Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Friday, May 24, 2024 79° Today's Paper

Top News

Rebuking Trump, Obama tells graduates walls won’t solve ills

Swipe or click to see more


President Barack Obama spoke during Rutgers University’s 250th Anniversary commencement ceremony, today, in New Brunswick, N.J.

PISCATAWAY, N.J. » President Barack Obama today urged college graduates to shun those who want to confront a rapidly linked world by building walls around the United States or by embracing ignorance, as he delivered a sharp and barely concealed critique of Donald Trump.

Obama used his commencement speech at Rutgers University to illustrate a world view antithetical to the ideas espoused by the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. Looking out at a sea of red and black gowns, Obama told the roughly 12,000 graduating students that the pace of change on the planet is accelerating, not subsiding, and that recent history had proved that the toughest challenges cannot be solved in isolation.

“A wall won’t stop that,” Obama said, bringing to mind Trump’s call for building a border wall between the U.S. and Mexico. “The point is, to help ourselves, we’ve got to help others — not pull up the drawbridge and try to keep the world out.”

The president never mentioned Trump by name, but his intended target seemed clear. Repeatedly, Obama referred to disparaging comments about Muslims and immigrants, and opposition to free trade deals. But he appeared most incensed by what he described as a rejection of facts, science and intellectualism that he said was pervading politics.

“In politics and in life, ignorance is not a virtue,” Obama said. “It’s not cool to not know what you’re talking about. That’s not keeping it real or telling it like it is. That’s not challenging political correctness. That’s just not knowing what you’re talking about,” the president said.

“And yet, we’ve become confused about this,” he continued, warning that the rejection of facts and science would lead the U.S. on a path of decline.

Some 50,000 students and their families packed High Point Solution Stadium for the ceremony, the first at Rutgers to involve a sitting president. The public university’s leaders lobbied the president for years to come to campus for the school’s 250th anniversary, and Obama praised the school for its diverse student body and research programs.

Today’s address was the second of three commencement speeches that Obama will deliver during his final graduation season as president. Earlier in May, Obama told graduates at historically black Howard University that the country is “a better place today” than when he graduated from Columbia University more than 30 years ago. The president will also speak on June 2 at the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

Rutgers also bestowed an honorary law degree on the president, adding to the half-dozen or so other honorary degrees that the Columbia University and Harvard Law School graduate Obama has received.

83 responses to “Rebuking Trump, Obama tells graduates walls won’t solve ills”

  1. MoiLee says:


  2. maya says:

    As a taxpayer, I resent having to pay for illegals healthcare, WIC, section 8, education and foodstamps all the while they are undercutting jobs for Americans in areas such as landscaping, painting, construction, drywall, etc. Obama is just another elitist who is going to rake in millions post presidency on speaking fees, and he has no right to lecture the middle class. Those graduates should also know that H1B visas granted to legals also take jobs away from Americans.

    • boolakanaka says:

      What jobs.? Tell me what exact jobs have you lost?

      • d_bullfighter says:

        The problem is not jobs. As we know, immigrants both legal and illegal take back breaking jobs such as those in agriculture that most Americans would not, or could not do. The primary issue of an open border is a security issue. Potential enemies of the State have no problems infiltrating the borders due to Obama’s lax policy.

        • Mythman says:

          Sometimes Prof Boo you remind me of an assistant US Attorney who when nailed insists that instead of connecting the dots, the nailer list in numbered paragraphs exactly and precisely how and when fill in the blank, or, otherwise, don’t waste my time.

          Also there can be open trade and closed borders simultaneously, as the two are not really that connected. Anyway, “open” trade in pot, meth and heroin is not legal trade, is it? As for Prez O, what did it really matter after all that we had the first fully PC president?

          Time for a change and a different approach.

        • boolakanaka says:

          Sir, first I am not speaking to you, but rather pointing out the specific flaw in the posters presumed point.

        • d_bullfighter says:

          boo – that is obvious however that in my point to you.

