Quote from NeoRio1:
Oh man your funny.
He isn't the commander in chief yet. Just because he isn't yet does not mean that the Huffington Post one of the most liberal media outlets did not already see the true Obama.
Your in denial and I have more things to do with my life than debate your dumbass.
Why don't you write The Huffington Post and ask them why they think Obama is not what he said he is?
You couldn't answer my question about whether or not the U.S. was being perfectly clear with their position on Israel attacking Hamas in Gaza with a simple yes or no, could you?
Instead, you change the subject by suggesting that a blog, the
Huffington Post is the de-facto beacon of Obama's political position, and that such a political position is MORE important than what is being spoken by the current President and Commander in Chief, and his Administration.
How typical of you.
Do you always chose to wrap your bias in neat tidy little partisan boxes?
Is that what the mentally challenged do? They fit their bias into a tidy little box, and if it doesn't fit they change the subject?
Looks like your obsession with President elect Obama continues . . .
Leave it to you to think that U.S. Foreign Policy revolves around what the
Huffington Post thinks and how they feel somewhat "snake-bitten" by the fact that Obama isn't as liberal as they want him to be. Shocker!
And leave it to you to think that the U.S. has TWO ACTIVE COMMANDERS IN CHIEF at the same time.
I'm not sure who is dumber.
You, or Ben Cohen of the
Huffington Post.
Perhaps you and Ben can enroll together in that U.S. Civics class that I was talking about earlier.
In that way, you and he could learn that the United States of America only has ONE acting President at a time, ONE Commander in Chief at a time, that speaks for the entire Country. In that way, the message is perfectly clear, and
no one person is bigger than the Country as a whole.
Too funny.
