Obama - Man of the People

[CalvertNewb]

Just curious how this line fits in with your "trying to understand the other side" motive. It does not seem like it does - it seems like you want to argue and "call" people on things with which you disagree.

I would love to understand the other side. Instead i find that mostly I am called names. I point out hypocrisy with the hope that you will realize Trump is doing exactly what you claim Obama for yet time and again he is given a pass or some excuse is made for his behavior. Such as in this case.

The Op's original post was meant to disparage Obama for earning money for his speeches and books. What is wrong with that? He is no longer president and can feel free to charge what the market will bear. Yet he is criticized for it because he championed policies that would help the disadvantaged in our country?

Trump pandered to the disadvantaged to win the presidency yet he is far richer than Obama will ever be yet the OP somehow find Obama's behavior hypocritical.


It is clear it is a case of liking one man over the other and thus excusing his behavior

or believing there is a different set of rules for a white man and a black man.

 

[Gilligan]

I would love to understand the other side.

Priceless.

 

[This_person]

I would love to understand the other side. Instead i find that mostly I am called names. I point out hypocrisy with the hope that you will realize Trump is doing exactly what you claim Obama for yet time and again he is given a pass or some excuse is made for his behavior. Such as in this case.

The Op's original post was meant to disparage Obama for earning money for his speeches and books. What is wrong with that? He is no longer president and can feel free to charge what the market will bear. Yet he is criticized for it because he championed policies that would help the disadvantaged in our country?

Trump pandered to the disadvantaged to win the presidency yet he is far richer than Obama will ever be yet the OP somehow find Obama's behavior hypocritical.


It is clear it is a case of liking one man over the other and thus excusing his behavior

or believing there is a different set of rules for a white man and a black man.

I'm not sure to whom that is clear other than you, but it does seem clear to you. Now that it is clear to you (even though virtually no conservative would agree with you), do you think you understand the other side?

Because, believe it or not, what you just wrote I would reword as: "Obama's hypocrisy is fine, and I accept it, but I don't accept Trump's or the people who defend Trump for it like I defend Obama for it." That's what you've done to help me understand your side.

 

[GURPS]

The Op's original post was meant to disparage Obama for earning money for his speeches and books.

nope, I never said Obama could not make money ...
but you do not get to hang with billionaires, rich and Elite Hollywood types and claim to be anything other that a Rich Elitist yourself

 

[Monello]

You've said more than enough to show your ignorance and racist proclivities.

 

[Gilligan]

View attachment 118277

Check. Newb's got this.

THE LEFT WING INTERNET ARGUING CHECKLIST

Skim until Offended
Disqualify that Opinion
Attack, Attack, Attack
Disregard Inconvenient facts
Make #### Up
Resort to Moral Equivalency
Concern Trolling
When all else fails, Racism!

http://monsterhunternation.com/2013/09/20/the-internet-arguing-checklist/

 

[CalvertNewb]

LOL..don't flatter yourself. Very little makes me angry and certainly not vacuous spew from a small minded liberal parrot.

You attempted to marginalize Trump supporters by applying a derogatory label to them as a group so you could then dismiss them derisively. You received the training.

Again you must not understand the term pandering.

It does not imply all of or an entire group. It means he targeted that group and played to them. Not that they make up the entirety of his supporters

 

[CalvertNewb]

I'm not sure to whom that is clear other than you, but it does seem clear to you. Now that it is clear to you (even though virtually no conservative would agree with you), do you think you understand the other side?

Because, believe it or not, what you just wrote I would reword as: "Obama's hypocrisy is fine, and I accept it, but I don't accept Trump's or the people who defend Trump for it like I defend Obama for it." That's what you've done to help me understand your side.

It's still not clear because you don't answer the question. You just twist my words and try to insult me.


Why is one thing okay for Trump and not for Obama?

For example, golfing, vacationing, being a champion for the poor while not being poor?

 

[Bird Dog]

You just twist my words and try to insult me.

Please show where TP twisted your words and insulted you......TIA

 

[CalvertNewb]

Insults:

"LOL..don't flatter yourself. Very little makes me angry and certainly not vacuous spew from a small minded liberal parrot. "

"You are a tool"

Twisting my words:


"You attempted to marginalize Trump supporters by applying a derogatory label to them as a group so you could then dismiss them derisively. You received the training."

I did no such thing. I said he pandered to that group. Which is not the same as saying all of his supporters are that group

 

[This_person]

It's still not clear because you don't answer the question. You just twist my words and try to insult me.

I'm sorry, I thought you said it was clear. BRB











Yes, you did.

Why is one thing okay for Trump and not for Obama?

For example, golfing, vacationing, being a champion for the poor while not being poor?

