True. It shouldn’t be, but it will be.
No, the word for that begins with “n.”
Is the strawman covered with tar? And placed in his path by Br’er Fox?
The question in this thread was why was the hug controversial. I gave reasons why it is considered controversial and then received responses that his past doesn’t matter. I still contend that his past matters as I believe everyones past forms their present and future. I really don’t think his views have changed that much from when he was in college. So feel free to say you don’t care about his past.
I don’t believe he hates white people. I do believe he is an elitist who looks down his nose at all of us. And I believe he makes that clear with every class warfare speech he gives. He has the minions who agree and the pions who don’t. I do believe he belongs to a group of elitists (made up of democrats and republicans) who would like to socialize America but are smart enough to know that they have to do it in small pieces. I believe he thinks that he is the one smart enough to give us a government induced utopia which is impossible because everyone has a different definition of what is fair. But if that’s what the country wants then soon enough that’s what this country will get. We’ve been heading down that path for a lot longer than the past three years and are reaching the point of no return.
Now if this is a site where it’s just a bunch of “open minded” liberals that just want to agree with each other let me know.
No, you didn’t receive any replies like that. You can say this over and over again if you want, but it still won’t be true. People said the video doesn’t mean much of anything (it doesn’t) and that his college years are a lot less relevant than what he’s been doing in the Senate and as president.
I think it’s a bad sign if people can’t tell the difference between socialist-utopian-elitist and moderate Democrat - and not because the Democrats have views that are similar to those of utopian socialists. But that’s been going on for a couple of decades now.
It’s not that we want to agree with each other; it’s that we don’t want to agree with you. Referring to people who disagree with you as “minions”* of Obama is a big red flag that despite your protestations you’re not remotely as “open-minded” as you seem to imply and that basically you are determined to dislike Obama regardless of anything we say. We’ve refuted your assertions and you’ve basically called us “sheeple” in response. Well baaah to you, I say.
And referring to Obama as “an elitist who looks down his nose at all of us” translates to “guy smarter than me who makes me feel inferior”. Sounds like you have issues.
Also: “pions”?
Y’know I heard a rumor that Romney has some video footage of his daughter’s 12th birthday that he hasn’t shown to the public. Why is he hiding it? It must be that he is secretly a pedophile.
And referring to Obama as “an elitist who looks down his nose at all of us” translates to “guy smarter than me who makes me feel inferior”. Sounds like you have issues.
Also: “pions”?
[/QUOTE]
(Jay Westcott/POLITICO).
President Obama’s 2012 State of the Union address again rated at an 8th grade comprehension level on the Flesch-Kincaid readability test — the third lowest score of any State of the Union address since 1934.
The University of Minnesota’s Smart Politics conducted an analysis on the last 70 State of the Union addresses and found that President Obama’s three addresses have the lowest grade average of any modern president. “Obama’s average grade-level score of 8.4 is more than two grades lower than the 10.7 grade average for the other 67 addresses written by his 12 predecessors,” they conclude.
Not talking down to us eh?
Really? You’re against him because you don’t like the Flesch-Kincaid score of his State of the Union addresses? That’s a new one. And if he’d used big words you’d be complaining about him showing off his intellect and lording it over us unedumacated types, I’m sure.
Heck, do presidents even write their own SotU addresses anymore? I thought they had people for that.
And if he spoke at an unusually complex level, he’d be an elitist who doesn’t want anyone to understand him. Since JQPublic didn’t post a link, I’ll do it. Notice any trends in the State of the Union grading? Obama’s scores do rank the lowest, but they are essentially tied with G. W. Bush’s and a bit lower than Bill Clinton’s, and overall there is a clear trend toward a lower grade level - the five most recent presidents have the five lowest scores by this measurement.
They don’t write them alone, no.
The readability test is for readability; that is, it is a measurement based on written text, not speech. Of course the written text of a speech can be subjected to it. It seems to me that a speech, meant to be heard, should intentionally have a lower Flesch-Kincaid rating than a written article by the same author. It is more difficult to follow complex sentences that are heard as opposed to read. You really think that a simply and clearly written speech is evidence of elitism?
When Republicans do this it’s called “plain talk”.
The Flesch-Kincaid scale measures clarity of speech, not complexity of ideas. You can express very complex ideas at a sixth grade level or total bullshit at a 12th grade level. It’s also very sensitive to one’s speaking style, since it’s really only a measure of how long your words and your sentences are. It makes total sense to me that someone who made his way up as a community organizer–working with the poor, the uneducated, and people on the margins–would learn to speak with as much clarity as possible.
Not that I think I’m going to change your mind about the President. But hey, maybe if you’re lucky we’ll kick out that elitist socialist and replace him with a real man of the people like Mitt Romney.
That was not the question I asked you. Though I understand why you would want to avoid it.
What’s he got that is such a big deal, anyway? Scholarshipped his way to Harvard Law. Made US Presidential history just being elected. Two bright, happy children who clearly adore him. A wife so smokin’ hot she scorches footprints in the sidewalk when she barefoots. Can sink a three-pointer at thirty yards, blindfolded.
Harumph! Big deal! I got all that! Sorta. Kinda.
And he can sing.
Of course, the latter is much more useful when you’ve run out of things to say in the middle of page four of a paper that has to be five pages. 
I don’t think that’s really the issue here. Bush wasn’t a community organizer and his scores were the same as Obama’s (an average grade level of 8.6 over seven SOTU speeches to 8.4 over three speeches for Obama). The issue is that the way politicians talk to people has changed. And while Obama has the lowest scores of the presidents who have had these speeches televised, it’s also true that the way they have been broadcast has changed: they were not always primetime events, and apparently in the old days, the TV networks insisted they not go on too long.
And not that this is exactly the same issue, but I remember some of Clinton’s speeches being criticized for being too long. His longest addresses lasted more than 80 minutes and he never spoke for less than an hour. All of G.W. Bush’s SOTU speeches were less than an hour long, and Obama is in between. The lesson here is that if you already don’t like the guy, it is easy to find something insubstantial to complain about.
And that makes Obama an elitist.
Of course, if he had given a speech glittering with fancy SAT words, literary and historical allusions, and recondite metaphors, that also would make Obama an elitist – wouldn’t it?
Please explain the standards by which he could conceivably win here.
If he’s waging socialist class warfare, isn’t that kind of the opposite of elitism, seeing as how that’s essentially taking power, influence and money from the few and distributing it among the masses.
And he’s all snobby about sports too, with his fancy knowledge of posh sports like basketball and baseball and football. Not like Mitt Romney who knows all about NASCAR. Well, he knows some NASCAR owners anyway. A true man of the people.
I keed, I keed. But as Marley said, some people will grasp at any straw. [WARNING: seriously humor-impaired]
You clearly do not understand what “socialism” means.
Or, wait, that’s not you . . .