Barry's Illegal Alien Family

I guess those that think this is an outrage will be willing to take responsibility for their relatives actions. I'll bet that everyone has a screwed up brother in law or uncle. Every family has it's f()ckup.

All the socialists and communists have nothing else to say except Obama has no responsibility here- or try to bring up "it's Bush's fault".

You all have no respect for the soverignty of the USA.

If anyone could keep his low class criminal relatives out of here you'd think the president of the USA could get that done. Obama also has no respect for our laws.

You lefties have no credibility because you are of low moral integrity yourselves.

Shame on you.

SS109 wrote: A couple things to consider: Do Barack's illegal immigrant family members get a pass because they are related to the POTUS? Or the extra glare of the press when it comes to immigration violations.

Obama's father also had numerous brushes with drinking and driving, hilling others and eventually killing himself. So it looks like alcoholism runs in the family, I wonder if it will start showing up with Barack.

Supposedly he was able to give up drugs and eventually smoking, but we will see if the media and Republicans drive him to drink.

Biden 's job for the moment.

BearMtnHIB wrote: All the socialists and communists have nothing else to say except Obama has no responsibility here- or try to bring up "it's Bush's fault".

You all have no respect for the soverignty of the USA.

If anyone could keep his low class criminal relatives out of here you'd think the president of the USA could get that done. Obama also has no respect for our laws.

You lefties have no credibility because you are of low moral integrity yourselves.

Shame on you.

The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.

No, I have no respect for foaming-at-the-mouth Righties who can't distinguish between outrage-of-the-day bullsh*t, and reality.

WayneH wrote: [The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.

Chinese fortune cookie diet?

so... is "Ideological Pandering" already a phrase?

Becuase if not... can we coin it here, with this thread being a perfect example from both sides?

I've been reading local forums for many years now, and it's always little outrages, from one side or the other, posted from one slanted site or another, all pandering to the ideology of their followers. And then we all sit here, and take sides, and whatever side posted the story adamantly defends it, and the other side of the argument puts up their own example of the same idelogical pandering, and then more debate starts, and then it all degrades until the thread is either locked (well, not on this site), or we've all run out of one-upsmanships on the issues. It's fun to read, but I'm always surprised by it for some reason.

So... just know that, as a general centrist with some zealot-right-wing in me, I read these types of stories and think "Wow. Really? Who cares?!?" when it comes to Obama's illigitimate relatives, or Bush's brother's court case. I don't care who is assumed to be dumb, on either side... I prefer facts, and making my decisions based upon reserach and personal beliefs that are not tied to this type of ideological pandering. In fact, pandering is not a strong-enough word, but it's unfortunately the best-suited.

I realize that sites need to boost readership, and so they slant because they know their readers, etc., and it happens all over the place, follow the money, etc., but I just thought I'd throw my viewpoint out there. Most of these types of stories aren't even outages-of-the-day from either side, they're just a waste of time. :woo hoo: :can't hear

and that's all I have to say on the matter

RCCL wrote: so... is "Ideological Pandering" already a phrase?

Becuase if not... can we coin it here, with this thread being a perfect example from both sides?

I've been reading local forums for many years now, and it's always little outrages, from one side or the other, posted from one slanted site or another, all pandering to the ideology of their followers. And then we all sit here, and take sides, and whatever side posted the story adamantly defends it, and the other side of the argument puts up their own example of the same idelogical pandering, and then more debate starts, and then it all degrades until the thread is either locked (well, not on this site), or we've all run out of one-upsmanships on the issues. It's fun to read, but I'm always surprised by it for some reason.

So... just know that, as a general centrist with some zealot-right-wing in me, I read these types of stories and think "Wow. Really? Who cares?!?" when it comes to Obama's illigitimate relatives, or Bush's brother's court case. I don't care who is assumed to be dumb, on either side... I prefer facts, and making my decisions based upon reserach and personal beliefs that are not tied to this type of ideological pandering. In fact, pandering is not a strong-enough word, but it's unfortunately the best-suited.

I realize that sites need to boost readership, and so they slant because they know their readers, etc., and it happens all over the place, follow the money, etc., but I just thought I'd throw my viewpoint out there. Most of these types of stories aren't even outages-of-the-day from either side, they're just a waste of time. :woo hoo: :can't hear

and that's all I have to say on the matter

Agreed....but I think the problem with these threads usually starts with the first responses for the opposing view that is more of an insult than substanative debate of the actual topic. If we were speaking to each other face to face, there would be far fewer insults (if any), and an actual debaate of the issue would be possible...but not so much here.

CriticalBill wrote:

RCCL wrote: so... is "Ideological Pandering" already a phrase?

Becuase if not... can we coin it here, with this thread being a perfect example from both sides?

I've been reading local forums for many years now, and it's always little outrages, from one side or the other, posted from one slanted site or another, all pandering to the ideology of their followers. And then we all sit here, and take sides, and whatever side posted the story adamantly defends it, and the other side of the argument puts up their own example of the same idelogical pandering, and then more debate starts, and then it all degrades until the thread is either locked (well, not on this site), or we've all run out of one-upsmanships on the issues. It's fun to read, but I'm always surprised by it for some reason.

So... just know that, as a general centrist with some zealot-right-wing in me, I read these types of stories and think "Wow. Really? Who cares?!?" when it comes to Obama's illigitimate relatives, or Bush's brother's court case. I don't care who is assumed to be dumb, on either side... I prefer facts, and making my decisions based upon reserach and personal beliefs that are not tied to this type of ideological pandering. In fact, pandering is not a strong-enough word, but it's unfortunately the best-suited.

I realize that sites need to boost readership, and so they slant because they know their readers, etc., and it happens all over the place, follow the money, etc., but I just thought I'd throw my viewpoint out there. Most of these types of stories aren't even outages-of-the-day from either side, they're just a waste of time. :woo hoo: :can't hear

and that's all I have to say on the matter

Agreed....but I think the problem with these threads usually starts with the first responses for the opposing view that is more of an insult than substanative debate of the actual topic. If we were speaking to each other face to face, there would be far fewer insults (if any), and an actual debaate of the issue would be possible...but not so much here.

Remind me again what is the point of this thread? Was there ever any real intent to have a debate, or was this simply a thread aimed at slamming Obama for something he hasn't done?

Kate wrote: Remind me again what is the point of this thread? Was there ever any real intent to have a debate, or was this simply a thread aimed at slamming Obama for something he hasn't done?

Yes.