Obama writes excuse note for 4th grader (Cool)

Ford SportTrac Forum

Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Furthermore, this girl likely didn't miss anything substantial on the last day of school.



Here kids are still taking final exams on their last day.



Report cards are also mailed.



Now it's possible that the 10 year old girl was still in 5th grade, and then possibly didn't have any examinations, but that's an assumption that isn't guaranteed.



All it seems that BHO is doing is making PR appearances; The Tonight show with Conan, the Colbert Report, and now this.... Doesn't he have presidential duty...you know, take the Constitution and the ideas of the Founding Fathers and do the exact opposite? Or is he getting tired of that.



Did Obama's teleprompter have to show what to write on the note?



this was a once-in-a lifetime experience for this girl to see a sitting president

Yeah, I'd rather the "once-in-a-lifetime" viewing of a sitting president be of a better president. That said, what makes this a once in a lifetime experience? BHO is making "town hall" meetings left and right. With all the appearances he makes, I wouldn't be surprised if people started following him around the country, like groupies.



I'd say BHO should do something for America, follow the Constitution (gasp!)....but clearly these lame PR appearances are working far better.
 
Here kids are still taking final exams on their last day.

Seriously? 10-year-old kids have last-day final exams? I've never heard of such a thing, anywhere.



Now it's possible that the 10 year old girl was still in 5th grade,

"It's possible"??? You say that like that's an outside chance; like you think it's more likely that this 10 year old girl is a junior in college. What exactly were you expecting a ten-year-old's education level to be?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TJR said:We have become a country of mean old ladies that sit on their front porch waiting for someone to do something they don't like so they can stick their nose in it, yell and scream, and generally make a mountain out of a mole hill.



I wholeheartedly agree TJR.

 
Yeah, as in modern day society, crush those opinions that don't agree with yours', then back it up with sheeple baaaas...





 
Nobleman, yup, the note was cute. I think what some people are saying here reflects upon his time in office so far and the extent of the extreme (in many people's opinion) actions taken by him so far. Is the economy bad, yup. Was it caused y him..nope, GWB...nope, it was caused by the liberal attitude that everyone should share a part of the American dream, a house, weather or not they could afford it. The American dream, as I understand it is to be able to pursue to achieve and to be able to share in some of the pie. I didn't think the pie had to be sliced and served to you by the federal government. The measures taken so far by Obama are very dangerous to the health and future of our country as many Americans see it, including myself. This is not my guy loss..yours won repsponse. I really don't think the right person ran against him.



These are very scary times and before you give a knee jerk reaction to someone's comment, whether pro or con to the present administration and congress, think about what the other party is saying and evaluate its merits before bashing the messenger.





Remenber no matter who says it....THERE"S NO FREE LUNCH!
 
Dan,

that wont happen at this point. It is the little girls note. I wold think that the dad/family wants her to hang onto it..
 
it was caused by the liberal attitude that everyone should share a part of the American dream, a house, weather or not they could afford it.



Who are these mythical "liberals" that keep getting blamed? Again, most Americans are neither left or right, red or blue, rep or dem. Most of them actually listen to both sides and try filtering out the crap which spews aplenty. Most of them didn't get into loans over their heads.



"Liberals" didn't cause the issue, banks caused the issue. Banks were allowed to run free with a "way of doing business" that should have been regulated, should have been questioned, and should have been caught as a problem before the "bubble" burst. Flatly, the government failed because they trusted the people with their hands in the till to regulate themselves.



It? You must think there's only one issue the nation is facing. However with regard to the IT of the housing / lending crisis, the financeers themselves caused it, not the consumers who got in over their heads. If you study the issue, the banks gave out more than they could afford to, relying on the insurance policies to cover the "what if" scenario that people defaulted on their mortgages. The insurers were like "sure, we'll sell you that policy" again covering more bad deals than they could afford to if everyone cashed in, and the hedge funds were selling stock they didn't have in companies that were under pressure to begin with, finally causing them to collapse.



So who really bought more than they could afford when banks lent more than they had, on a policy from an insurer that covered more than it could, financed partially by stocks which were oversold, and being exploited by fund managers who didn't have the stocks to sell, and by a few asshole fund managers who didn't even invest their client's money? It didn't stop there, but it sure as hell didn't start with the common people.



The only thing I fault Obama for right now is not cleaning house at the SEC, Federal Reserve, and CIA but then again, he probably figured we couldn't afford more unemployed people.





The measures taken so far by Obama are very dangerous to the health and future of our country as many Americans see it, including myself.



