Main Menu

Is Obama a Marsist?

Not a typo — no, this one is stranger. While John C. Drew Ph. D. claims young Obama was at Occidental College in 1980-81 spouting Marxism [link to American Thinker web site], a new report from two ex-members of a secret CIA Mars time-travel and teleport team claims the future President was actually on Mars.

Andrew D. Basiago, 50, a lawyer in Washington State who served in DARPA’s time travel program Project Pegasus in the 1970’s, and fellow chrononaut William B. Stillings, 44, who was tapped by the Mars program for his technical genius, have publicly confirmed that Obama was enrolled in their Mars training class in 1980 and that each later encountered Obama during visits to rudimentary U.S. facilities on Mars that took place from 1981 to 1983.

Here’s the proof:

Discussion is being continued on this topic under Is Obama a Marsist (continued).

Print Friendly

, , , , , ,

661 Responses to Is Obama a Marsist?

  1. avatar
    gorefan January 4, 2012 at 2:25 am #

    Here is an explanantion for the video

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43299687/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/did-amateur-spot-secret-mars-base-uh-no/

    “It looks like a linear streak artifact produced by a cosmic ray,” said Alfred McEwen, a planetary geologist at the Lunar and Planetary Lab at the University of Arizona and the director of the Planetary Imaging Research Laboratory.”

    [skip]

    “McEwen explained. “But with space images that are taken outside our magnetosphere, such as those taken by orbiting telescopes, it’s very common to see these cosmic ray hits. You see them on optical images and a lot of the infrared images too,” he told Life’s Little Mysteries.”

    “As a cosmic ray passes through a camera’s image sensor, it deposits a large amount of its electric charge in the pixels that it penetrates. If the particle passes through at a shallow angle to the plane of the camera, it affects several pixels along its path. The result is a bright streak on the image.”

    “The digital compression software that converts the image into a JPEG file then “sort of smears out the image, giving it that pixelated look,” McEwen said.”

    Just like a smiley face on a pdf of a birth certificate.

  2. avatar
    G January 4, 2012 at 2:32 am #

    Yeah. The other problem with the video host is that he’s struck by the “rectangular shape and “sharp angles”… however, that just so happens to coinside with him zooming into the level of pixilation in the resolution.

    Seems like he’s falling for optical illusion and seeing what he wants to see. Same as folks who see images in clouds…

  3. avatar
    misha January 4, 2012 at 8:11 am #

    I saw Elvis in the frozen food isle.

  4. avatar
    misha January 4, 2012 at 8:18 am #

    If Groucho Marx and John Lennon wrote a musical together, it would be a Marxist-Lennonist production.

    Their copyright has been filed by the law firm of Dewey, Cheatum and Howe.

  5. avatar
    Majority Will January 4, 2012 at 8:44 am #

    Once again:

    Pareidolia ( /p¦rɨˈdoʊliə/ parr-i-doh-lee-ə) is a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being perceived as significant. Common examples include seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon or the Moon rabbit, and hearing hidden messages on records played in reverse. The word comes from the Greek para- – “beside”, “with”, or “alongside”—meaning, in this context, something faulty or wrong (as in paraphasia, disordered speech) and eidōlon – “image”; the diminutive of eidos – “image”, “form”, “shape”. Pareidolia is a type of apophenia.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

  6. avatar
    J. Potter January 4, 2012 at 9:18 am #

    First President on Mars! Obama just keeps racking up significant accomplishments! Maybe in his post-presidency, he’ll have time to go back.

    Any attempts to create an eligibility related meme out of this, or is it so far just a general Obama Conspiracy? Is a President found to be in the thrall of Martian mindworms eligible for re-election? Nothing in the Constitution about mindworms. I guess the Founders were too busy to go to Mars. Still, when the voters hear about the mindworms, I suspect it may cost Obama a few votes. Hard to trust a bug.

    Speaking of mindworms, how many of the Red frontrunners have been to Mars? Oh, wait….Reds….red planet…..oh nooooooes!

  7. avatar
    Majority Will January 4, 2012 at 9:21 am #

    J. Potter: Speaking of mindworms, how many of the Red frontrunners have been to Mars? Oh, wait….Reds….red planet…..oh nooooooes!

    Red state.

  8. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 4, 2012 at 9:32 am #

    I’m more interested in the timetravel part of the CIA program. This would explain some of the time traveling claims birthers seem to believe in from Ann Dunham’s mother being able to assign a social security number in 1977 based on her working at juvenile court in 1986 to Bill Ayers being able to get Obama the social of a dead person in 77 even though he didn’t know Obama until the 90s

  9. avatar
    red-diaper baby 1942 January 4, 2012 at 12:05 pm #

    thanks for the link for John Drew. He’s been a long-time and regular commenter on the NYT Political Caucus blog (the last couple of years under the name Augustine 25), where he’s been spouting this stuff too, as well as complaining about his wife being unemployed (entirely Obama’s fault) and other conservative/conspiratorial stuff. Lately he’s been absent, and I’ve been wondering what happened to him. I’ve actually missed him — whatever the topic, his post (rant) was absolutely predictable, creating a bit of stability in an uncertain world.

  10. avatar
    jahHG January 4, 2012 at 2:48 pm #

    What on earth………er, Mars am I supposed to be looking for in this video???? I watched the whole thing and am a at a loss here. President Obama was enrolled in a Mars training class and this video is the proof????? How??????

  11. avatar
    jayHG January 4, 2012 at 2:48 pm #

    oops……misspelled my screen name…………

  12. avatar
    Majority Will January 4, 2012 at 2:59 pm #

    jahHG:
    What on earth………er, Mars am I supposed to be looking for in this video????I watched the whole thing and am a at a loss here.President Obama was enrolled in a Mars training class and this video is the proof?????How??????

    Tell Sven that’s where the adoption papers and the other documents birthers demand are hidden.

  13. avatar
    ellen January 4, 2012 at 3:28 pm #

    I believe that smrstrauss would probably appreciate any help from constitutional experts over at http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7466841558189356289&postID=909525113481608842&page=1&token=1324496414797

  14. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 4, 2012 at 3:35 pm #

    In order to properly understand the relationship of the video to the story, it is necessary to look at the story’s category: “Wild and Wacky” and perhaps consulting item 3 under the sites Editorial Policy. I hope that clears up any misunderstanding.

    jahHG: What on earth………er, Mars am I supposed to be looking for in this video???? I watched the whole thing and am a at a loss here. President Obama was enrolled in a Mars training class and this video is the proof????? How??????

  15. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 4:13 pm #

    - red diaper baby 1942

    You have to admit my story has come a long ways since my first posts at the NYT The Caucus blog site. I remember folks over there saying I was lying about having a Ph.D., lying about ever attending Occidental College – I graduated the year Obama started at Oxy, lying about meeting young Obama.

    Today, however, the story of my debate with young Obama has appeared in books by Michael Savage, Jack Cashill, Paul Kengor and Stanley Kurtz.

    My take on young Obama’s ideological extremism has been confirmed by a liberal author, David Remnick, who interviewed all the participants in that 1980 debate including Caroline Boss, Hasan Chandoo and Barack Obama.

    Ironically, the fact that I was posting at the NYT The Caucus blog site about young Obama’s ideological extremism as early as 2008 is now part of the evidence that the mainstream media failed to properly follow up on clear evidence of Obama’s radical, Marxist socialist roots. Thankfully, more people are waking up to the fact that Obama has lied about his ties to Marxist socialist philosophy. It make you wonder, what else is he lying about?

