Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on June 17, 2012, 04:05:09 PM
-
Unger strike: Obama’s former professor says he ‘must not’ win in 2012
dailycaller.com ^ | June 17, 2012
Posted on Sunday, June 17, 2012 6:30:16 PM by Jet Jaguar
Harvard Law School professor Roberto Unger, who taught President Barack Obama classes such as Jurisprudence and Reinventing Democracy, said last month in a little-publicized video that his former student has betrayed liberals and should lose the presidency in November.
“President Obama must be defeated in the coming election,” Unger said in a sit-down video posted to his YouTube account in May, which also attacked the Republican party.
“If [The Republicans] had their way, inequality would be even greater than it is now,” Unger said, before acknowledging that a Romney win would lead to some undesirable “judicial and administrative appointments.”
But those costs, to Unger, pale in comparison to the risks of an Obama second term.
“The Democratic Party has no new direction. … [Obama] has failed to advance the progressive cause,” Unger said. “He has spent trillions of dollars to rescue the moneyed interests and left workers and homeowners to their own devices.”
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
-
wow, a guy who earns 280,000 a year supportes a republican.
holy shit, i am so shocked here.
-
wow, a guy who earns 280,000 a year supportes a republican.
holy shit, i am so shocked here.
Did you even read the article before replying you dumb fuck?
-
Did you even read the article before replying you dumb fuck?
there isn't an article to read because 333 didn't post the link....as usual
from reading the excerpt it's obvious that he's disappointed that Obama has not gone far enough to push the liberal/progressive causes.
I guess since 333 posted this he is in agreement with Unger and actually wants a POTUS who will be more liberal/progressive than Obama
-
there isn't an article to read because 333 didn't post the link....as usual
from reading the excerpt it's obvious that he's disappointed that Obama has not gone far enough to push the liberal/progressive causes.
I guess since 333 posted this he is in agreement with Unger and actually wants a POTUS who will be more liberal/progressive than Obama
Lol, yeah, I didnt exactly get that the guy was endorsing Romney either.
-
Who Is Obama's Harvard Prof and Why Does He Not Want Him Reelected?
Vocal Minority ^ | 6/18/12 | EricTheRed
________________________ ________________________ __
So we finally hear from a professor who had President Hope&Change as a student ... and he doesn't want him re-elected. [h/t Drudge]:
Obama’s Harvard law professor says ‘President MUST be defeated in 2012’ (even though he’s the man Barack used to have on speed dial)
•Roberto Unger, 65, is respected author and Brazilian politician
•Taught Obama about ‘reinventing democracy’ at Harvard Law School
•Professor was an adviser during the 2008 election campaign
By [U.K.] DAILY MAIL REPORTER
PUBLISHED: 17:17 EST, 17 June 2012 | UPDATED: 07:06 EST, 18 June 2012
A former professor of Barack Obama has turned against his one-time student and publicly urged voters not to re-elect him.
Roberto Unger posted a video on YouTube detailing the reasons why he believes the President does not deserve a second term in the White House.
Mr Unger, a prominent Brazilian politician and an adviser to Obama in 2008, said: ’President Obama must be defeated in the coming election. He has failed to advance the progressive cause in the United States.’
The 65-year-old academic was in frequent contact with Mr Obama on his Blackberry throughout the last election campaign but has since decided that he no longer agreed with the President’s decisions.
His list of complaints against the President is a long one in the video entitled ‘Beyond Obama’.
The esteemed philosopher is scathing of Mr Obama’s plans to salvage America’s ailing economy, saying that his policy solely consists of ‘financial confidence and food stamps’.
He adds: ’He has spent trillions of dollars to rescue the moneyed interests and left workers and homeowners to their own devices.’
The politician admits that if Republican candidate Mitt Romney wins the election ‘there will be a cost... in judicial and administrative appointments’.
Now, conservatives might be giddy about this news story: Yay, one of Obama’s own wants him out of office! But not so fast: Unger appears to be rejecting Obama because he hasn’t fundamentally changed the Unites States fast and substantively enough. Perusing his lectures, you will even discover he wasn’t a fan at all of the stimulus plan.
That’s the first thing that bothers me about his revelation. The second is that one is that this article appeared not in an American news source, but in the U.K.
Unger doesn’t hide the fact that he is an unabashed Leftist. His website conveniently has PDF scans of several of his published works.