        • boolakanaka says:

          If the United States still takes in 10,000 Syrian refugees in 2016, and the number of refugees rises to 4.5 million, a mere 0.22 percent of them–one out of every 450–will be resettled in the United States. That number is still so small and the process so well monitored that potential terrorists are unlikely to see the refugee system as a viable way to enter the United States.

          Foreign-born terrorists tend to enter on student visas, tourist visas, business visas, or have asylum applications pending, or are lawful permanent residents. All non-immigrant or immigrant categories face fewer security and background screenings than refugees do.

          Of the 859,629 refugees who have entered the United States since 2001, three have been convicted for planning a terrorist attack abroad and exactly zero have perpetrated domestic attacks – that’s one conviction for every 286,543 refugees admitted. Focusing on the 735,920 refugees from Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and South Asia, that’s one conviction for every 245,307 refugees admitted. Just to hammer the point home, these are convictions for planning terrorist attacks abroad, not for carrying out actual terrorist attacks in the United States.

          In 2015, 53 percent of the Syrians admitted were men, while only 41.5 percent of those men were between the ages of 14 and 40. Of all the Syrian refugees in that year, only 22.3 percent of them were men between the ages of 14 and 40. Terrorism-related convictions are almost always of men, so any risk-assessment should note the small number of men in the applicable age ranges.

          Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that individual Syrian refugees are three times as likely to attempt terrorism in the United States than non-Syrian refugees because they are super-radicalized and very good at hiding it while waiting for years in refugee camps for their chance to strike. Assuming this fantasy is true, the United States can expect to convict a single Syrian refugee for attempting a terrorist attack for every 95,514 of them allowed in as refugees. There are many more convictions for attempted terrorism than successful terrorist attacks. Without even attempting to estimate the damage caused by such hypothetical terrorist attacks, it’s clear that the present political panic and calls for a moratorium on refugee admissions from Syria are totally unwarranted.

        • MililaniGal says:

          boolakanaka, all your statistics mean nothing when the one killed by the statistically insignificant terrorist is you or your family. Would your statistics matter if you were one of the fourteen victims killed in San Bernardino?

        • keaukaha says:

          You are absolutely correct. The minority is not taking jobs away,they’re performing the undesirable ones. All you need to do is go to the hotels,restaurants,shopping centers and many other businesses to see that 99% of service jobs are done by immigrants. They come from countries that are so impoverished that they’re ecstatic to be working. They live simply and make due with what they have. Most importantly is that they instill the value of education to their children most of whom do extremely well in the public school system.

        • d_bullfighter says:

          boo – I do not share your optimism. First of all, even if only a very small percentage are admitted to or sneak into the country as as terrorists, it only takes a handful of trained terrorists to wreak their havoc among the citizenry. Would it not be more prudent to carefully screen everyone who enters the country? FBI Director James Comey has already testified before the House Committee on Homeland Security that the federal government cannot conduct thorough checks on all of the coming influx of 10,000 refugees from Syria which undercuts your unfounded assertion that the process is “so well monitored.”

          Irrespective of your argument that foreign born terrorists tend to enter the US via the visa process, common sense would conclude that a determined terrorist will use whatever avenue of entry is readily available to enter the country and that includes lax border security which amounts to the least resistance to entry. Contrary to your claim, a terrorist with a history of such activity on file with the FBI/DHS would be denied a visa which would make crossing the border the next obvious option would it not?

          Your fallacy of appealing to traditional wisdom citing past lack of cases of foreign born terrorists executing attacks on US soil is in no way a valid and reliable indicator of what may yet happen in the future. It is shortsighted because it does not account for long-term ramifications and consequences. The term “sleeper cells” has been coined precisely because it is thought that such terrorists already exist in Western countries who are plotting to carry out terrorist attacks but have not yet done so. With the potential loss of human lives at stake boo – do you think it is prudent to bet the future on the past? Only a gambler would commit himself to such a fallacy.

          Small number of men? How small a number of men do you suppose it takes to carry out terrorist attacks? Even if one allows for a small percentage to immigrate, FBI Director has already stated for the record that your proposed “risk assessment” is not possible unless a Syrian male is already in the FBI’s database. Such an individual has no background that can be adequately scoured for risk of terrorism. The FBI can only query against that which they have collected.