Are you suggesting only poor people can champion the poor? Can only white men champion white men, yellow women champion yellow women? Can a rich black man champion poor white people?

 

[CalvertNewb]

I'm sorry, I thought you said it was clear. BRB











Yes, you did.

Are you suggesting only poor people can champion the poor? Can only white men champion white men, yellow women champion yellow women? Can a rich black man champion poor white people?

More twisting of words with no substance. You are like the school yard bully with taunts of "am not, are too"

 

[This_person]

More twisting of words with no substance. You are like the school yard bully with taunts of "am not, are too"

What did I twist?

It is clear it is a case of liking one man over the other and thus excusing his behavior

or believing there is a different set of rules for a white man and a black man.

I'm not sure to whom that is clear other than you, but it does seem clear to you. Now that it is clear to you (even though virtually no conservative would agree with you), do you think you understand the other side?

It's still not clear

So, you said Trump is "being a champion for the poor while not being poor?" Are you suggesting one must be poor to champion the poor?

 

[This_person]

Do recall:

[video=youtube;IpoTSeuLffA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpoTSeuLffA[/video]

 

[CalvertNewb]

What did I twist?

​

So, you said Trump is "being a champion for the poor while not being poor?" Are you suggesting one must be poor to champion the poor?

Please see the original post that started this discussion. That person was contending that very thing. That Obama was a hypocrite because he represented the poor and now is being paid for his speeches and his books. I never claimed that. I was pointing out his hypocrisy as Trump pandered to the poor during his campaign while being an elitist billionaire I shouldn't have to explain this to you if you followed the thread and comprehended the discussion.

 

[This_person]

Please see the original post that started this discussion. That person was contending that very thing. That Obama was a hypocrite because he represented the poor and now is being paid for his speeches and his books. I never claimed that. I was pointing out his hypocrisy as Trump pandered to the poor during his campaign while being an elitist billionaire I shouldn't have to explain this to you if you followed the thread and comprehended the discussion.

I did, but apparently you did not. There have been many instances of telling you that was not the SOLE part of what was deemed hypocritical. If you can find where Trump has said that people should only make so much money, or that people who make money need to "spread it around", or that there is a problem with income inequality, etc., please do. Otherwise, you are not getting what you're being told.

 

[CalvertNewb]

I did, but apparently you did not. There have been many instances of telling you that was not the SOLE part of what was deemed hypocritical. If you can find where Trump has said that people should only make so much money, or that people who make money need to "spread it around", or that there is a problem with income inequality, etc., please do. Otherwise, you are not getting what you're being told.

Wrong. You are inferring that from your bias against Obama. None of the words that you use are mentioned in the original post that started the discussion nor did any other poster in a subsequent post say anything about income inequality, spread it around or people should only make so much money.

Instead Obama was attacked for earning money in a capitalist free market which under any other circumstances Conservatives would cheer.

Therefore it is hypocritical.

 

[Gilligan]

Instead Obama was attacked for earning money in a capitalist free market ..... it is hypocritical.

What is hypocritical about it is the audience and the source of the money. The SCOAMF said only a couple short months ago, in response to a question during a 60 Minutes interview, that he had no intention of going to Wall Street. Yet...LMAO..there he goes.

I could GAF otherwise. I don't care who he gives speeches to.

 

[Gilligan]

nor did any other poster in a subsequent post say anything about income inequality, spread it around or people should only make so much money.

.

Of course not. Only Barry said all of those things. Often.

 

[This_person]

Wrong. You are inferring that from your bias against Obama. None of the words that you use are mentioned in the original post that started the discussion nor did any other poster in a subsequent post say anything about income inequality, spread it around or people should only make so much money.

Well, actually, I was basing that based on what I know Obama has said, but I am also basing in on the following:

I have a problem with successful people who spent their entire lives disparaging and trying to destroy successful people.

I don't care how much money Obama makes, ...

But that's what we're trying to point out in people like Obama. He spent a lifetime trying to destroy honest wealthy people, all while becoming very wealthy himself. And getting wealthy doing what? What has he actually provided as an exchange for earning his wealth? He's never produced anything. He's never hired anyone. He's never providing anything to the middle class or poor. He surrounds himself with very wealthy elites while disparaging very wealthy people he disagrees with politically. Obama is the very definition of 'double standard'.

Instead Obama was attacked for earning money in a capitalist free market which under any other circumstances Conservatives would cheer.

Therefore it is hypocritical.

I repeatedly saw people saying, "I have no problem with him making money - even $60M" and the like. People asked for you to show where they said they did, and you never responded. Meanwhile, you called people racist and hypocrites and more. Very insulting.