  16. avatar
    J. Potter January 4, 2012 at 4:19 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: It make you wonder, what else is he lying about?

    No, can’t say that it does. Maybe it would if I knew more, but my curiosity isn’t piqued enough to hunt down your story.

  17. avatar
    misha January 4, 2012 at 4:51 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: clear evidence of Obama’s radical, Marxist socialist roots.

    So? Israel was founded by Ben Gurion, a socialist and an atheist. Golda Meir was a socialist, and a Marxist at one time. The kibbutzim are the foundation of Israel. I was a kibbutznik for one year. Kibbutz can be translated as commune or collective.

    Israel has universal health care, and it is socialized: all ambulances and hospitals are government owned. Physicians and nurses are paid by the government. Medical care there is equal to the States, sometimes better.

    Also, federal bailouts were started by Nixon, for Lockheed:
    http://uspolitics.about.com/od/economy/a/lockheedBailout.htm

    Nixon also instituted wage and price controls to tame inflation. Reagan approved stiff tariffs on Japanese big bikes to give Harley time to recover. Michele Bachmann accepted $250K in farm subsidies. Cattle ranchers do not pay market rates to graze on public land. Alabama gave Kia the land, and trains Kia assembly line workers at state expense. ADM got 50/gallon tariffs on Brazilian ethanol. In Pennsylvania and Montgomery county MD, liquor stores are government owned. Social Security is pure socialism, as is public transportation and public libraries.

    I could go on for pages.

  18. avatar
    misha January 4, 2012 at 5:41 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Obama’s radical, Marxist socialist roots.

    Banks and stock brokers privatize profits, and socialize losses.

  19. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny January 4, 2012 at 5:44 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: lying about ever attending Occidental College – I graduated the year Obama started at Oxy

    Yes, you left the place when Obama arrived there.

    Which makes you THE expert on Obama’s beliefs in those days, of course.

    Makes us wonder what else he is lying about? Considering the places where you have been posting this self-aggrandizement, it must be his birth certificate, of course? Did he have a computer with Paintshop on when you met him? Oh wait, it was Vattel of course? How many copies of Vattel did you see him burn, after replacing them with Blackstone?

    Inquiring minds would like to know. And no, we do not want to know about you personally. Why should we?

  20. avatar
    Daniel January 4, 2012 at 5:57 pm #

    You might need to be intelligent to have earned a PhD, but apparently you don’t have to be very wise.

  21. avatar
    misha January 4, 2012 at 6:00 pm #

    Daniel:
    You might need to be intelligent to have earned a PhD, but apparently you don’t have to be very wise.

    You can always tell a Harvard graduate, but you can’t tell him much.

  22. avatar
    misha January 4, 2012 at 6:13 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: clear evidence of Obama’s radical, Marxist socialist roots. Thankfully, more people are waking up to the fact that Obama has lied about his ties to Marxist socialist philosophy.

    “And Alaska — we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs. … It’s to maximize benefits for Alaskans, not an individual company, not some multinational somewhere, but for Alaskans.” – Sarah Palin, explaining the windfall profits tax that she imposed on the oil industry in Alaska as a mechanism for ensuring that Alaskans “share in the wealth” generated by oil companies. – New Yorker interview, Sept. 2008

    Thankfully people are waking up to the fact that Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are crackpots.

  23. avatar
    misha January 4, 2012 at 6:32 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: clear evidence of Obama’s radical, Marxist socialist roots.

    Sarah Palin used AK tax dollars to fund dominionist churches

    Today, we find that part of those funding scandals include the tax money of Alaskans used to pay for youth programs at Juneau Christian Center.

    Read on: http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/4/155547/0997

  24. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 6:54 pm #

    - Paul Pieniezny

    If you read the American Thinker article, Meeting Young Obama, you will find that I was in a very good position to identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs in 1980-1981. My girlfriend, at the time, was the co-president of the Democrat Socialist Alliance. She was the one who introduced me to young Obama and the one who verified his participation in the activities of the Democrat Socialist Alliance. (She was a classmate of Obama’s.) I founded this group, under a different name, in 1976.

    I knew both Hasan Chandoo and his girlfriend, Margot Mifflin, from the anti-apartheid efforts which took place in the spring of 1979 on the Occidental College campus.

    The liberal author, David Remnick, has verified that Obama’s roommate, Hasan Chandoo, was a Marxist, socialist. I have a Ph.D. in political science from Cornell University. I’ve taught American Government and the U.S. Presidency at Williams College in MA. If I’m not the best qualified person on earth to correctly identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs, then I don’t know who else in the world would be qualified to do so.

  25. avatar
    Scientist January 4, 2012 at 7:01 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Blah, blah, blah

    So what?

  26. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 7:03 pm #

    - misha

    I spent a year living in England and I saw the results of socialized medicine. It creates bad teeth.

  27. avatar
    Majority Will January 4, 2012 at 7:07 pm #

    “If you read the American Thinker article”

    LMAO

    Gee. Why not cite extreme fright wing cesspools like the P & E or WND too?

    :-P

  28. avatar
    Daniel January 4, 2012 at 7:09 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I have a Ph.D. in political science from Cornell University. I’ve taught American Government and the U.S. Presidency at Williams College in MA. If I’m not the best qualified person on earth to correctly identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs, then I don’t know who else in the world would be qualified to do so.

    Well then, Mr “expert”, perhaps you could tell us exactly why we should give a damn?

    I mean even if Obama’s Ideological background is as you describe(and I don’t believe for a minute that it is), why would that matter?

    Are you saying that If someone attends Mass twice he is forever a Catholic and may never be anything else? Obama is clearly not Marxist now, so why should we care if he had a passing interest in Marxism, or Catholicism, or modern interpretive dance, back in college?

    Furthermore, are you suggesting that if he is a Marxist, that would disqualify him? Are you saying that some political ideologies are precluded from running for office? Is it just Marxism you would forbid, or are there other political ideologies you would deny? How about Liberals, should they be allowed? What about middle of the spectrum Conservatives? Libertarians? Just who, in your universe, is allowed to run for office?

    And what do you suggest we do with the millions of people who defied your law and illegally voted for this marxist? Should perhaps round them all up in internment camps? Who would run those camps, FEMA maybe?

    I pity any political science student that had you for a teacher. I can’t see how they would possibly have passed any course after yours.

  29. avatar
    Scientist January 4, 2012 at 7:10 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I spent a year living in England and I saw the results of socialized medicine. It creates bad teeth.

    I lived in Canada for many years and France for a few and have one cavity in my whole life. I am healthy as a horse.

    Besides the US has socialized Medicine-it’s called Medicare and tens of millions of seniors will kill anyone who touches it. On the other hand, “Obamacare” uses private insurance, private doctors and private hospitals. I can only conclude that whatever Obama believed at 20, he is disapointingly unsocialist today. Only a tiresome fool believes the same thing at 50 that he did at 20. Does that describe you?