          Again, your last argument is an illogical fallacy because it is based on a gambler’s fallacy. Instead of your use of statistics which can be manipulated to suit your purposes, let’s use real life examples to counter your claim. The European Union has had open borders for years and what has been the result of that? The recent attack in Brussels was done by a Belgium born Muslim terrorist. The recent attack in San Bernadino was done by a US born Muslim. Yes it seems that terrorists are very good at “waiting for years.” So good in fact they can wait at least a generation for home grown terrorists to be born. My point is that while multiculturalism and accommodation are noble endeavors, multiculturalism allows extremism to flourish unchallenged in Muslim communities where tolerance is not accepted at the risk at the rest of the population.

        • boolakanaka says:

          D bull fighter is that so? As my post is a synopsis from both the US Senate Intelligence committee and the well respected Cato Insitute?

        • d_bullfighter says:

          Yes boo that is so. Why don’t you challenge my assertions if you find them to be faulty instead of resorting to an appeal to authority? I believe you to be an attorney but am surprised that you employ so many logical fallacies. Poor judgment to say the least.

        • boolakanaka says:

          There are no absolutes in life, to wander into such such dictum, is to cultivate the public policy of the binary–e.g. things are either black or white. Moreover, this is not a university classroom where one can promulgate the esoteric and intellectual meanderings of so called “fallacies”– such banter is the kissing cousin of mental masturbarion. That is to say, fine for a morning lecture to sophomore and juniors, but hardly the real world. Thus, all things being equal we must balance and moderate all relevant contending issues in the context of what is before us…..that said, I remain unconvinced or sufficiently compelled.

        • d_bullfighter says:

          boo – There are absolutes in life unless of course you are a moral relativist. As I told you before, go ahead and refute my argumentation as to my points. The problem with your weak appeal to authority is that anyone can read a study/report, critique it and come to a different conclusion. Of all people, you as a lawyer should be well aware of that and I hope you don’t employ your logical fallacies in your day job as you are prone to do here!

        • boolakanaka says:

          D bull…I have practiced for almost 25 years, in several different states, held faculty appointments at several different law schools, including an Ivy, and serve as general counsel to several different firms….so, I think I might be ok–but thanks for your concen.

      • aomohoa says:

        I agree with that. The Hispanics on the Mainland are the ones who do the gardening,house cleaning, work in the fields. All they jobs that “America’s” would never want to do. There are many Americans who would rather collect a welfare check than work.This country was built by immigrants.If they are not criminals and want to pay taxes they should be allowed to go through the process and become citizens without fear of deportation.

        • boolakanaka says:

          Holomua, well stated.

        • saywhatyouthink says:

          Are you willing to bet your life and that of your family on your “Assumptions”? Better to be safe rather than sorry, even one terrorist is one too many. It’s not like these people have a legal or constitutional right to immigrate to the US.
          American citizens should be Obama’s priority, he has a duty to unhold the US constitution and protect the safety of the american people, not the Syrians. If there is any possibility of a terrorist infiltrating the refugee or immigration process, they should not be allowed in period. He can set up and fund a refugee camp in a neighboring Muslim country for them but to bring them into the US is foolish and a violation of the oath he took when he entered office.

        • hawaiikone says:

          Might be a better idea to focus on why it is that Americans won’t take some jobs that immigrants will.

        • boolakanaka says:

          Violation of office?? Please illuminate on how that is so legally?? Here is something to ponder…give me the answer to this, who is responsible for the most tragic, in terms of fatality, terrorist act, in our history? Here is a little hint- he was Caucasian, natural born citizen, sworn into our military and not a Muslim.

        • sarge22 says:

          Hillary Clinton?

  3. kuroiwaj says:

    President Obama is fighting to protect his misdirected legacy. The Federal Courts are reversing most of his executive actions, and soon the Congress with a GOP President will undo his failed ideology. America will be great again.

