Alarming News

February 27, 2009

Ah-nnoying

Does Obama’s real need to state how clear he’s trying to be in nearly every single speech grating on anyone else’s nerves yet? Especially when he’s usually not clear at all?

“Let me be clear: there is no military solution in Iraq, and there never was. The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq’s leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year – now.”- September 12, 2007 remarks

“But I also want to be very clear about what this plan will not do: It will not rescue the unscrupulous or irresponsible by throwing good taxpayer money after bad loans.”-Housing plan speech

“Now, let me be clear — let me be absolutely clear, because I know you’ll end up hearing some of the same claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people”-Feb. 24 Speech To A Joint Session Of Congress

“Let me be clear: America is committed to Israel’s security. And we will always support Israel’s right to defend itself against legitimate threats.”-January 22, 2009 Remarks to State Department Employees.

“Let me be clear: ending this war is not going to be easy. There will be dangers involved.”-A March 19, 2008 speech in Fayetteville, NC.

“Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.”-Oct. 2, 2002 speech where Obama called the Iraq war “a dumb war … a rash war.”

“And let me be clear: Our goal is not to further burden an already struggling industry; it is to help America’s automakers prepare for the future.”-January 26th, 2009 climate speech.

“Now, let me be clear. Let me be clear. We have real enemies in the world. These enemies must be found. They must be pursued. And they must be defeated.”-2004 speech at the DNC convention.

Posted by Karol at 09:05 PM |
Technorati Tags:
Comments

I think he addresses himself. Sort of self-motivational speech: “now, Barack, concentrate! make it clear! it is clear, I said so!”
Did you notice also, Karol, how he’s always turns his chin up, as if he’s sort of seeing the shiny goal at the horizon, we the rest of the sheeple, aren’t privy to? A peacock. With peacock brains.

Posted by: Tatyana at February 27, 2009 at 10:36 pm

We all knew there are terrorists sleeper cells in the country. People are realizing today that O’Dumbo and his brain dead liberal crowd were, and are, the most dangerous terrorists organization America has ever faced. He has destroyed more of traditional America in 30 days than Nazism/Communism ever could. Still think he’s not a crazy Islamist who’s aim is to destroy the country?

Posted by: Scrapiron at February 27, 2009 at 11:18 pm

Now, let me be clear, this policy shall remain in effect and concurrent with other policies, until such time as their natural expiraton date…(decided by the CINC) is made.
Yea fiefdom-ness!

Posted by: Snoop-Diggity-DANG-Dawg at February 27, 2009 at 11:53 pm

My favorite thing is when he says: “I’ve always said” or “I’ve said many times”… then he proceeds to say something which is the exact opposite of anything he has ever said before.
It’s gonna be a long four years….

Posted by: jana at February 28, 2009 at 12:51 am

Odumbo, that’s the best insulting way that I’ve heard so far (not as good as W’s Commander Bunnypants, but there’s lots of time for more).
As to referring to the dems as terrorists, scrapiron; I think this is a sure way of turning potential voters off. just saying.

Posted by: bryan at February 28, 2009 at 3:09 am

Hmm I wonder where Obama got it from.
“But let me be clear. Our approach is not to seek agreement for agreement’s sake.” 1/25/88. State of the Union.
“Let me be clear: If Congress passes legislation that endangers our arms reductions or undermines our national defense, I will have no choice; I will veto it.” 5/9/87. Radio address.
“Now, let me be clear about those words — “stewardship for the benefit of mankind.” ” 5/6/83-speech to the NRA
“And let me be clear that this cannot be the last round of cuts.” 9/24/81-adress to the nation on recovery program.
Yep, the Gipper. Obama is doing it because it is effective-it focuses the listener’s attention and give the impression that the speaker is about to say something candid and precise. It may be annoying but it works-which is why the two greatest communicators among our recent presidents use it.

Posted by: Von Bek at February 28, 2009 at 8:54 am

“…and give the impression that the speaker is about to say something candid and precise.”
Well, candid and precise is something Reagan did pretty well. “If Congress passes legislation that endangers our arms reductions or undermines our national defense, I will have no choice; I will veto it.”
Pretty precise.
Compare and contrast: “And let me be clear: Our goal is not to further burden an already struggling industry; it is to help America

Posted by: Mark Poling at February 28, 2009 at 12:06 pm

Von Bek: to be a greatest communicator, you have to have something to communicate. Preferably consistent.