Because you are an expert right? Because you and so many others can get up there and fix the problem right now. Because you are looking at this without any bias right? Because the measures being taken are to try and stop things from hurdling out of control here at home, and not invading sovereign nations because we can, or lying to America repeatedly? Because "many" is a generalization and not an actual number of Americans. Because these alleged dangerous actions are more dangerous than doing nothing. Because there is a "safe" action, a guaranteed action that will fix the mess we're in.



There isn't a damn person on the planet that isn't concerned with what this administration is doing. This is a global issue, the collapse doesn't end in our borders.



The last president took measures which we all know were very dangerous to the health and future of our country as many americans saw it. Where did you stand on that? Sitting here bashing every move BO makes is not patriotism, it's politics.



This is not my guy loss..yours won repsponse. I really don't think the right person ran against him.



Of course not. The R's ran a horrible campaign against the D's. Why would you do that? Only if you did NOT want to be up there in front of a nation responsible for fixing for some (there's more than one) of the biggest messes in the history of the world. The R party has lost its way and only seems to be able to point and say "look they're doing it all wrong" before the results are in.



In fact, so many of the people responsible for this very mess are Republican. Why? Because the current direction of the party is misguided and benefits those who sought to fill their pockets at whatever cost to the nation. Even the R VP candidate took advantage.



My guy didn't win either, he lost the R nomination. When the choice came down to McCain and Obama, I chose a new guy, my guy won, and now I have to trust he will do his best to swing this thing around.



These are very scary times and before you give a knee jerk reaction to someone's comment, whether pro or con to the present administration and congress, think about what the other party is saying and evaluate its merits before bashing the messenger.



I evaluated it. It was bull$h!t. There was no knee jerk, there were no merits. Maybe you should re-read the entire thread. The inflammatory comments made before mine were no better than saying GWB staged 9/11 so that he could invade Iraq. I don't care what party is saying what, if it's bull$h!t, I'm calling bull$h1t.



Frankly at this stage in the game everyone bashing the president before seeing the results of actions being set in place is either a sore loser, or a jackass. If he did the exact opposite of what he's doing, there would be another group of people bashing those actions. If he didn't give the girl an excuse letter, he would be deemed a heartless socialist who expected her to be in school until the last minute or end up in Siberia. Frankly the office of the president needs a little PR right now as much as it needs the balls to make the unpopular choices, and resist the temptation to break international law every chance it has.



Maybe Obama should deny the issues, lie to the public, let the recession go on another year and say it's not happening. Maybe he should just look the other way and let GM fail so 100,000 (again, I'm making up that number) people are out of work all at once. Is it better to pay 100,000 people unemployment, or invest in their company so that they continue working and it survives? If you have a better plan, go work for the administration and share it with them. That would be patriotic.



Maybe we can sit around and wait for a better plan. GM had plenty of time left to do business, they had plenty of cash on hand right? The markets dropping 500pts a day had time right? Maybe we can wait for a republican plan which they did so well at implementing in years past.



Do you know the answer? I don't pretend to. What I know is the last idiot is out of office, and in 3 years, maybe I'll be saying I hope this idiot is out of office. I hope not to be, I hope he's doing the right thing and in 3 years we're on the path to stability again. I have hope because President Obama and his administration have a plan and they haven't said they hope this nation fails. They haven't endorsed the boycott of GM to further add to the failure. In fact, they're working on it, rather than sitting around blaming the other party and not contributing, and staging coups to force themselves back into power. Frankly I grew up Republican and I'm ashamed what the party has come to. I can't stand plenty of Democrats, but I'm plain disgusted by what I hear from the R Party these days, not to mention some of the spinless turds that tout the party message because of the click they're in (turd comment not directed at anyone here unless you feel it applies to you).
 
[quote Who are these mythical "liberals" that keep getting blamed?][/quote]....Senator Dodd, Congressman Frank and others that as a policy encourage everyone to share in the American Dream, AKA own their own home. Liberal, as I used it refers the fiscal liberals who believe in spending your and my money in a "redistribution of wealth" manner.



I chose a new guy, my guy won, and now I have to trust he will do his.....
No person, D or R in that position should be given blind trust. All politicians must be scrutinized as to their policies and decisions. The approach taken by the present administration is to spend our way out of this recession and for the first time I can recall have the US government take part ownership in a public corporation. In the past the Government was a lender and not an owner. A very dangerous policy in my opinion.



Maybe Obama should deny the issues, lie to the public...
in my opinion he has already done that.





President Obama and his administration have a plan and they haven't said they hope this nation fails
. Please give me the quote saying that he/she wants the "country" to fail. It is true that several have hoped that some of his proposals, universal health care, weaker military, etc. Fail, i.e. do not get passed by congress and put into law. No one, that I know of wants the country to fail.