    • boolakanaka says:

      Please, once again, tell me how you are going to win in both the US Supreme Court (no majority) and the White House. Please cite actual data and polling, otherwise you are just espousing aspirational thoughts….

      • kuroiwaj says:

        Boo, you do see and hear the tsunami coming in November when the United States the day after election confirm a GOP President, majority in the U.S. Senate and House, with an increase control of State legislatures, and County Government control. If you don’t, you are not seeing and listening. The GOP is making America great again.

        • boolakanaka says:


        • boolakanaka says:

          You do realize how the electoral college works and what contemporary demographics and population studies say??? If not, I’ll give you a 101 course on why from a pure emperical basis, what you are suggesting is not really possible. Again, facts not platitudes.

        • hawaiikone says:

          Controversial issues can produce significant disparities between what people say they’ll do and what they actually wind up doing.

    • boolakanaka says:

      Last I looked, you have a sexist, leering, philandering, elitist, combative and racist candidate. No R worth their grain of salt should be proud of him, Goldwater to Reagan would rebuke him without hesitation….

      • lespark says:

        You got to admit he’s been there and done that. What you see is what you get. No smoking mirrors.
        Hillary takes money for favors. Support Hillary if you need a favor and hope you have enough money.

        • boolakanaka says:

          The purported skills of a CEO has almost no translation to the highest position in the democracy of the world. It is not autocratic nor one that one can bully other institutions or for that matter countries, into a corner. Quite the opposite it is about building coalitions, on both sides of aisle and developing commonality.

          Business acumen does not magically translate into skillful management of the US economy. Recall, George W. Bush was touted as America’s first president with an MBA. Now, according to a January Washington Post/ABC News poll, 54 percent of Americans believe the current economic problems are Mr. Bush’s fault while only 29 percent blame President Obama.

          In truth, the Great Recession has a long history, but Bush greatly exacerbated the problem with lax oversight of the financial sector and business-as-usual at mortgage lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And he boosted America’s debt with unpaid wars and an unfunded prescription drug benefit.

          CEOs tend to be single-minded people who clear mine fields. The mines they want cleared are taxes and government regulations. The last thing a successful CEO wants is any oversight of Wall Street.

          Business moguls generally have scant public records. Their jobs require little sense of civic virtue – the obligation to seek the public good and habitually act rightly. By contrast, the CEO’s culture tends to be draconically secretive. The CEO thinks his tax return is not in the public domain. The politician knows that not even his sex life is off limits.

        • Winston says:

          Don’t like Trump. Don’t like defending him, but Book’s post is just two wrong to pass up.

          CEO skills most certainly do transfer, as do any life accomplishments. Countries routinely bully and negotiate–it’s called diplomacy. Trump? a question mark. Hillary-proven failure.

          Business acumen not transferable to economics? True up to the lame “it was Bush’s fault” regarding the 2008 bust. A NYT poll as proof—WEAK and wrong. Fannie/Freddie were/are creatures of congress, both parties and congress, mainly democrats, pushed both into quotas for subprime lending. Carter pushed the community reinvestment act. Clinton enlarged it (Bush supported it also and approved banking deregulation, and democrat operatives made millions running Fannie Mae leading up to the crash. So, no matter what one poll conclude, the facts, if they matter, tell us otherwise.

          Unpaid entitlement all Bush’s fault? There’s something in the bible about beams and motes. As though democrats had nothing to do with the massive Medicare, Obamacare, Social Security, and other entitlement unfunded liabilities to which Ms. Clintons promises would add trillions.

          Finally, you’re worried about “civic virtue”. Seriously, have you looked into Hillary’s past? Her blatant corruption in accepting millions in foundation donations from foreign countries WHILE SECY of STATE, her outrageous speaking fees from Wall St. firms with obvious interest in her presidential aspirations? And is intentionally exposing top secret national information a civic virtue? Is destroying her official record at the State Department (deleted emails) a special virtue of transparency. How virtuous is a person who would lie to bereaved family members at their loved one’s funeral (Benghazi dead)?