Posted by: Tatyana at February 28, 2009 at 3:07 pm

“As to referring to the dems as terrorists, scrapiron; I think this is a sure way of turning potential voters off. just saying.”
This is no rhetorical device, bryan; this is what scrapiron actually believes. I’ve encountered this dude at a few Righty blogs, and I have found him to be someone you don’t want on your team if you want to maintain any credibility. He’s a virulent racist, for one thing.
Look:

Go down to any street corner in any big city U.S.A., find a group of drugged out rappers, Pick any one, that

Posted by: Mike's Dumbmerica at March 1, 2009 at 3:46 pm

Hey, spoofer.
Care to counter your quotes with factual argument, rather than Soviet-style dossier keeping remarks?
What I would accept as factual argument: -comparative percentage of Black Muslims vs. White Christians (or even simpler: any race non-Muslims) in US jail population, with further subdivision per crime committed.
-comparative percentage of crimes committed over victims of same race as perpetrator: Blacks over Blacks vs. Whites over Whites.
- comparative percentage of serious crimes (murders, rapes, assaults with weapons) committed by Blacks on Whites vs. Whites on Blacks
-comparative percentage of crimes committed by Black vs. crimes committed by any other minority (Latinos, Asians, East/West Europeans, Australian Aborigines, whomever).
Accidentally, why don’t you think up a name? Invent something other than hate-filled pseudonym. Can’t you define yourself other than a paranoid obsessive stalker?

Posted by: Tatyana at March 1, 2009 at 6:28 pm

All I was saying is that if you are an undecided voter, any party saying the other side is dumb/ bankrupt of ideas/ wrong is expected. Saying the other side are terrorists says more about the sayer than the subject. I just cannot see it winning voters over. It may even seem to indicate an attitude that unless you lock step in every way you are wrong. As some 12 year old said at CPAC, conservatism is an attitude not a party.

Posted by: bryan at March 1, 2009 at 8:08 pm

Hey, spoofer.
Care to counter your quotes with factual argument, rather than Soviet-style dossier keeping remarks?

I’m guessing that you’re addressing me.
“Counter” my own quotes with arguments against my own quotes? That doesn’t make any sense.
By the way: one person’s “Soviet-style dossier keeping remarks” are another person’s “proof.”

What I would accept as factual argument: -comparative percentage of Black Muslims vs. White Christians (or even simpler: any race non-Muslims) in US jail population, with further subdivision per crime committed.
-comparative percentage of crimes committed over victims of same race as perpetrator: Blacks over Blacks vs. Whites over Whites.
- comparative percentage of serious crimes (murders, rapes, assaults with weapons) committed by Blacks on Whites vs. Whites on Blacks
-comparative percentage of crimes committed by Black vs. crimes committed by any other minority (Latinos, Asians, East/West Europeans, Australian Aborigines, whomever).

I’m stunningly uninterested in “what you would accept.” It’s not clear what case you think you’re arguing, or what point you want to make. I characterized a known racist with examples of his racist comments. The stuff you’re listing up above has exactly nothing to do with what I posted, or, in fact, anything at all.
Congratulations! You’re 0 for 2.

Accidentally, why don’t you think up a name? Invent something other than hate-filled pseudonym. Can’t you define yourself other than a paranoid obsessive stalker?

“Accidentally?” Strike three! You have officially made no sense during your entire post!
Also: where does “paranoid” fit into anything?

Posted by: Mike's Dumbmerica at March 1, 2009 at 9:32 pm

Tatyana:
I’m sorry

Posted by: Mike's Dumbmerica at March 1, 2009 at 9:39 pm

To anonymous:
-you quoted as false certain statements. I asked you to prove they are false. Labeling them “racist” doesn’t count.
-your blog is a spoof site of the person you mock. You have no content you can think of yourself, no thoughts on your own – you need to hate someone as stimulus for writing. You are nothing but a dirty red-assed screaming monkey in a liberal Zoo. [Now you can start calling me racist, too. Go ahead, commie]
-in case you want to call your spoof site parody: it is not. It’s a bore. Stinks of impotence, that is always repellent.
-don’t bother leaving any more of your comments in my place.

Posted by: Tatyana at March 2, 2009 at 9:17 am

Liberals are so suhing about obama its a wonder their not kissing the very ground he trods upon what makes these liberal so stupid and rediculous?

Posted by: Flu-Bird at March 2, 2009 at 10:04 am

-you quoted as false certain statements. I asked you to prove they are false. Labeling them “racist” doesn’t count.

Here’s what scrapiron has to say about blacks:


The type of crime usually limited (committed by) to Islamist and blacks in Afica has came to America with the Islamist and blacks. Animals who haven

Posted by: Mike's Dumbmerica at March 2, 2009 at 11:22 am

Stalker, let’s try this experiment: call our president, on your blog, a red-assed screaming liberal monkey” and wait for comments.
How much you wanna bet that 90% will consist of “racist!”?
Your power of conclusion leaves me speechless, monkey-boy.

Posted by: Tatyana at March 2, 2009 at 1:11 pm


Stalker, let’s try this experiment: call our president, on your blog, a red-assed screaming liberal monkey” and wait for comments.
How much you wanna bet that 90% will consist of “racist!”?

I’m not sure why I’d want to try that experiment. It has nothing at all to do with your contention that I would play the race card when you called me a red-assed monkey. Interestingly enough, there are a variety of names one could use that would be innocuous or, at worst, idiotic when applied to me, yet distinctly racist if applied to a black person.

Your power of conclusion leaves me speechless

This is a phrase that I’ve never heard before, so I don’t know how to respond to this. This whole interaction would be more successful, I think, if you were to try writing in English.