Nobleman, these are just my opinions and although they may differ from yours, I can understand your views





 
Here is the "I hope the President fails" comment I had heard...



And, if you either read it all or listen to it and leave your mind open, I get where he is coming from.



He is saying I hope he fails as the things he (the President) wants to do will cost us dearly. I didn't take it as he wants the Pres to fail in being a President and things to that nature, just not succeed at losing all of our money, letting large corporations to be able to bail with no ramifications, etc etc etc...



I am NOT a Rush fan. So for me to get it says a lot about leaving an open mind and figure out where Rush is coming from. Not just the statement, but the entire paragraph..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If I got up on stage and said "America deserved 9/11", what would that make me?



Regardless of how I can explain and rationalize it, and show the good things that came out of it, what would it be if I got on the radio and said, "America deserved 9/11"?



Even if I see where he was coming from, I have to disagree. When the man says...



If I wanted Obama to succeed, I'd be happy the Republicans have laid down. And I would be encouraging Republicans to lay down and support him. Look, what he's talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don't want this to work. So I'm thinking of replying to the guy, "Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails." (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here's the point. Everybody thinks it's outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, "Oh, you can't do that." Why not? Why is it any different, what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don't care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: "Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails." Somebody's gotta say it.



...it is pretty clear. Yes he's saying he doesn't want "this method" to work, but the other methods have not and we are trying this now. You can slap a label on anything, call it commie, call it socialist, but we're doing it, we're trying something new because we need another method. Get on board and make it work or f**k off. Soldiers don't get to pick their wars, well, we're going to need to play this hand out. In 4 years we get to decide whether it worked or not. You ever meet a soldier that said "I hope we all fail and die because this war isn't righteous"?



We have tried the government being a loaner without intervention. It has not worked. Wagoner got fired because this is the third time GM has come back for a taxpayer handout and fallen to the same fate. So I'm sorry, but what's wrong with the government saying "enough is enough, we'll give you the money, but you will tell us what is being done with our money, and we will be watching this time."



Was it commie to try eating a new cuisine when "Americana" got boring? To try Chinese, Cuban, or Russian when Hamburgs, and Frankfurts (oh crap we're nazis now).



Now we have a situation that is radical, but has a shot at working. I pose this situation to you:



A corporation fails.

People are unemployed.

Healthcare is lost.

Retirements are ruined.

Homes are lost.



Now who inherits the problem? We the taxpayer. Any way you slice it, the taxpayer pays for it in the long run so what's wrong with the government spending the money up front and making sure the end result changes? Why not keep people working and spending rather than on the streets while we spend on them.



Rush and the like try to wave a flag or stir the patriotic pot only when it is convenient to their message. If it came down to patriotism or their wallets, they would probably burn the flag. Why not get on board and find or offer ways to make this work so that the nation prospers?



I keep hearing "we worked hard for our money" screw those who didn't. This nation used to be a union. We used to do what was best for the country first, then worry about calling someone a bum.



So what was good about 9/11? A city full of @$$holes bonded and became human, even if only for 3 days. A nation banded together and remembered their patriotic sides. People rose up against a common enemy. Security was "tightened", lots of government money was spent on "security initiatives". We realized not enough people know that patriotism unless there's a tragedy or it's trendy to have a flag on your car.



Should several thousand people have died? Should I say, "I hope more planes crash into more towers" just to get a little patriotic spirit going?



No.



So no one should say that millions should be unemployed, the economy should crumble, the president should fail and in effect the country should collapse, just to see a socialist policy fail, because they are sore losers. "If I wanted Obama to succeed, I'd be happy the Republicans have laid down."



So thanks, he can sit there in his corner and have his tantrums, or he can get on board and get productive. Oh wait, he's just a radio host, doesn't the R party have any real leadership?
 
Nobleman,

I am TOTALLY with you.



To make the comments he said especially about deserving 9/11, really are pushing it in my opinion. He does have his right to his opinion, but the fact he is a public figure, I believe his opinion needs to be exercised a bit.



Just like cops are held to higher standards, so are those in the media in my opinion.



I simply posted it as I believe that is where the comments came from that were mentioned higher in the post.
 
Liberal, as I used it refers the fiscal liberals who believe in spending your and my money in a "redistribution of wealth" manner.



I'm not sure there is such a person. I guess that could be defined as an extreme ideology, but have you ever known anyone that says "take a million from Bill Gates and hand it to 100 people in the projects"? These badges that lump everyone into a red or blue aren't in check with the reality that most americans are down the middle. Are people happy the goverment has to run GM, no. Do we really have a choice? That's a fine line if you let them collapse.