Obama was Unger’s student in the late 1980’s. It can be assumed, therefore, he was exposed to Unger’s 1987 book, “Social Theory: Its Situation and Task”. In it are sections devoted to Marxism. In Unger’s defense, a quick scan of this section doesn’t reveal a glowing review of Marxism or of nations’ implementation of it.
This book, as well as another 1987 books “False Necessity” (republished in 2002) and “Plasticity into Power” are quite heavy academic reading. It is hard to tell from skimming certain chapters whether Unger overtly advocates Marxism/socialism over capitalism but he makes definitely clear that he is for societal change through evolutionary politics.
He also makes it clear that the direction for this change is necessarily and undoubtedly leftward, as explained in detail in his 1998 books “Democracy Realized: A Progressive Alternative” and “The Left Alternative.” In other words, in what would certainly make for lively classroom discussions, Unger puts forth ideas not for “stay the course” Leftism but a new, improved, evolved, better-faster-stronger (cue the Bionic Man music) Leftism.
This is the message he wanted to convey to his students and, likely, as an adviser to candidate Obama, his dream for an Obama presidency.
As can be seen from the statements in the Daily Mail article, Unger is disappointed in Obama because he did not succeed in implementing that desired societal change.
Not for lack of trying, Prof. Unger! Unfortunately for you, as well as for Obama who was elected president under false pretenses, the American people and conservative opponents in Congress just had something to say about your ideas for fundamentally changing this nation.
-
333 - what is Ungers problem with Obama?
-
Wait.. According to 3333 Obama didnt even go to harvard!!!!!
Hey 333 What gives?
Get your fuckin story straight, Chump
-
333 - what is Ungers problem with Obama?
That obama is a fraud and a con man who lied his way to the presidency and has plundered the treasury in favor of criminals like corzine and the wall street mafia.
-
there isn't an article to read because 333 didn't post the link....as usual
from reading the excerpt it's obvious that he's disappointed that Obama has not gone far enough to push the liberal/progressive causes.
I guess since 333 posted this he is in agreement with Unger and actually wants a POTUS who will be more liberal/progressive than Obama
Silence! The little fucktard is having this all play out differently in his little head.
-
That obama is a fraud and a con man who lied his way to the presidency and has plundered the treasury in favor of criminals like corzine and the wall street mafia.
Please quote and highlight where that is said exactly as such in the article.
-
Silence! The little fucktard is having this all play out differently in his little head.
LOL. I could care less what reason people have - so long as he is ousted from office.
-
As we all see, you could care less about truth, evidence, and logic.
Which is why your dubious claims of being a lawyer fall on deaf ears here.
-
That obama is a fraud and a con man who lied his way to the presidency and has plundered the treasury in favor of criminals like corzine and the wall street mafia.
he didn't say that at all
how is it possible for you to read text and then just imagine it said something that wasn't there
you do the same think with videos which I why I never waste my time watching videos that you post
maybe you missed this sentence in the article that you posted
Now, conservatives might be giddy about this news story: Yay, one of Obama’s own wants him out of office! But not so fast: Unger appears to be rejecting Obama because he hasn’t fundamentally changed the Unites States fast and substantively enough. Perusing his lectures, you will even discover he wasn’t a fan at all of the stimulus plan
.
no joke - you might actually have something seriously wrong in your brain
-
“The Democratic Party has no new direction. … [Obama] has failed to advance the progressive cause,” Unger said. “He has spent trillions of dollars to rescue the moneyed interests and left workers and homeowners to their own devices.”
-
he didn't say that at all
how is it possible for you to read text and then just imagine it said something that wasn't there
you do the same think with videos which I why I never waste my time watching videos that you post
maybe you missed this sentence in the article that you posted
.
no joke - you might actually have something seriously wrong in your brain
You answered your own question here. Facts and evidence has the same effect on him that garlic and sunlight has on vampires.
No one else on this board will post something and then claim it is something completely opposite than what the article/post/video clearly states.
-
Wait.. According to 3333 Obama didnt even go to harvard!!!!!
Hey 333 What gives?
Get your fuckin story straight, Chump
bump
-
bump
Where did i say he never went to Harvard? I said his being law review editor and his claim of being a scholar is a total sham, which it is. He was elected to law review as a popularity contest and never did a damn thing as editor but pad his fraudulent resume.
-
Where did i say he never went to Harvard? I said his being law review editor and his claim of being a scholar is a total sham, which it is. He was elected to law review as a popularity contest and never did a damn thing as editor but pad his fraudulent resume.