          Somehow, if you deny the above, then your definition of “civic virtue” is about as Orwellian as it gets, amounting to “say anything, do anything, get away with it”, which, oddly enough, happens to be the Clinton motto.

          Elections are about choices. We have two bad ones. Thinking voters need to examine both.

        • Winston says:

          Well, Book, where’s your Huffington Post brain dump for this one?

        • boolakanaka says:

          Winston (is that Celtic for simp), let me ask you this, have you ever worked in congress or the White House -I have. If you cannot even obtain the support of your OWN party, from the leadership of both the house and senate, how will you advance your legislative agenda or even the more practical matter of the budget??? Seriously, give me a lucid and cogent explanation on how this will happen?? Please, being pedantic and putative are not attributes for the highest office, and neither is sophomoric name calling….I’m waiting.

        • Winston says:

          Ah, the ad hominem arrives. Isn’t that the same thing as sophomoric name calling? Boolkahana, meet boolkahana.

          Oh my, you’ve worked in DC. So impressive (not). Given your lopsided posts, I’m pretty sure you were a major contributor to PEW’s latest findings on US Citizen’s record low trust in government:

          “Public trust in the government remains near historic lows. Only 19% of Americans today say they can trust the government in Washington to do what is right “just about always” (3%) or “most of the time” (16%).”

          What you and other products of the beltway have yet to realize is that the public is in revolt. Who can best mince his or her way through the legislative process is a meaningless issue. A significant part of the electorate, the Trump/Sanders extremes has already said, in effect, “let it burn”. The democrats response? Nominating a visibly corrupt government establishment figure like Clinton. I wouldn’t have said this a month ago, but now, I think Trump is going to beat her like a yard dog.

        • boolakanaka says:

          More telling, and the basic thrust of my main posit, which you entirely avoided- how will The Donald develop the necessary and pragmatic coalitions to forward his own articulated public policy??? Not known as a consensus builder, but further without any inclination to cultivate such relationships, he still exhibits nary the requisite skill set or comportment to effectively takeover such a lofted public office. I prefer HRC, and her foibles to this effete and self proclaimed messiah of the real estate world…

        • Winston says:

          So happy that you posited your pragmatic presidential preference—while avoiding Clinton’s laundry list of character flaws and incompetent performance to date. As for her ability as a consensus builder, she failed miserably with Hillary Care in 1993. What makes you think she’s any better now? We’re down to parsing opinions now. I just disagree with yours and think we may be witnessing a sea change in American politics, for both parties and for the Federal bureaucracy in general. Trump, who stands a good chance of winning, is just a symptom of what I think is coming.

      • Winston says:

        Whoa, thought you were talking about Hillary’s hubby for a minute there until you got to racism. Regarding that charge, how is Trump demonstrated to be racist?? Closing our borders to all races entering illegally seems fairly neutral and our border with the latino (a made up word inaccurately conglomerating many races/ethnicities) world. Limiting Muslim immigration??? That’s a multi-racial religion. Again, where’s the racism? Where did he single out race as an issue, even by implication.

        Yours is just another thoughtless resort to the race card, as shameful as it is ignorant.

        Proud of Trump. Not at all. However, even with the risk involved in a Trump presidency, he is preferable to an Obama third term enacted by a person of Clinton’s qualities.

        • boolakanaka says:

          Here you go, nine seperate documented examples :
          The Justice Department sued his company — twice — for not renting to black people. He refused to condemn the white supremacists who are campaigning for him.
          He questions whether President Obama was born in the United States.He treats racial groups as monoliths. He trashed Native Americans, too

          In 1993, when Trump wanted to open a casino in Bridgeport, Connecticut, that would compete with one owned by the Mashantucket Pequot Nation, a local Native American tribe, he told the House subcommittee on Native American Affairs that “they don’t look like Indians to me… They don’t look like Indians to Indians.”

          He encouraged the mob justice that resulted in the wrongful imprisonment of the Central Park Five

          In 1989, Trump took out full-page ads in four New York City-area newspapers calling for the return of the death penalty in New York and the expansion of police authority in response to the infamous case of a woman who was beaten and raped while jogging in Manhattan’s Central Park.