  30. avatar
    sfjeff January 4, 2012 at 7:11 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – Paul Pieniezny If you read the American Thinker article, Meeting Young Obama, you will find that I was in a very good position to identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs in 1980-1981. My girlfriend, at the time, was the co-president of the Democrat Socialist Alliance. She was the one who introduced me to young Obama and the one who verified his participation in the activities of the Democrat Socialist Alliance. (She was a classmate of Obama’s.) I founded this group, under a different name, in 1976. I knew both Hasan Chandoo and his girlfriend, Margot Mifflin, from the anti-apartheid efforts which took place in the spring of 1979 on the Occidental College campus. The liberal author, David Remnick, has verified that Obama’s roommate, Hasan Chandoo, was a Marxist, socialist. I have a Ph.D. in political science from Cornell University. I’ve taught American Government and the U.S. Presidency at Williams College in MA. If I’m not the best qualified person on earth to correctly identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs, then I don’t know who else in the world would be qualified to do so.

    So has your former girlfriend publicly confirmed your claim?
    Has Hasan Chandoo?
    Has anyone else from Occidental?
    Pictures or records of Obama’s involvement with the Democrat Socialist Alliance?

    I acknowledge your claim. I just don’t see anything that corroborates your claims. And frankly- why should I believe you?

  31. avatar
    Daniel January 4, 2012 at 7:15 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - misha

    I spent a year living in England and I saw the results of socialized medicine.It creates bad teeth.

    How can you spout such nonsense and still claim any expertise in polysci?

  32. avatar
    Scientist January 4, 2012 at 7:19 pm #

    Daniel: Furthermore, are you suggesting that if he is a Marxist, that would disqualify him? Are you saying that some political ideologies are precluded from running for office? Is it just Marxism you would forbid, or are there other political ideologies you would deny? How about Liberals, should they be allowed? What about middle of the spectrum Conservatives? Libertarians? Just who, in your universe, is allowed to run for office?

    Personally, I draw the line at Red Sox fans. Romney is thus disqualified. And Bloomberg. Obama is a White Sox fan; that’s sad, but not disqualifying.

  33. avatar
    jayHG January 4, 2012 at 7:24 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: In order to properly understand the relationship of the video to the story, it is necessary to look at the story’s category: “Wild and Wacky” and perhaps consulting item 3 under the sites Editorial Policy. I hope that clears up any misunderstanding.

    Alright. Let me just start over……….

  34. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny January 4, 2012 at 7:29 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: The liberal author, David Remnick, has verified that Obama’s roommate, Hasan Chandoo, was a Marxist, socialist. I have a Ph.D. in political science from Cornell University. I’ve taught American Government and the U.S. Presidency at Williams College in MA. If I’m not the best qualified person on earth to correctly identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs, then I don’t know who else in the world would be qualified to do so.

    And there I was, thinking one of the main characteristeristics of being an academic was to be critical of oneself and one’s opinions. And not to attach too much importance to paper qualifications, but rather to pedagogic and scientific achiements.

    (Oops – and there I go talking about myself – better keep my mouth shut before I fall into the trap here… )

  35. avatar
    Daniel January 4, 2012 at 7:29 pm #

    Scientist: Personally, I draw the line at Red Sox fans.Romney is thus disqualified.And Bloomberg.Obama is a White Sox fan;that’s sad, but not disqualifying.

    Well of course…. I just didn’t consider it necessary to stat the obvious ;-)

  36. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 4, 2012 at 7:55 pm #

    If anyone wants to see John Drew smacked down check out the fogbow links:

    http://thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=3350

    John Drew came in, made a fool of himself, lied repeatedly about what Remnick said and was booted. It’s funny how Drew’s story morphed from him being at one function where Obama was at at Occidental to having a conversation with Obama to spending a whole day with Obama. He’s a serial exaggerater who is so into John Drew that he has a life doll of John Drew.

  37. avatar
    Majority Will January 4, 2012 at 8:12 pm #

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): http://thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=3350

    Whew! Funny stuff!

    Now THAT is entertainment!

    And enlightening.

    Thanks!

  38. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 9:01 pm #

    - sfjeff

    As you may know, Hasan Chandoo verified that the “debate” took place in an interview with Ronald Kessler, a New York Times best-selling author. See, http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/obama-college-marxism-occidental/2010/02/08/id/349329 Kessler gave both Boss and Obama the opportunity to react to the story and both declined the offer.

    Presidential historian David Garrow interviewed me last month regarding my take on young Obama and verified my relationship with Boss through photos, old letters and cards. See, http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2011/12/giving-up-all-my-secrets-dr-drew.html

    To me, the primary evidence that Obama is still a Marxist socialist is his lack of a conversion story, his later ties to Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers and Alice Palmer, and his continual use of Marxist rhetoric and concepts including class conflict, alienation and redistribution of wealth. I have never suggested that my take on President Obama’s current views is based simply on my observations of his behavior slightly over 30 years ago. For one of the best books that traces out young Obama’s interaction with me and his later ties to Marxist socialist activists – including folks associated with the famous Midwest Academy – I recommend you check out Stanley Kurtz’s well-researched book, Radical-In-Chief.

  39. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 9:14 pm #

    If you would like more information on the folks behind Fogbow and the lies I caught them telling about me, please see my blog at http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2011/12/dr-drew-crushing-fogbowers-and.html

    The leader of the Fogbow website is Bill Byran. Bryan is a crook who is no longer allowed to practice law in California because of his criminal behavior. http://www.wnd.com/2011/06/311093/

    I wouldn’t take the Fogbowers too seriously since they don’t hold up well to sunlight and transparency.

    Bob Ross, by the way, is the reason I’m no longer posting at Fogbow. I humiliated him repeatedly for the way he expressed doubts about David Garrow interviewing me for his book last month. Apparently, in Bob’s wacky world, a photograph is not enough evidence to convince him I was interviewed by Garrow. I guess Bob thinks liberal writers and people like me just naturally hang out together for the fun of it. What a joke! The folks at Fogbow finally pulled the plug when I won the debate and demonstrated Bob’s utter silliness.

  40. avatar
    Majority Will January 4, 2012 at 9:19 pm #

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross):
    If anyone wants to see John Drew smacked down check out the fogbow links:

    http://thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=3350

    John Drew came in, made a fool of himself, lied repeatedly about what Remnick said and was booted.It’s funny how Drew’s story morphed from him being at one function where Obama was at at Occidental to having a conversation with Obama to spending a whole day with Obama.He’s a serial exaggerater who is so into John Drew that he has a life doll of John Drew.

    So, he does have a talent apparently. The world needs clowns.

  41. avatar
    Scientist January 4, 2012 at 9:19 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Marxist rhetoric and concepts including class conflict, alienation and redistribution of wealth.

    Allowing the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy to expire = Marxism? Was Reagan a Marxist? Nixon? Eisenhower? Clinton?

  42. avatar
    Daniel January 4, 2012 at 10:04 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: To me, the primary evidence that Obama is still a Marxist socialist…

    I notice you avoided explaining why that would be significant, even if it were true….

    I notice you avoid most of the hard questions…

    Hardly the sort of thing I would expect from a PhD and an expert in Political Science.

  43. avatar
    Daniel January 4, 2012 at 10:05 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Bob Ross, by the way, is the reason I’m no longer posting at Fogbow. I humiliated him repeatedly

    You mean like the way Orly humiliates her opponents every time she goes to court?

  44. avatar
    nbc January 4, 2012 at 10:13 pm #

    Daniel: John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Bob Ross, by the way, is the reason I’m no longer posting at Fogbow. I humiliated him repeatedly

    You mean like the way Orly humiliates her opponents every time she goes to court?