Lol.. ok... you are like Deion Sanders right now
-
You answered your own question here. Facts and evidence has the same effect on him that garlic and sunlight has on vampires.
No one else on this board will post something and then claim it is something completely opposite than what the article/post/video clearly states.
yeah and I hate to make light of what might actually be a serious medical condition but when someone looks at written words or watches a video or listens to an audio clip and sees/hears things that aren't there what at the options
1. visual and auditory hallucinations -i.e. something truly broken in his brain
2. willful dishonesty
3. profound stupidity
-
“The Democratic Party has no new direction. … [Obama] has failed to advance the progressive cause,” Unger said. “He has spent trillions of dollars to rescue the moneyed interests and left workers and homeowners to their own devices.”
-
-
Hey Tinkerbell, you got some questions in this thread to answer about your behavior.
If you opt to play stupid (probably not playing) and ask what questions, I will gladly quote them again for you.
-
didn't bother watching
what's the point when you'll just hear whatever you want regardless of whether it was actually spoken or not
-
“The Democratic Party has no new direction. … [Obama] has failed to advance the progressive cause,” Unger said. “He has spent trillions of dollars to rescue the moneyed interests and left workers and homeowners to their own devices.”
I Thought you said he was too progressive?
-
Hey Tinkerbell, you got some questions in this thread to answer about your behavior.
If you opt to play stupid (probably not playing) and ask what questions, I will gladly quote them again for you.
Watch the clip idiot.
-
I am not wasting a second of my time on your bullshit.
Answer the questions you sociopath.
-
I am not wasting a second of my time on your bullshit.
Answer the questions you sociopath.
Answer what? The professor said obama gave trillions to the wall street mafia while fucking everyone else. WHAT PART OF THAT DO YOU NOT GRASP?
Face it you gay stalking creep - your messiah has failed and only has a few clowns like yourself left to support him.
-
Hey Tinkerbell, you got some questions in this thread to answer about your behavior.
If you opt to play stupid (probably not playing) and ask what questions, I will gladly quote them again for you.
As predicted.
Answer what?
Here you go. I increased the size of it so you won't miss it this time. Answer. Then go back to your gay dreams and delusions.
he didn't say that at all
how is it possible for you to read text and then just imagine it said something that wasn't there
you do the same think with videos which I why I never waste my time watching videos that you post
maybe you missed this sentence in the article that you posted
.
no joke - you might actually have something seriously wrong in your brain
-
Answer what? The professor said obama gave trillions to the wall street mafia while fucking everyone else. WHAT PART OF THAT DO YOU NOT GRASP?
Face it you gay stalking creep - your messiah has failed and only has a few clowns like yourself left to support him.
TARP started under Bush
also you do understand that Ungers primary criticism is that Obama has not gone far enough in pushing liberal/progressive agenda
you do understand that......right?
-
TARP started under Bush
also you do understand that Ungers primary criticism is that Obama has not gone far enough in pushing liberal/progressive agenda
you do understand that......right?
Obama supported TARP, flew in to DC to support TARP and appointed its author as Treasury Secretary. Yes, Geither, as Paulsons' right hand man, was the actual author of tarp.
So spare us the bullshit - Obama voted for TARP and supported it just as much as anyone.
-
Obama supported TARP, flew in to DC to support TARP and appointed its author as Treasury Secretary. Yes, Geither, as Paulsons' right hand man, was the actual author of tarp.
So spare us the bullshit - Obama voted for TARP and supported it just as much as anyone.
and what about my questions regarding Unger
-
and what about my questions regarding Unger
A lot of what he said in the clip was very accurate. Whatever the label you want to put on it, he was dead right about the failings of obama in the economy and the fact that obama has given away trillions of dollars to the wall street mob and fucked the rest of us w debt, chaos, food stamps, etc.
-
A lot of what he said in the clip was very accurate. Whatever the label you want to put on it, he was dead right about the failings of obama in the economy and the fact that obama has given away trillions of dollars to the wall street mob and fucked the rest of us w debt, chaos, food stamps, etc.
yes or no is fine
here is the question again
also you do understand that Ungers primary criticism is that Obama has not gone far enough in pushing liberal/progressive agenda
you do understand that......right?
-
yes or no is fine
here is the question again
also you do understand that Ungers primary criticism is that Obama has not gone far enough in pushing liberal/progressive agenda
you do understand that......right?