          “They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes,” Trump wrote, referring to the Central Park attackers and other violent criminals. “I want to hate these murderers and I always will.”

          The public outrage over the Central Park jogger rape, at a time when the city was struggling with high crime, led to the wrongful conviction of five teenagers of color known as the Central Park Five.

          The men’s convictions were overturned in 2002, after they’d already spent years in prison, when DNA evidence showed they did not commit the crime. Today, their case is considered a cautionary tale about a politicized criminal justice process.

          He condoned the beating of a Black Lives Matter protester

          At a November campaign rally in Alabama, Trump supporters physically attacked an African-American protester after the man began chanting “Black lives matter.” Video of the incident shows the assailants kicking the man after he has already fallen to the ground.

          The following day, Trump implied that the attackers were justified.

          “Maybe [the protester] should have been roughed up,” he mused. “It was absolutely disgusting what he was doing.”
          He called supporters who beat up a homeless Latino man “passionate”

          Trump’s racial incitement has already inspired hate crimes. Two brothers arrested in Boston last summer for beating up a homeless Latino man cited Trump’s anti-immigrant message when explaining why they did it.

          “Donald Trump was right — all these illegals need to be deported,” one of the men reportedly told police officers.

          Trump did not even bother to distance himself from them. Instead, he suggested that the men were well-intentioned and had simply gotten carried away.

          “I will say that people who are following me are very passionate,” Trump said. “They love this country and they want this country to be great again. They are passionate.”

          He stereotyped Jews as good negotiators — and political masterminds

          When Trump addressed the Republican Jewish Coalition in December, he tried to relate to the crowd by invoking the stereotype of Jews as talented and cunning businesspeople.

          So, what else you got???!?

        • sarge22 says:

          Trump is doing just fine. “Make America Great Again” has already started. Maybe you can provide some details of the Clintons starting with Watergate and concluding with classified emails. Trump isn’t going to back down like the wimp Romney did when he should have knocked out Obama. Trump is in it to win it in case you haven’t noticed. Why don’t you just refer to the NYT and NYP in your posts? Trump 2016

        • boolakanaka says:

          Sarge wth are you talking about?? Bill Clinton was 24 when Watergate went down, and has nothing at all to do with it–period. What absolutely pedestrian mind you have…..thee pillock of the day.

        • sarge22 says:

          Here”s what I.m talking about boola. Hillary was 27 and a lying lawyer. An email says that Hillary Clinton — then Hillary Rodham — was fired for lying and being unethical when she was a 27-year-old working on the Watergate investigation.

        • hawaiikone says:

          I suppose it’s far easier to tear down your opponent’s candidate than it is to defend your own, especially when they’re equally repugnant.

        • sarge22 says:

          It worked against Romney but is not working against Mr Trump. It only makes him stronger. Trump 2016

        • Winston says:

          Quite a list, Book. I don’t like Trump and won’t defend allegations about his past conduct, even the indirect, guilt by association attached to some of your examples.

          What I “got” is that his immigration policies have been branded as racists. They are not.

  4. Maipono says:

    “In politics and in life, ignorance is not a virtue,” Obama said. “It’s not cool to not know what you’re talking about. It’s really funny or sad that this is just what the president has been doing for the last 7 years, going on 8.

    • saywhatyouthink says:

      Trump calls them as he sees them, if nothing else you’ve got to admire his honesty when he expresses his views on controversial issues. Most politicians just give you lip service and stick to the politically correct positions on issues. You never really know what they really think, with Trump that’s not a problem.

  5. 50skane says:

    Plugging for crooked Hillary or the Dems. BO could’t let the opportunity go, he just had to throw election politics into it.

    Same old Dems.

  6. soundofreason says:

    So, with that being said, he’s increasing the height of the fence around the whitehouse ….why?