    This is fascinating. John Drew hardly humiliated the people at the Fogbow. What a foolish claim. John Drew failed to support much of his claims and was shown to be quote mining several authors…

    Such a joker.

  45. avatar
    gorefan January 4, 2012 at 10:18 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: As you may know, Hasan Chandoo verified that the “debate” took place in an interview with Ronald Kessler, a New York Times best-selling author.

    Wait are you talking about this statement:

    “If that’s what John Drew said, that’s what he said,” Chandoo commented. “I can’t remember Obama ever talking like that. It sounds a bit absurd to me, but that’s my opinion. I can’t remember him ever expressing an interest in being a Marxist.”

    http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/obama-college-marxism-occidental/2010/02/08/id/349329

    That’s not much of a confirmation of your story.

  46. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 10:19 pm #

    Daniel:

    Bob Ross is a freak…even by Fogbow standards. He seriously said that having photographic evidence wasn’t proof that I was “interviewed” by Garrow. It was an absolutely silly thing to assert and displayed a profound lack of common sense.

    For a great look at why Obama’s ideology is a threat to American values, prosperity and our U.S. Constitution, I recommend you check out Michael Savage’s book, Trickle-Up Poverty. For an eye-openning look at why FDR’s policies made the Great Depression worse and longer than it should have been check out Burton Folsom’s book, New Deal or Raw Deal.

    I have no doubt that business owners and employers are frightened by Obama’s long-standing ties to Marxist socialist thought. I don’t see the economy getting much better until Obama is kicked out of office by the same swing voters who elected him in 2008.

  47. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 10:42 pm #

    - gorefan

    Please. :-) LMAO Hasan Chandoo could have denied ever making that road trip with young Obama. He could have denied ever knowing me and Caroline Boss. Chandoo did none of that.

    Ronald Kessler is a great journalist, the author of best selling books on the CIA, FBI and Secret Service. See, http://www.ronaldkessler.com/ If my story did not ring true, I don’t think Kessler would have published it. Kessler, of course, is a conservative.

    Chandoo, by the way, admits he is a Marxist socialist in David Remnick’s book, The Bridge. Remnick is a liberal. Remnick reports Boss was the leader of the Democrat Socialists Alliance at Oxy.

    You should know that Chandoo does not have a strong reputation for telling the truth. In the Kessler article, he is basically caught lying about how often he sees President Obama. It was really pretty funny. Kessler caught Chandoo in a lie even as Chandoo tried to discredit my take on young Obama’s ideological extremism.

    Remnick makes the argument that Chandoo was more of an ideological extremist than young Obama. I take the opposite point of view. I met them both and Obama, by far, was the most extreme revolutionary of the group. This, of course, would help explain why it was Obama and not Chandoo who ended up hanging out with unrepentant terrorists like Bill Ayers. Of course, I have a real advantage over Remnick in making sense of young Obama’s ideology. I was there to see it.

  48. avatar
    gorefan January 4, 2012 at 11:01 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Hasan Chandoo could have denied ever making that road trip with young Obama. He could have denied ever knowing me and Caroline Boss. Chandoo did none of that.

    Oh, the trip may have occurred, what Hasan appears to be saying is the debate never happened. At least not the way you remember it.

  49. avatar
    nbc January 4, 2012 at 11:20 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I was crushing the Fogbow crew at their own site. It was a laugh.

    I was there and you were crushed by your inabilities to provide supporting evidence and your misquotes.

    Sorry Drew, but you stood no chance given your level of ignorance.

  50. avatar
    nbc January 4, 2012 at 11:21 pm #

    I leaned on you so hard on you that you converted your avatar into that of a little girl with a pinkish dress. LMAO

    I changed it because you thought that I was a girl. You were no match for a girl in a pink dress my dear.

  51. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 11:23 pm #

    - gorefan

    I have provided the most complete and most detailed account of young Obama’s ideological views. I have done so in a complex and truthful manner that does not trap young Obama into a simplistic black and white point of view.

    My story helps explain why Obama went on to hang out with people like Rev. Wright, Alice Palmer and Bill Ayers.

    My report on young Obama’s ideological extremism helps make sense of the role played in developing his intellectual beliefs by Frank Marshall Davis while Obama was still in Hawaii.

    Don’t you think it is strange that I’m the only person out there willing to describe what it was like to debate young Obama?

    If my take is so inaccurate, then why aren’t any of his friends from Oxy providing evidence of Obama arguing a pragmatic centrist point of view when they tangled with him intellectually? If Obama was not a Marxist socialist, then why doesn’t Chandoo provide us with some evidence of the sort of non-Marxist non-socialist things young Obama would say to him? The reason is that they can’t.

  52. avatar
    sfjeff January 4, 2012 at 11:24 pm #

    I read the interview.

    Not once des Hasan confirm any ‘debate’ took place. And Hasan specifically denies remembering Obama ever discussing Marxism. Hasan refutes your position.

    Boss isn’t quoted at all. She is your former girlfriend- how come she hasn’t come out validating your story?

    What this shows me- as I suspected- that you have nothing to corroborate your story- and in the case of the story you cited, you are willing to twist the truth.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – sfjeffAs you may know, Hasan Chandoo verified that the “debate” took place in an interview with Ronald Kessler, a New York Times best-selling author. See, http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/obama-college-marxism-occidental/2010/02/08/id/349329 Kessler gave both Boss and Obama the opportunity to react to the story and both declined the offer.

  53. avatar
    nbc January 4, 2012 at 11:24 pm #

    It turns out that MIllie is an administrative assistant at a construction company. Bill Bryan, the leader of Fogbow, is a disbarred attorney.

    And you were not extended a contract at your College which you of course blamed to affirmative action rather than to a poor publication record and a run for office.

    Sorry my friend, I believe that you’re upset that President Obama and you met under similar circumstances and that he managed to achieve the Office of the President, while you are now advising people on how to write grants. While you blame your failures and his success on affirmative action, there is no real evidence of such other than in your imagination. Now you feel you have an opportunity to vent your frustrations in your minute in the limelight. But by stepping into the limelight you have exposed yourself as well…

    For that we thank you.

  54. avatar
    nbc January 4, 2012 at 11:29 pm #

    sfjeff: Boss isn’t quoted at all. She is your former girlfriend- how come she hasn’t come out validating your story?

    She and others discussed Obama in Remnick’s book and while Drew asserts that this supports his case, it actually totally demolishes it.

    Chandoo and Hamid, among others, helped “ignite” Obama politically. “In college, Hasan was a socialist, a Marxist, which is funny since he is from a wealthy family,” Mifflin said. “But he was socialist in the way we were back then—an idealist who believed in economic equality, that’s all. I am not sure how he defined it then, but he really studied it. Barack learned a lot from him, especially the notions of fairness and equality that you see in him today.” Chandoo, for his part, readily admits to his youthful radicalism, but says that Obama was never the least bit doctrinaire: “The only thing doctrinaire about him was his austerity!”

    To slap an ideological tag on Chandoo and Hamid, let alone Obama, is not only unfair; it also credits them with thinking far more programmatically than they did. “I would say we were idealistic and well-read in terms of understanding all the ideologies,” Hamid said. “I remember going home to Pakistan and sitting across from my mother in the summer waxing eloquent about the benefits of socialism. She said, ‘Wahid, this is all well and good, but I think you will grow up.’ I guess that’s what happened. We weren’t Marxists. We were idealistic and believed in the betterment of the lot of the masses and not just the few. If you describe that as socialist, then maybe we did have some socialist thoughts at the time.