Yes, but he is also arguing that obama is basically corrupt and simply either does not understand the problem, or does not care about solving any problems.
i agree w the prof about moving to production based economy vs debt as well as consumption tax vs others.
The fact is that Obama is killing off the democrat party like i sad a week or two ago, and this guy sees it since obamunism does not provide a basis for anything in the future whatsoever.
-
wow, a guy who earns 280,000 a year supportes a republican.
What are you talking about? The guy is saying Obama must be defeated because he's not progressive enough.
holy shit, i am so shocked here.
It's easy to be shocked when you imagine that the text says something that shocks you. As opposed to, you know, actually reading it.
-
Yes, but he is also arguing that obama is basically corrupt and simply either does not understand the problem, or does not care about solving any problems.
i agree w the prof about moving to production based economy vs debt as well as consumption tax vs others.
The fact is that Obama is killing off the democrat party like i sad a week or two ago, and this guy sees it since obamunism does not provide a basis for anything in the future whatsoever.
where did he say Obama was corrupt
See comments by AVXO
how many times do you need your nose rubbed in the actual words that were written
-
where did he say Obama was corrupt
See comments by AVXO
how many times do you need your nose rubbed in the actual words that were written
he said Obama gave away TRILLIONS to wall street moneyed interests while offering everyone else nothing but food stamps and rhetoric. What does that tell you where his feelings are?
-
he said Obama gave away TRILLIONS to wall street moneyed interests while offering everyone else nothing but food stamps and rhetoric. What does that tell you where his feelings are?
He's not saying Obama is corrupt: he's saying that Obama isn't as progressive as he thinks he should be, having catered to the rich people who don't need it while ignoring the poor people who do need it. Let me spell it out for you in case you aren't good at reading: he's saying Obama didn't "spread the wealth around" enough. And this is the guy you're quoting to argue that Obama should be defeated?
I really think you're paid by the Obama campaign 333386. You get paid to post the most ridiculous stories to make people stand up and defend Obama - even people who wouldn't otherwise do so - to get them to see him as someone subjected to a smear campaign. and put them into the mentality of defending Obama.
-
He's not saying Obama is corrupt: he's saying that Obama isn't as progressive as he thinks he should be, having catered to the rich people who don't need it while ignoring the poor people who do need it. Let me spell it out for you in case you aren't good at reading: he's saying Obama didn't "spread the wealth around" enough. And this is the guy you're quoting to argue that Obama should be defeated?
I really think you're paid by the Obama campaign 333386. You get paid to post the most ridiculous stories to make people stand up and defend Obama - even people who wouldn't otherwise do so - to get them to see him as someone subjected to a smear campaign. and put them into the mentality of defending Obama.
That is their problem not mine. Obama is not being smeared, obama is being exposed for his disastrous record and those that voted for this disaster need to be reminded of it.
Obama's record speaks for itself. From his lies and smears of Hillary in the primary, his corrupting the caucuses in many states, his lies about hope and change to get elected, his fraudulent stim bill, his bailing out corrupt thugs on wall street, his appointment of radicals and freaks to all levels of the govt, his spitting on NYC w the KSM trial and backing the GZ mosque, his ramming through the worst possible health care bill imaginable, his pissing away billions on corrupt solar companies, his war on the church, his war on the economy, his war on coal, his war on states dealing with voter fraud, his war on the states dealing w immigration, his daily bashing business people, his pandering to gays, pandering to hispanics, pandering to fringe groups, he has been the worst president and has presided over the worst admn of my lifetime without even a close second.
Those that voted for this may call it a smear, but the reality is that there is nothing to defend whatsoever in this fraudulent admn that more and more people are waking up to daily.
-
where did he say Obama was corrupt
See comments by AVXO
how many times do you need your nose rubbed in the actual words that were written
LMAO
He's not saying Obama is corrupt: he's saying that Obama isn't as progressive as he thinks he should be, having catered to the rich people who don't need it while ignoring the poor people who do need it. Let me spell it out for you in case you aren't good at reading: he's saying Obama didn't "spread the wealth around" enough. And this is the guy you're quoting to argue that Obama should be defeated?
I really think you're paid by the Obama campaign 333386. You get paid to post the most ridiculous stories to make people stand up and defend Obama - even people who wouldn't otherwise do so - to get them to see him as someone subjected to a smear campaign. and put them into the mentality of defending Obama.