I think that's why he's getting a csar{tsar}[czar] of "companies too big to fail". That line was fed to him right and left and it is why we're in this situation. GM failing represents millions of jobs lost across many different companies, not just GM. In the future, the government needs to know these weak points before they're asking for help with one month of cash left.



Did you know that some small towns could be devastated if their Wal-Mart closes? So many people work that store that it has an effect. Picture a company like GM going under. Canada now owns a piece of GM also.



No person, D or R in that position should be given blind trust. All politicians must be scrutinized as to their policies and decisions. The approach taken by the present administration is to spend our way out of this recession and for the first time I can recall have the US government take part ownership in a public corporation. In the past the Government was a lender and not an owner. A very dangerous policy in my opinion.



I agree. However to what extent do we scream "ANARCHY" when all this is is a shot at fixing things. I'm all for revolution if the fuc*er starts annexing Canada and Mexico while seating a "man in black" in every board room, however this is far from that. GM's history with lending can be summed up like this: "we lent, we lent more, we lent you more and now you're telling us you now have a month to live and need cash or millions will be unemployed and the auto industry will pretty much collapse, along with a major financer (GMAC) of mortgages and... oh, no, no, no, we're bailing you out, but this time you're answering to the taxpayer mother lover."



Who else do you know that gives a loan without any collateral, oversight, or investment interest? I sure wouldn't lend you that kind of coin unless I had a gps, transceiver, and a piece of c4 embedded in your spine. Think of the GM csar as the c4 in GM's spine.







Nobleman, these are just my opinions and although they may differ from yours, I can understand your views



I respect that, you're entitled to your views and I do see where your coming from.



My opinion is that too many in the R party are out of touch with reality and use incendiary catch phrases to incite pressure on an administration that has a really $h!tty job right now. 5 months into this presidency is not the time to judge results. 3 years from now is. That doesn't mean we should allow him to annex Canada and Mexico for the next 3 years, but let them try. We've all done it the republican way for the past 20 out of 28 years. Now we're here, I have to say it is time for a change, we know "stay the course" doesn't work.



If we're approaching 10% unemployment, be happy it isn't 15% because GM went under.



And from a publicity standpoint, no one leading the R party is doing a real good job of getting good press right now. Not that the D's are a gleaming pile of gold, but I just don't see the same behavior coming out of that party. I mean really, when the entire country is on an anti-republican rampage, maybe they should hire George Clooney or someone popular with the kids to run for office. It's worked in the past.



Nobleman,

I am TOTALLY with you.



To make the comments he said especially about deserving 9/11, really are pushing it in my opinion. He does have his right to his opinion, but the fact he is a public figure, I believe his opinion needs to be exercised a bit.



Just like cops are held to higher standards, so are those in the media in my opinion.



I simply posted it as I believe that is where the comments came from that were mentioned higher in the post.



Wait, dude, did Limbaugh actually say this? I actually pulled that one out as an observation I had living in NYC at the time. I didn't know the guy got on the air and said it.



I think it's an observation that would need to be worded carefully (and it has been) but I don't think spewing that trash on the air when people are still recovering from it is any better than the "preacher" protesting at military funerals.





 
Well, I found some pretty crappy stuff he said related to 9/11, but I found one I do agree with:



If you lost a family member in the September 11th attack, you're going to get an average of $1,185,000. The range is a minimum guarantee of $250,000, all the way up to $4.7 million. If you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed in action, the first check you get is a $6,000, direct death benefit, half of which is taxable. Next, you get $1,750 for burial costs. If you are the surviving spouse, you get $833 a month until you remarry. And there's a payment of $211 per month for each child under 18. When the child hits 18, those payments come to a screeching halt.



Keep in mind that some of the people that are getting an average of $1.185, million up to $4.7 million, are complaining that it's not enough.



We also learned over the weekend that some of the victims from the Oklahoma City bombing have started an organization asking for the same deal that the September 11th families are getting.



In addition to that, some of the families of those bombed in the embassies are now asking for compensation as well. You see where this is going, don't you? Folks, this is part and parcel of over 50 years of entitlement politics in this country. It's just really sad



Soldiers are always crapped on. The only ones who ever accept a new leader and move on to fight the mission are also always given the shortest end. I really don't want to see military funding cut, but I would like to see the money better spent.



I do have to wonder if Rush gives a crap about soldiers, or he's just using them to add fire to his bashing.
 
Nobleman, you seem to be expressing a black and white, or rather a Dem and Rep response to everything. My comments about my misgivings with Obama's actions should not be rebutted with "...the Reps did this bad thing..." I am evaluating his performance not compared to others, but in what I think is right and wrong. BTW I am a fiscal conservative and a social liberal, not necessarily a Republican.



The mess we are in started with FDR's fiscal liberal actions. We've suffered ever since.
 
Top