    Remnick, David (2010-04-06). The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama (p. 104). Knopf. Kindle Edition.

    No wonder Drew left…

  55. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 11:33 pm #

    - nbc

    None of the other Fogbowers changed their avatars over the course of the debate with me. Why did you suddenly think that was a great idea?

    I took it as a sign there is something wrong with you. You’re a pleaser and a cheerleader for the left. You really don’t have anything of serious intellectual weight to offer the real world.

    Simply repeating a quote that shows I’m right about young Obama doesn’t earn you a Ph.D. in anything.

  56. avatar
    Daniel January 4, 2012 at 11:39 pm #

    Still avoiding the question I see, “Dr” John

  57. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 11:45 pm #

    - sfjeff

    You aren’t applying your common sense. :-) Chandoo made a huge mistake even responding to Kessler’s request for an interview.

    Chandoo could have said that I was making the whole thing up, that he didn’t remember me or Caroline, or that he never drove up to her house in Portolla Valley with young Obama.

    He did none of those things.

    Instead, he lied about never hearing Obama discuss Marxism. Trust me. I was in the room when Obama debated Marxism right in front of me and Chandoo. The true test of my story is that it has withstood the test of time. The Obama literature is moving steadily in the direction I indicated as early as 2008 – young Obama was a ardent Marxist socialist.

  58. avatar
    nbc January 4, 2012 at 11:52 pm #

    Instead, he lied about never hearing Obama discuss Marxism. Trust me. I was in the room when Obama debated Marxism right in front of me and Chandoo.

    ROTFL, so Chandoo did not support your story so he must have been lying… Yes Drew, that must be the case.

    Whatever you stated is of little relevance as the facts show otherwise.

  59. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 11:52 pm #

    - nbc

    Please…even the people at Fogbow were making fun of you for changing your avatar while you were debating me. :-) You made yourself look like a weakling and a fool.

    On a more serious note, I think you’re minimizing the role of affirmative action in the lives of young people like me in the 1980s and today.

    I was harmed by affirmative action while I was at Cornell University because the best interviewing opportunities went to the less objectively qualified black students.

    While I was in the political science department at Williams College I observed numerous times when better qualified white candidates were discriminated against in favor of black applicants.

    Today, 50% of the new hires in that political science department are blacks.

    The head of the political science department told me that I was not allowed to advance along the tenure track because of the poor quality of my scholarship.

    Subsequently, I won an extremely rare honor from the American Political Science Association for having the best doctoral dissertation in the nation in my field.

    The way I was harmed by affirmative action later on in California is now illegal. I really hope swing voters learn more about the liberal left and its out right hostility to young white people and their careers.

  60. avatar
    nbc January 4, 2012 at 11:54 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: None of the other Fogbowers changed their avatars over the course of the debate with me. Why did you suddenly think that was a great idea?

    Because you were such fun in your ignorance. Drew, you continue to be soo wrong about simple issues and I thought you might appreciate being shown wrong by a little girl in pink.

    Simply repeating a quote that shows I’m right about young Obama doesn’t earn you a Ph.D. in anything.

    It shows that Obama, according to his friends was NOT a marxist and yet you continue to foolishly assert the contrary. I find that fascinating self delusion.

  61. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 4, 2012 at 11:58 pm #

    - nbc

    You really don’t see how silly you look right now, do you? I don’t know why anyone would take your blog seriously if they see the way you react to these posts.

    Think about it. Chandoo admits to Remnick that he was a radical as a youth. Chandoo is Obama college roommate. Why would Obama pick Chandoo as his roommate if young Obama was a centrist pragmatic type?

    It makes no sense.

    Anyone who keeps their avatar consistent should be able to figure out the truth. Oh, wait, you changed your avatar last time I debated you…

  62. avatar
    gorefan January 4, 2012 at 11:59 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I have provided the most complete and most detailed account of young Obama’s ideological views.

    So you say. Where is your corroborating evidence?

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Don’t you think it is strange that I’m the only person out there willing to describe what it was like to debate young Obama?

    Not really. That you cannot produce one person to back up your claim is what I think is strange.

  63. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:02 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I took it as a sign there is something wrong with you. You’re a pleaser and a cheerleader for the left. You really don’t have anything of serious intellectual weight to offer the real world.

    Well, I am not the one who failed to get his appointment extended at Williams College or who failed in one or two elections…
    So who is lacking in serious intellectual weight here? Furthermore, I have shown you to be slightly confused about your representations of Remnick and Obama himself.

    Sorry John in our discussions I have not seen anything that suggest serious scholarship on your part.

    Today, 50% of the new hires in that political science department are blacks.

    A statistical fluke at best based on a sample of three or so.

    The head of the political science department told me that I was not allowed to advance along the tenure track because of the poor quality of my scholarship.

    Yes, that makes sense your track record does not show much other than your ‘award winning’ thesis. A one time fluke perhaps? Sorry my friend, a single thesis does not make one a scholar that takes hard work.

    I was harmed by affirmative action while I was at Cornell University because the best interviewing opportunities went to the less objectively qualified black students.

    So you have claimed, without ANY supporting evidence.

    While I was in the political science department at Williams College I observed numerous times when better qualified white candidates were discriminated against in favor of black applicants.

    Again no evidence to support this has been presented.

    In fact Williams College was criticized for its mostly white male faculty… Sorry John, you fail again

  64. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:03 am #

    gorefan: So you say. Where is your corroborating evidence?

    It is found in the fact that Chandoo and others deny it and obviously must be lying…

    Sigh… And John wonders why he was let go from Williams’ College…

  65. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:08 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You really don’t see how silly you look right now, do you? I don’t know why anyone would take your blog seriously if they see the way you react to these posts.

    Think about it. Chandoo admits to Remnick that he was a radical as a youth. Chandoo is Obama college roommate. Why would Obama pick Chandoo as his roommate if young Obama was a centrist pragmatic type?

    Aha guilt by association… Is that the extent of your scholarship? And you wonder why Williams let you go?

    Remnicjk Chandoo, for his part, readily admits to his youthful radicalism, but says that Obama was never the least bit doctrinaire: “The only thing doctrinaire about him was his austerity!”

    To slap an ideological tag on Chandoo and Hamid, let alone Obama, is not only unfair; it also credits them with thinking far more programmatically than they did. “I would say we were idealistic and well-read in terms of understanding all the ideologies,” Hamid said.

    You claimed Remnick supported your position now you admit that he contradicts your position but that somehow you should be taken seriously anyway…

  66. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 12:12 am #

    - nbc

    You silly little avatar changer. :-) To me, that was the online equivalent of wetting your pants. I thought it was funny that you did that and your fellow Fogblowers worried about you. It was a laugh. You really can’t handle the truth, can you?

    Remnick’s book also indicates that the Democrat Socialist Alliance flew a big picture of Karl Marx on the Occidental dining hall. This is hardly the behavior of a group of people who were not Marxists. :-) I knew Caroline Boss a lot better than you. She was definitely a Marxist in 1980-1981. Chandoo was definitely a Marxist.