  7. KWAY says:

    The first person who should walled out is Trump. I hope those who’re planning to vote for this psychopath have a survival kit assembled for their kids who will have to endure a 10 year nuclear winter after Trump p*sses off the world with his stupidity. The sad thing is even us who aren’t have to put kits together for our kids too.

    • serious says:

      Obama has put so many people on welfare in the cities/states that have the majority of the electoral votes that a liberal Democrat is a shoo in–THEY don’t want to lose that free s-it!!! Why work–it pays more–move to Hawaii they pay more!!

  8. Kuokoa says:

    HE is the problem!

  9. lespark says:

    Thank goodness for term limits. Vote for Hillary for another 4 or more years.

  10. BigErn says:

    He should be walled in prison for causing irreparable harm. POS.

  11. SandPounder says:

    Building a wall, Mr. Obama, is not meant to solve all our problems – but it’s a good start. It will give our nation some control over our own borders. Something you would never do.

  12. Waterman2 says:

    Punahou must be sooooo proud .

  13. residenttaxpayer says:

    Sounds like the democrats are running scared of Trump….in regards to building a wall to secure our borders is a concept that we should be open to…better to stop illegals from entering than trying to apprehend them once they sneak over……

  14. Jerry_D says:

    Why did Obama ruin these students’ commencement with a politically-charge rant, when instead he should be offering them words of inspiration and motivation? This is the same BS Kirk Caldwell did six month before being elected mayor….he gave a graduation speech at the college where I teach, which simply turned out to be a 25-minute campaign speech. Caldwell literally got boo’d off the stage!

    • lespark says:

      I lost all respect for Obama when he dropped the Mike after he said “Obama out” At the Washington Correspondents Dinner. Arrogant. Really thinks he’s somebody.

      • boolakanaka says:

        Duhhh. First, the correspondents dinner is meant to be entirely sardonic by conscription. Second, he is the most powerful person in the free world…so, I would venture a guess to say yes, he is somebody. What a pillock simp you are….

  15. Marauders_1959 says:

    NO-Babama is an expert regarding “What Doesn’t Work”.
    None of his ideas worked except bringing in more muslims and illegals.

  16. saywhatyouthink says:

    A wall may not solve our immigration problem but doing nothing has only made it worse. Muslims and illegal immigrants seems to be more important to Obama than the american citizens who elected him.

  17. lespark says:

    Term limits will save us. Don’t know if Caldwell or Ige have anything to worry about.

    • Mythman says:

      There are more than a few “illegal” aliens on the North Shore making a living selling dope who will beat you to death for frucking with them, Prof Boo. Extreme example to illustrate that this time around, voters are voting with their gut not with any objective metric. The reptilian brain is in charge in reaction to what has taken place over the past twenty years, regardless of party affiliation. Just ask any intelligence pro. The closest analogies are found in the breakdown of “Yugoslavia” and similar. Take a breather for the next 16 years and write a few interesting books.

      • boolakanaka says:

        And your point Sir Myth? The same can be said of the trendy confides of far south orange country, Marin, Portland and Seattle? What you have in a nutshell is a very vocal, but ever decreasing of disenfranchised whites (welcome to the party, albeit late, that most minorities already represent) that feel that the American Dream has passed them by…my point being, is all because widgets are for that matter the railroad, has readied its peak decades ago, does not matter or require we should try and save such antiquated notions…..

        • Mythman says:

          The point is, academic objectivity as per metrics wrt policy and law are not persuasive due to the past 20 years of chaos – a chaos that transcends ethnicity and geography. Like Yugoslavia in its meltdown, remember, nothing rational matters during the meltdown. At least in America, the country, we won’t subdivide into regions or states based on ethnicity. We will elect someone who represents what Tito originally represented, but on the other side of the political spectrum, who will perform as a builder of buildings where jobs tend to cohere, as they once did. Surely you have some interesting books in you from your postings here?

        • boolakanaka says:

          Sir Myth, while I generally agree, both the global environment and playing field have ramifications in which the US has limited influence,,e.g. Limited productivity versus expansion. We are certainly at seminal point in terms of leadership and its correlation to economic expansion and viability.

Leave a Reply