffers from chronic depression and despises the limelight and he is devoted to her first and foremost. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
SarcasmKills

Joined: 07 Apr 2003 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemcgarrett wrote: |
"very true" as opposed to "somewhat true?" C'mon, perfectly acceptable in terms of what? informal English? Has nothing to do with grammar, by the way.
Your explanation why Powell couldn't win is a stretch, to put it mildly. Powell didn't run because his wife suffers from chronic depression and despises the limelight and he is devoted to her first and foremost. |
Again.. it's prefectly acceptable.. and yes, it's a grammar issue.. but enough about that... let's stick to the debate topic at hand...
As for your latest Powellism, I don't buy that either... sure, I'll buy the fact that he is possibly devoted to his wife, but he's not a dumb man, do you think that if he seriously thought that he had a chance to win that he wouldn't take it?
He's smart enough to know what a huge deal that would be a so many levels, and no way he would let that opportunity pass.. and no way his wife would ever ask him to give up that chance.. if she loved him and was devoted to him first and foremost as he apparently is to her then there is no way that she would be so selfish...
the problem is that the opportunity to win was never there... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004 Location: Goseong
|
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mithridates wrote: |
Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
I googled 'obama cocaine' and got this:
....In the book, Obama acknowledges that he used cocaine as a high school student but rejected heroin. "Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though," he says.
Why did he make the admission?
In an interview during his Senate race two years ago, Obama said he admitted using drugs because he thought it was important for "young people who are already in circumstances that are far more difficult than mine to know that you can make mistakes and still recover.
A book and a two year old interview. Is there something newer than this? |
The book was actually published eleven years ago and it's been common knowledge since then. Of course, very few people bought the book when it first came out. |
Better yet, why would Otis post such a thing, especially when it's common knowledge that our current president was a drug addict and alcoholic.
Answer: Neocon smear tactics.
It's ok to be both of those as long as your a Republican. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|