    We have clear evidence that Boss and Chandoo were Marxists according to Remnick’s book. I don’t see how you can assert that young Obama’s friends were not Marxists simply on the basis of one quote from Wahid Hamid. My take is that Boss, Chandoo and Obama were all Marxists. I don’t see how I could be so right regarding Boss and Chandoo, but somehow mistaken about young Obama?

    I would think that an objective observer would see that I’m telling the truth.

  67. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:20 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You silly little avatar changer. To me, that was the online equivalent of wetting your pants. I thought it was funny that you did that and your fellow Fogblowers worried about you. It was a laugh. You really can’t handle the truth, can you?

    My fellow fogbowers thought it was hilarious for me to change into this pink girl cheerleader, since you were erroneously believing that I was a female and called me a cheerleader.

    Wetting my pants? On the contrary, I was laughing my pants off at the lack of rigor in your ‘research’.

    My take is that Boss, Chandoo and Obama were all Marxists. I don’t see how I could be so right regarding Boss and Chandoo, but somehow mistaken about young Obama?

    Even Chandoo fails to make the case. He considers himself a radical but even his friends admit that this was youthful playfulness, exploring these new ideas. These same friends claim counter to you, that Obama was not a Marxist. So who should we believe? Someone who met Obama fleetingly or his own friends?

    Given your attempt at self inflation, I have no problem making the rational choice here my friend.

    Can we expect you supporting your claims about discrimination any further or is the statistically flawed claim of 50% the best you have to offer?

    I am getting more and more convinced that your advisor was right when he told you why your contract was not extended. Must have been a tough time to accept this.

    Chandoo: Chandoo, for his part, readily admits to his youthful radicalism, but says that Obama was never the least bit doctrinaire: “The only thing doctrinaire about him was his austerity!”

    Hamid on Chandoo and Obama: To slap an ideological tag on Chandoo and Hamid, let alone Obama, is not only unfair; it also credits them with thinking far more programmatically than they did. “I would say we were idealistic and well-read in terms of understanding all the ideologies,” Hamid said.

    PS: I knew you would like the cheerleader picture… But honestly my friend, the joke was on you. Sorry that you failed to recognize this.

  68. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:24 am #

    On Fogbow I explained what I believe is troublesome with Drew’s claims. While his claims that Remnick supported his position are in fact contradicted by the actual text in Remnick’s book and while there were other problems with Drew’s citations, I find his inability to address his claims of discrimination poorly supported given the known facts

    In the end this is about how Drew deals with questions about his stated claims and how he goes about presenting a supported hypothesis. For instance, his claims about Williams College are rather interesting given the fact that the faculty has historically been white males, something which was already observed in a 2003 archived article. It also noted how they were losing african american faculty. As to the racial composition of the students, again, other than a higher than census average of Asian students, there is no evidence of affirmative actions found there either. We do see an incredibly limited sample of 2 out of 4 associate/visiting professors being black but such a small sample size is useless for our purposes.

    Drew could also go back to the days where his contract was not extended and show us how he lost against less qualified people. The problem here is that Drew considers himself as the top student in the Nation in his field, and thus, anyone else must have been less qualified. I find that a fascinating position but again, lacking in reason and logic. One thesis award does not make one the best in the Nation, at best it shows potential. But the potential needs to be actualized, which requires hard work to show that the original hiring decision for a position that may lead to re-appointment and tenure track was validated. And, as Mike has observed, a solid publication record is essential in academia. However, having said that, I do encourage Drew to provide us with some relevant data that would allow us to evaluate better his claims. So far, the response has been less than underwhelming. Drew has shown himself to be ill equipped to defend himself against criticism, causing him to focus more on the person than on the argument, allowing him to avoid addressing said criticism in a meaningful and intellectual manner. That, I see as one of his greatest short comings..

    On http://www.eph-log.com/eph-archives/201 … rse-racism I observe Drew, when asked to provide some concrete evidence about how affirmative action was the cause of his non appointment, avoids the issue and reminds the readers, again and again, how much damage these actions had done to him at a moment where he was quite vulnerable. I have no doubts that the hiring decision caused him great pain and hardship, but I am not really convinced that this was because of affirmative action.

    On the above link someone mentions Mark Reinhardt, who, after three years was reappointed with much of the same publication record as Drew. Mark appears to be a white male. Again, the evidence requires a bit more than just picking some examples. Ideally, one would be able to present the evaluation records of those days but that is highly unlikely. So at best one could aim to show that there were others, less qualified, who did get reappointed, and that this was because of their race or gender. Of course, when one considers oneself to be the best in the nation in one’s field, I can understand why a failure to be re-appointed comes as quite a shock, which must be explained by external factors.

    Oh yes and then there is his claim that Ayers wrote Obama’s book… Will this silliness never end…

  69. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 12:24 am #

    - nbc

    Frankly, you are seeing the exact skills that made me such a great political scientist. I have a terrific advantage over you in that I was there and I saw Obama’s Marxist socialist perspective face-to-face. If you had an ounce of common sense and a tiny bit of intellectual clarity and courage, you would instantly see that it is amazing that Remnick has confirmed the basic facts regarding young Obama and that they line up perfectly with what you would predict knowing my story. Remember, I went public with my take on young Obama’s radical ideology as early as 2008.

    Remnick is a liberal who is reporting information that is extremely consistent with my take on young Obama and his friends including 1) verifying the attachment of the Democrat Socialist Alliance to Karl Marx, 2) verifying Chandoo’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought, and 3) verifying Wahid Hamid’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought. Wahid Hamid even says Obama shared these socialist ideas. If this same information came from Jerome Corsi you would be attacking it as made up falsehoods.

    At this point, I don’t thin any serious person doubts young Obama’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought. The real debate is over his honesty and integrity and whether or not the American people will still like him once they realize he deceived them about his ties to Marxist socialist extremism. Finally, I’d like to point out that it is not that easy for a white male conservative to get a job at Williams College in the first place. You need to be about 100 times better than the average applicant even to get in the door. I doubt there is any achievement even remotely equal to that in your academic record. As I have said, your writing style tells me you have not yet completed you BA degree. You also seem to lack common sense.

  70. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:32 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Frankly, you are seeing the exact skills that made me such a great political scientist. I have a terrific advantage over you in that I was there and I saw Obama’s Marxist socialist perspective face-to-face.

    Fascinating how you can say this with a straight face and yet you failed so horribly in your career as a political scientist. Even after you failed to continue down the tenure track at Williams because of the poor quality of my scholarship according to the head of the department, you did not show any further evidence of scholarly development.

    As JeffZ so carefully explained

    It is utterly immaterial in any event because the jobs you had in those seven years in no way help your case … no remotely equivalent academic institution hired you, you didn’t publish NEW (as opposed to rehash of your thesis) scholarly work in that time period, and nothing in those jobs indicates that Williams made a mistake. Had you gone on to great things at another academic institution, you’d have a much stronger case. Ultimately, tenure decisions are a projection of FUTURE scholarly output, because once someone is tenured, there is no going back. Your CV is the best evidence that Williams got it right, because you have produced no NEW (again, not talking about reworkings of your grad school thesis republished in different form) scholarship, nor been hired by a single noteworthry academic institution, in the last 20 years, INCLUDING THE SEVEN YEARS in question.

    Poor Drew continues

    At this point, I don’t thin any serious person doubts young Obama’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought.

    In fact, most scholarly person would in fact doubt Obama’s commitment to Marxism because neither his friends in the past nor his present actions support such a foolish position.