Haha. Don't waste your time. The little retard has shown he can't read worth a damn and can't answer a simple question. Guess they don't make "lawyers" like they used to.
-
That is their problem not mine. Obama is not being smeared, obama is being exposed for his disastrous record and those that voted for this disaster need to be reminded of it.
What I don't understand is why would you, who aren't a "progressive" and don't want "social justice" as this guy defines those terms, use Obama's failure to be "progressive" and met out "social justice" (again, according to this guys' definition) as an argument for why Obama should be booted from the White House?
Obama's record speaks for itself.
Right. So there's no need to distort it or to use someone who wants policies to the left of Obama's as a supporting crutch.
From his lies and smears of Hillary in the primary, his corrupting the caucuses in many states, his lies about hope and change to get elected, his fraudulent stim bill, his bailing out corrupt thugs on wall street, his appointment of radicals and freaks to all levels of the govt, his spitting on NYC w the KSM trial and backing the GZ mosque, his ramming through the worst possible health care bill imaginable, his pissing away billions on corrupt solar companies, his war on the church, his war on the economy, his war on coal, his war on states dealing with voter fraud, his war on the states dealing w immigration, his daily bashing business people, his pandering to gays, pandering to hispanics, pandering to fringe groups, he has been the worst president and has presided over the worst admn of my lifetime without even a close second.
Right. But that's besides the point. Remember, this guy's problem with Obama isn't that he isn't a good President. His problem is that Obama didn't give enough handouts to poor but instead sided with the rich people. He's, essentially, accusing Obama of being a Republican (as he defines the term).
Perhaps both of you agree that Obama needs to be booted from the White House, but it's quite ridiculous for you to quote him as supporting your position, because you are diametrically opposed.
Those that voted for this may call it a smear, but the reality is that there is nothing to defend whatsoever in this fraudulent admn that more and more people are waking up to daily.
It's not an issue of smears or of people waking up. It's an issue of endorsing the argument of someone who wants policies that are farther to the left that Obama's as the reason why Obama should lose the election. You did this, nobody else.
On a sidenote, someone else mentioned you were a lawyer. Are you actually a lawyer, admitted to the Bar and all?
-
What I don't understand is why would you, who aren't a "progressive" and don't want "social justice" as this guy defines those terms, use Obama's failure to be "progressive" and met out "social justice" (again, according to this guys' definition) as an argument for why Obama should be booted from the White House?
Right. So there's no need to distort it or to use someone who wants policies to the left of Obama's as a supporting crutch.
Right. But that's besides the point. Remember, this guy's problem with Obama isn't that he isn't a good President. His problem is that Obama didn't give enough handouts to poor but instead sided with the rich people. He's, essentially, accusing Obama of being a Republican (as he defines the term).
Perhaps both of you agree that Obama needs to be booted from the White House, but it's quite ridiculous for you to quote him as supporting your position, because you are diametrically opposed.
It's not an issue of smears or of people waking up. It's an issue of endorsing the argument of someone who wants policies that are farther to the left that Obama's as the reason why Obama should lose the election. You did this, nobody else.
On a sidenote, someone else mentioned you were a lawyer. Are you actually a lawyer, admitted to the Bar and all?
Whether the guy is a progressive, a communist, a libertarian, a conservative, he made some interesting observations I agree with, some I don't.
But I do agree with him that Obama is destroying the democrat party and that is why anyone who gives a damn in the demo party knows he has to go as well.
-
Whether the guy is a progressive, a communist, a libertarian, a conservative, he made some interesting observations I agree with, some I don't.
That's a fair point. It just seems weird to use his position as a justification for why Obama must not win when the guy's position basically boils down to "Obama is a closet Republican!".
But I do agree with him that Obama is destroying the democrat party and that is why anyone who gives a damn in the demo party knows he has to go as well.
I don't think Obama is destroying the Democrats. Consider Pelosi, Rangel and Frank in the House, and Schumer and Reid in the Senate. Those guys are, at least in my estimation) far to the left of Obama. In fact, I'd almost call Obama a centrist if I was doing a point-by-point comparison with Pelosi, Rangel or Frank. And considering how clearly Obama is to the left, that's saying something.
-
Well, I'm sure he will be pulling for Dennis Kucinich on the ticket, the destroyer of sandwich shops everywhere.