Posted by: Mike's Dumbmerica at March 2, 2009 at 6:45 pm

Didn’t I tell you not to comment on my blog? Go away. Do something productive. Like learning Chinese. Or Ebonics.

Posted by: Tatyana at March 2, 2009 at 8:52 pm

Didn’t I tell you not to comment on my blog? Go away.

It’s no trouble, really.

Posted by: Mike's Dumbmerica at March 2, 2009 at 10:31 pm

Oh, Tatyana:
You still haven’t explained why it’s necessary for me to provide statistical proof that American blacks aren’t cannibals or animals.

Posted by: Mike's Dumbmerica at March 3, 2009 at 8:21 am

You haven’t provided any statistics I asked you in my original comment.
Cannibals, etc – go google “metaphor”, “alliteration”, “association” as rhetorical speech devices. With your perfect command of English I’m shocked, shocked at such glaring omission.

Posted by: Tatyana at March 3, 2009 at 10:29 am

Well, here’s the deal, Tatyana:
Nothing that I said required statistical evidence to back up. That was an invention on your part. I have been dealing with scrapiron for a few years now, and I know what the guy’s about, so I characterized him as a virulent racist. Then I provided quotes to back up my point. The quotes showed him dismissing an entire race (or–best case scenario–90% of a race) as “animals” and as “drugged-up.”
Believe it or not, the quotes are the evidence. That’s the whole idea behind citing quotes when you are trying to make a point.
Do you still want statistics? Well, one hundred percent of scrapiron’s quotes were racist.

Posted by: Mike's Dumbmerica at March 3, 2009 at 11:40 am

No, that’s not the deal.
The deal I outlined earlier.
*scrapiron said, in paraphrasing, that most of the hard criminals are Black Muslims. You presented this quote as evidence of his racism. I’m telling you that he is factually right. You can only dismiss this as some flaw of his character (i.e. “racism”) if there is no basis in his claims.
Instead of ready-made “racist” sticker, why don’t you look at the evidence and prove to us that statistically he is wrong? I gave you some ideas how to pursue a legitimate argument. But you can’t argue, because you know he is fundamentally right. It just clashes with your demagogic ideology.
As to “animals” and “drugged up” – ever been to a courthouse? Get on excursion to the just-opened Bronx Justice Center and open the door into any hearing room. Go on, it’s your taxes at work, you don’t need special permission to educate yourself. I hope you will.

Posted by: Tatyana at March 3, 2009 at 12:58 pm

I’m telling you that he is factually right.

Really? How does one bolster metaphor with numbers? Pray share the statistics that underlie this vague, all-encompassing attack:

The type of crime usually limited (committed by) to Islamist and blacks in Afica has came to America with the Islamist and blacks. Animals who haven

Posted by: Mike's Dumbmerica at March 3, 2009 at 2:27 pm

Listen, buddy, I knew what alliteration means 25 years before you were born. I have two university diplomas. You are the one with inferiority complex: you have nagging need to prove you’re better than me, for three days in a row, in every one of your postings.
Btw, “complex”, “alliteration”, etc are not English words, strictly speaking. “Mishmash” is a Hungarian dish with eggs and peppers, quite tasty btw, it can’t be “wearing thin” with anything, let along with malapropisms. Mixed metaphors are not your forte, to say the least.
You bore me. You have no argument, other than self-inflated ego and demagoguery; I was weary of college mini-napoleons like you when a freshman in my first college. Go impress goth girls and Che warriors. Ciao.

Posted by: Tatyana at March 3, 2009 at 2:47 pm


Listen, buddy, I knew what alliteration means 25 years before you were born. I have two university diplomas. You are the one with inferiority complex: you have nagging need to prove you’re better than me, for three days in a row, in every one of your postings.
Btw, “complex”, “alliteration”, etc are not English words, strictly speaking. “Mishmash” is a Hungarian dish with eggs and peppers, quite tasty btw, it can’t be “wearing thin” with anything, let along with malapropisms. Mixed metaphors are not your forte, to say the least.

Heh. No insecurity there.
So far in this discussion, I am the only person who has presented any evidence. You may not like my evidence, but it’s more than you have come up with.
You are, for some reason, invested in Scrapiron’s case. Then make it. Rid us of the “metaphor, alliteration and association” that have muddied the waters. Define the terms. When he says that blacks are “animals,” tell me what he means, quantify it, and prove your case. When he says that they “eat their own,” explain what he’s talking about and give me the statistics.
One part of the job is done for you, it would seem. Scrapiron wrote that “They use racism to get

Posted by: Mike's Dumbmerica at March 3, 2009 at 10:41 pm

All I can say is, nice hijack, Dumbmerica. Obama can’t talk (and the worrying thing is, maybe can’t think) in anything other than meaningless platitudes, and you find the way to turn the conversation into a referendum on scrapiron.
That’s the spirit. Keep Rule 12 alive.

Posted by: Mark Poling at March 4, 2009 at 11:21 pm
Post a comment