    Sorry Drew, you have shown no scholarly qualities so far that would support your grandiose claims about Obama or yourself.
    You take a sample of a few assistant professors as evidence of a 50% hiring of blacks, you ignore that Williams has been historically a white male faculty, you claim Remnick supports you and then whine when he does not and claim that Remnick must obviously putting his spin on the story.

    Sorry my friend, if you want to play the scholar, at least make an attempt to act like one.

  71. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:34 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Remnick is a liberal who is reporting information that is extremely consistent with my take on young Obama and his friends including 1) verifying the attachment of the Democrat Socialist Alliance to Karl Marx, 2) verifying Chandoo’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought, and 3) verifying Wahid Hamid’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought. Wahid Hamid even says Obama shared these socialist ideas. If this same information came from Jerome Corsi you would be attacking it as made up falsehoods.

    Sigh, still not able to read and comprehend the quote I provided. Remnick provides no support for your thesis about Obama and even your position on Chandoo and Hamid are poorly supported as my quotes have shown.

    Is it that hard to deal with contradictory evidence my friend? Not a very scholarly position imho.

  72. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:38 am #

    Finally, I’d like to point out that it is not that easy for a white male conservative to get a job at Williams College in the first place.

    Sigh… Still no evidence I assume to support your position? Silly me, I thought that a scholar would at least have some facts and data, not pure speculation or personal beliefs. Surely you can do better my friend.

    Why is it so hard for your to accept that perhaps you did not measure up to Williams’ requirements? Your further track record also does not show much supporting evidence that you were the scholar you believed your were.

    As JeffZ reminded you

    I don’t think you understand the difference between “scholarship” and “memory of a 30-year-old encounter with a teenager.” God help me if anyone starts judging my views, character, or anything else of importance about me based on a chance conversation

  73. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:40 am #

    Rory also observed

    conservative around 1989? Like hiring a conservative in 1986, perhaps? Drew’s problem is that his original hiring is the strongest evidence that he’s a bit…overwrought (or did he become an outspoken conservative only at Williams? At which point, i’d argue his many activities outside of scholarly work is a non-discriminatory reason for non-tenuring. He was being paid to be a scholar and teacher, not a politician and radio host). Derek’s right: Drew has leveled a serious charge against Williams and so far has provided no substantive evidence of misconduct.

    As others have also noticed, you have leveled some significant charges but provided no substantive evidence.

    I am not the only one who finds this somewhat disturbing and perhaps lacking in scholarship.

  74. avatar
    sfjeff January 5, 2012 at 12:45 am #

    P>To me, the primary evidence that Obama is still a Marxist socialist is his lack of a conversion story, his later ties to Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers and Alice Palmer, and his continual use of Marxist rhetoric and concepts including class conflict, alienation and redistribution of wealth. I have never suggested that my take on President Obama’s current views is based simply on my observations of his behavior slightly over 30 years ago. For one of the best books that traces out young Obama’s interaction with me and his later ties to Marxist socialist activists – including folks associated with the famous Midwest Academy – I recommend you check out Stanley Kurtz’s well-researched book, Radical-In-Chief.

    See, here is the thing. Your only claim for publicity is your supposed connection to young obama- without that connection you are just one more right winger claiming Obama is a Marxist- and they are a dime a dozen.

    And you haven’t gotten anyone to corrobarate your story. Which to me is questinable- my college GF would vouch for me if the story if it was true.

  75. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 12:45 am #

    - nbc

    You silly avatar changer. LMAO The Democrat Socialist Alliance (DSA) – according to Remnick – hung up a huge sign featuring Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad. KARL MARX…

    Caroline Boss was the co-president of the DSA at the time. Young Obama was active in the DSA and appeared at one of their key anti-apartheid events in 1981…not long after I first met him. Chandoo was active in the DSA too and, along with Boss, was one of the key speakers at that event.

    Are you going to argue Remnick doesn’t say the DSA promoted the image and ideology of Karl Marx? Have you even read Remnick’s book?

  76. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:51 am #

    You silly avatar changer. LMAO The Democrat Socialist Alliance (DSA) – according to Remnick – hung up a huge sign featuring Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad. KARL MARX…

    Wow… And your point is what?
    Sigh… I love how you manage to move the goalposts so quickly…

    Since you were the ‘gold medal winner’… Here is a somewhat simplistic analysis, not unlike some of the ones you presented.

    By johnatrisk

    Previous winner: Barry Rabe.

    http://www.fordschool.umich.edu/faculty/Barry_Rabe

    http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/experts/rabeb/rabecv.pdf

    However, since he does research on climate, he must be a Democrat, even though he’s ironically enough a professor at the hotbed (you like how we’re working in these climate terms to subliminally bias the discussion?) of Marxism, the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy.

    Next winner: Jeffrey Anderson

    http://www18.georgetown.edu/data/people/jja5/cv.pdf

    Clearly also a Democrat because he claims the people were the proximate cause of the collapse of the Berlin Wall and not Ronald Reagan.

    http://explore.georgetown.edu/news/?ID=47059

    And he teaches at the clearly Trotskyite campus of Georgetown University…you know, the one with Henry Kissinger and Madeline Albright.

    With our cohort of white males, let’s examine publication records in the 3 years from the award date, and include publications prior. For Barry, I count 12 journal articles, 2 books, and at least 6 book chapters and numerous reviews. For Jeffrey, a true slow start with only 5 articles and a book, but then again, the Marshall Fund Fellowship for a year might have distracted him.

    What was your track record again? Remember that the gold standard in academics is your publication record.

  77. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 12:54 am #

    And still no update on your claims that you suffered discrimination at Williams or elsewhere other than your personal anecdotes.

    If you want to be an auto-biographer then fine, but if you want to be a scholar surely you understand that you fall short of the standards required by such institutions as Williams or even when involved in these internet discussions?
    Surely you must realize that ‘I tell you it’s true’ carries not much weight in an argument? And when you are trying to spin Remnick well, that’s just the icing on the cake in my perspective.

  78. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 12:57 am #

    - sfjeff

    I’m not a journalist. It is the responsibility of journalists like Ronald Kessler and others to interview people and report the truth. I’m just one small point of reference for those seeking to understand Obama’s life story. I can report that I have been interviewed by Michael Savage on his radio program and that my story has been checked out by numerous authors (and publishers) who have determined that it is credible.

    You have to admit that David Remnick provides substantial collaboration for my take on young Obama. (My gosh, Remnick reports the Democrat Socialist Alliance is promoting Karl Marx on the Oxy campus at the time.) Remnick is a liberal who would be expected to protect Obama. Instead, he basically verifies that young Obama was a radical extremist who held to views which would be seen as dangerous and offensive to most Americans.

    If Obama is no longer a Marxist, then why doesn’t he share the story of how he stopped believing in Marxism. I have a story like that. It is sort of a painful story where I dropped a lot of my old friends and even had to start a new career. As far as I can tell, my wife and I have shown great courage in bringing my story to public attention. We were warned we would be murdered if we went public with this story.

    I would expect that I get some credit for being courageous enough to tell the truth back when no one wanted to hear that young Obama had been a Marxist socialist extremist. I’m grateful that liberal authors like Remnick have basically verified my take on young Obama so that people can see I was telling the truth.

  79. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:02 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I’m not a journalist. It is the responsibility of journalists like Ronald Kessler and others to interview people and report the truth.