-
this is what i didnt understand from 2 years ago. I said i didnt like Obama because he wasnt as far to the left as he promised. And 3333... YOU KILLED ME FOR IT, almost like it wasnt a real reason not to like Obama. So what i dont understand now is when this professor (of the school you said he never attended) says the same thing, you agree with him. Is your hatred for Obama short circuiting your arguments to where they get all screwed up in you little brain?....Face it...with this one, you really wet the bed. As you say "i dont like obama because he is a socialist" but then you post someone saying "Obama isnt really a socialist so he needs to go", youre like "hell yeah this guy is right"...
Bro whats your deal... Take a break from getbig and your Obama hate for like an Hour. OR
PM fury or coach and ask him to back you up on this thread because youre drowning over here
-
That obama is a fraud and a con man who lied his way to the presidency and has plundered the treasury in favor of criminals like corzine and the wall street mafia.
uh huh....the FBI, the NSA, etc always let people lie their way to the presidency.......the candidates are vetted way in advance you dummy......they investigated up the ass to make sure of their identity and who they are and what they've done
-
Answer what? The professor said obama gave trillions to the wall street mafia while fucking everyone else. WHAT PART OF THAT DO YOU NOT GRASP?
Face it you gay stalking creep - your messiah has failed and only has a few clowns like yourself left to support him.
You must feel like an idiot claiming Obama is a communist all this time, huh?
-
He's not saying Obama is corrupt: he's saying that Obama isn't as progressive as he thinks he should be, having catered to the rich people who don't need it while ignoring the poor people who do need it. Let me spell it out for you in case you aren't good at reading: he's saying Obama didn't "spread the wealth around" enough. And this is the guy you're quoting to argue that Obama should be defeated?
I really think you're paid by the Obama campaign 333386. You get paid to post the most ridiculous stories to make people stand up and defend Obama - even people who wouldn't otherwise do so - to get them to see him as someone subjected to a smear campaign. and put them into the mentality of defending Obama.
Haha seriously someone should learn 333... to read and comprehend material. Massive owning right there :D
No wonder he is against learning, better health care etc he wants people to be as dumb and miserabel as him
-
Well this thread didn't turn out the way it was expected. It did however, turn out the way most typically do. With a grand backfire and the little retard getting shit on while running in circles.
-
Well this thread didn't turn out the way it was expected. It did however, turn out the way most typically do. With a grand backfire and the little retard getting shit on while running in circles.
Just waiting for his Fury and Skip1982 gimmicks to show up for support any time now
-
:)
Obama former professor says he failed and must be defeated - F A C T
Well this thread didn't turn out the way it was expected. It did however, turn out the way most typically do. With a grand backfire and the little retard getting shit on while running in circles.
-
:)
Obama former professor says he failed and must be defeated - F A C T
You are a jobless leach who's got nothing better to do than care for what a college professor thinks of Obama - FACT
-
:)
Obama former professor says he failed and must be defeated - F A C T
Irrelevant to the reasons you posted and tried to bullshit with. F A C T
Long day of internet and Ramen noodles ahead of you huh?
-
:)
Obama former professor says he failed and must be defeated - F A C T
Lol For a more RADICAL person....hahahahahahaha h give it up.. this is an ultimate thread backfire
-
Just waiting for his Fury and Skip1982 gimmicks to show up for support any time now
:D :D :D
-
:D :D :D
LOL. Obama's former law school professor is shitting all over his horrible presidency, his former chicago law colleague said he is ignorant and a lazy layabout as a teacher, and you fools attack me?
Fine - i welcome the attacks by you leftist cult members of Team Messiah
-
LOL. Obama's former law school professor is shitting all over his horrible presidency, his former chicago law colleague said he is ignorant and a lazy layabout as a teacher, and you fools attack me?
Fine - i welcome the attacks by you leftist cult members of Team Messiah
Na...just not making a whole bunch of sense. His professor said in plain words. Obama isnt RADICAL ENOUGH and someone radical should hold the office... and you agree with him.. Very interesting.. that will be all...
-
Na...just not making a whole bunch of sense. His professor said in plain words. Obama isnt RADICAL ENOUGH and someone radical should hold the office... and you agree with him.. Very interesting.. that will be all...
HAHAHA. Give him 4 more pages of back pedaling and deflecting before he makes his usual "I was kidding" mercy post.
-
Na...just not making a whole bunch of sense. His professor said in plain words. Obama isnt RADICAL ENOUGH and someone radical should hold the office... and you agree with him.. Very interesting.. that will be all...
What did the professor say in the clip that was "radical"?