« Jenny Hyun's "racist" tweet | Main | Iran warns of pre-emptive military strike against U.S. »

February 21, 2012

Comments

"I won’t forget the episode of The Apprentice in which me made fun of one of the male contestants for being a virgin."

Beta male solidarity, bro!

[HS: In any event, it was unchristian of him to make fun of the guy for being a virgin.]

I think once the voters are done kicking the tires, Romney will be the nominee. But watch out, because Obama will go after the LDS church mercilessly. The commercials have already been written, I'm sure: "Romney's church discriminated against blacks until very recently, and it still discriminates against women."

Anyway, Obama is going to be re-elected I'm afraid. There are too many people who will feel discomfort or guilt if they have a hand in "firing the black guy."

What happens after that will be interesting though. After the election is over, Obama's people (and the media - but I repeat myself) will feel unconstrained and we'll hear endlessly about how the 47-48-49% who did not vote for Obama are all a bunch of bigots and crackers etc. etc. etc. Thanks to that and $5/gallon gasoline, by the time Obama takes the oath of office on January 20, 2013 his approval rating will be in the high 20s or low 30s, I imagine.

Trump is a relentless self-promoter and full of bluster. Everything Trump does is the best!

Being a male virgin is the lowest status marker in America. Having a felony is less socially damaging than being a virgin.

And Trump's daughter is now a Christ killer.

There's a clear difference between a virgin aka usually involuntary celibacy hence loser and religious voluntary celibacy. The latter takes conviction, faith and self-control, which are all admirable traits. If someone is an involuntary virgin by their mid-20s they are socially inept and something psychologically or physically is wrong.

Trump is right though, Santorum won't win by campaigning against birth control. That would be alienating 50% of the vote and 90% of female Catholic voters.

" If someone is an involuntary virgin by their mid-20s they are socially inept and something psychologically or physically is wrong.'

Why would an adult make fun of someone like that? That's pretty childish and cruel.

The only influence Trump has with the public is by virtue of being a rich celebrity, but as far as the Republican party goes, he doesn't have any. He's only decided to pontificate on politics rather recently and gets positive attention from the right by virtue of talking crap about Obama.

But the average Republican vote doesn't care any more about his opinion than the average Democratic voter.

I have had it with the three stooges, Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul delaying the main event.

It's time for the trio to stand aside so Romney can be justly coronated GOP nominee and we can move to the hilarious spectacle of watching Obama's rock bottom African IQ attempt to defend his record in office against the attack ads from the high IQ white male candidate, Mitt Romney.

[HS: I really don't appreciate the comments about Obama's IQ. This is a blog dedicated to the truth, and the truth is that Obama is quite intelligent and he uses his intelligence for evil purposes.]

"This is a blog dedicated to the truth, and the truth is that Obama is quite intelligent"

List three things he's said as president, unscripted, where he demonstrated intelligence above a 105 IQ.

I've never heard him say anything interesting or intelligent.

[HS: I am sure that if you spend a week hanging out with people who have a 140 IQ, and then a week hanging out with people who have a 105 IQ, you will place Obama in the 140 camp.]

And I am serious about how informative a person's emotional, verbal, and eye movement reaction times indicate their level of intelligence.

Watch Youtube videos of Obama answer a question without a teleprompter and you can see how slowly his eyes and speech take to show awareness of the question compared to politicians in the 115-125 range.

Then watch Youtube videos of Romney's swift eye movements, emotional reactions, and rapid fire verbal responses (people with high IQs tend to talk very rapidly because their brain can process information faster than they can speak) and you'll be able to get a better feel for how far Obama is intellectually compared to Romney.

There is no way anyone below 125 IQ could be an editor of the harvard law review, let alone graduate magna cum laude. Law school grades are a reasonably good gauge of intellectual ability. The IQ of harvard JDs is probably north of 135. Its hard to think of a harder IQ threshold than Harvard JD cum laude outside of STEM.

I wouldn't read too much into how fast the man talks. Small mistakes in speech carry higher consequences for him than perhaps literally anyone else. Not surprising he takes his time.

Is BO the only editor of the Harvard law review who was never published in it? I know plenty of people with IQ's higher than 140 and I wouldn't put him in the 140 camp, either. I agree with the Undiscovered Jew. But the discussion is pointless because it's all just speculation. None of us have any real evidence to support our opinions. Harvard JD cum laude blah blah blah. That's not evidence.

"Law school grades are a reasonably good gauge of intellectual ability."

When you're dealing with NAMs, all bets are off.

I agree with TUJ.

Still, there was something today at VFR that supports the HS view that Obama uses his high IQ for evil:

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/021732.html

The comments to this entry are closed.