    Well, that by itself is quite enlightening.

  80. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:04 am #

    Remnick is a liberal who would be expected to protect Obama. Instead, he basically verifies that young Obama was a radical extremist who held to views which would be seen as dangerous and offensive to most Americans.

    Again misrepresenting Remnick

    Chandoo and Hamid, among others, helped “ignite” Obama politically. “In college, Hasan was a socialist, a Marxist, which is funny since he is from a wealthy family,” Mifflin said. “But he was socialist in the way we were back then—an idealist who believed in economic equality, that’s all. I am not sure how he defined it then, but he really studied it. Barack learned a lot from him, especially the notions of fairness and equality that you see in him today.” Chandoo, for his part, readily admits to his youthful radicalism, but says that Obama was never the least bit doctrinaire: “The only thing doctrinaire about him was his austerity!

    To slap an ideological tag on Chandoo and Hamid, let alone Obama, is not only unfair; it also credits them with thinking far more programmatically than they did. “I would say we were idealistic and well-read in terms of understanding all the ideologies,” Hamid said. “I remember going home to Pakistan and sitting across from my mother in the summer waxing eloquent about the benefits of socialism. She said, ‘Wahid, this is all well and good, but I think you will grow up.’ I guess that’s what happened. We weren’t Marxists. We were idealistic and believed in the betterment of the lot of the masses and not just the few. If you describe that as socialist, then maybe we did have some socialist thoughts at the time.

    Remnick, David (2010-04-06). The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama (p. 104). Knopf. Kindle Edition.

    Still blind to the facts..

  81. avatar
    John Reilly January 5, 2012 at 1:06 am #

    Anyone who wants to discuss what silly things President Obama did when he was in school should remember one thing — let he who is without sin cast the first stone — and then tell us where we will find their blog comments asking about President Bush’s background. Senator McCain, who I voted for and donated to, has a colorful background as well.

    President Obama is not a Marxist, socialist or any of those pejoratives you toss around. He deserves to be replaced for other good reasons. Name calling will certainly persuade some folks, but they are already not going to vote for the scary Black guy in the White House. If you want to persuade the bulk of people on this site, you need to use logic, i.e., President Obama has not turned the economy around, and the candidate you are urging is not part of the group who got us into the mess that President Obama inherited.

    Or you can call him a Marxist, and perhaps in four years Mayor Booker will replace President Obama, as Misha sometimes predicts. Then you will have a second scary Black guy in the White House, and no fantasies about Newark not being in the United States.

  82. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:07 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: As far as I can tell, my wife and I have shown great courage in bringing my story to public attention. We were warned we would be murdered if we went public with this story.

    Oh for goodness sake… Such a magnificent story teller. Did you not first claim that you were a friend of Obama, and “one of the people who knew Barack Obama.” when in fact he had met Obama at two fleeting meetings.

    If you are so convinced that Chandoo was not telling the truth because he did not really ‘meet’ the president during the celebration then what should we think of your embellishments?

  83. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 1:09 am #

    - nbc

    Use some common sense, little avatar changer. If I was an African American and my thesis was good enough quality to win one of the top nine awards given by the APSA each year in recognition of extraordinary achievements in political science, then do you think I would have been allowed to go on to compete for tenure at Williams?

    Remember they only give out four awards every year among over 530 new Ph.Ds in political science.

    You have no intellectual credibility at this point if you think anti-white discimination had nothing to do with that decision.

    The fact that blacks are currently way over represented in the Williams College political science department is clear evidence of systemic bias against young white scholars.

    Frankly, 95% of all Ph.Ds. in political science go to whites. How is it that Williams College is in a situation where 50% of its new hires are black? The bottom line is that you aren’t very good at seeing reality. Remnick points out that Obama’s closest friends at Occidental College hung up a huge sign featuring Karl Marx…and yet you think this fact has no significance?

  84. avatar
    John Reilly January 5, 2012 at 1:13 am #

    Incidentally, I have never been at an anti-Apartheid rally, but I imagine for African-Americans being opposed to Apartheid is not a controversial issue. (It should not be for real Americans, either, but it was.) People troubled that an African-American has some political views shaped by the color of his skin ought to try working in the two most integrated aspects of our society, professional sports and the military. I’ve only done the latter. You meet lots of minorities. Your life depends upon them. You get to know them and understand that growing up in rural Indiana, like me, does not expose you to the inner city, or Apartheid, or other issues which are important to African-Americans. To me, Israel was an abstraction (although I have now been there multiple times for my work); to Jewish people who had relatives killed in the Holocaust and who have cousins in Jerusalem, Israel attains mythic proportions.

  85. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 5, 2012 at 1:14 am #

    You should have sees what some of my close college friends hung up. It means nothing.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Remnick points out that Obama’s closest friends at Occidental College hung up a huge sign featuring Karl Marx…and yet you think this fact has no significance?

  86. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 1:18 am #

    - John Reilly

    The economy was doing pretty good until Democrats took total control of Congress in January 2007.

    I blame them for wrecking the U.S. economy, not the Republicans or president Bush. I think that Obama was responsible for the great recession too in the sense that business leaders knew that he was bad news for our nation and they have held back on creating jobs or making big investments until they see him out of office.

    The same thing happened during the New Deal when FDR frightened off business owners and investors which his anti-capitalist hostility.

    My story is useful, in part, because it provides evidence that Obama holds to a long-standing commitment to Marxist socialist ideology, a commitment reflected in his time with Frank Marshall Davis, with me, with Alice Palmer and later Bill Ayers.

    Business leaders and employers are right to fear Obama…if he had his way their freedom and wealth would be sharply curtailed and confiscated by the government.

  87. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:22 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Use some common sense, little avatar changer. If I was an African American and my thesis was good enough quality to win one of the top nine awards given by the APSA each year in recognition of extraordinary achievements in political science, then do you think I would have been allowed to go on to compete for tenure at Williams?

    With the same track record? Unlikely. Sorry John but by most academic standards, you were just not up to par with what is expected from you. That you won an award is relevant to showing promise, but in the end, things just did not appear to pan out for you. As I understand, you did not publish much of anything else, and although your teaching may have been up to standard, I find your present display of ‘scholarship’ to undermine even that aspect. Since you informed by the department head of Williams that you were not allowed to advance along the tenure track because of the poor quality of my scholarship, you have failed to show any further evidence that would show a scholarly career.

    But the real problem is that you have failed to provide any substantive evidence to support your claims about Williams and that the evidence shows that, contrary to your claims, Williams had a mostly white male faculty.

    Now, I understand from Ken Thomas that you may have been somewhat of an odd duck

    At this time, John Drew was somewhat of an odd campus figure, who polarized campus debate and discussion with extreme claims. These claims included things like declaring that the Faculty of Williams College (then, as often, the first-rated Liberal Arts College in the United States) were part of a left-wing conspiracy, and that he was the only member of the Faculty who would vote Republican in the 1988 elections.

    I also understand you tried to unsuccessfully run for political office while at Williams (and for another unsuccessful one while in CA). How am I doing so far?

    So, the combination of your lack of substantive evidence combined with your documented scholarly history, causes me some obvious concern.

    You have no intellectual credibility at this point if you think anti-white discimination had nothing to do with that decision.

    Again, purely argumentative and lacking any foundation in evidence or data. I have also shown that those who received similar awards as you did, showed far more scholarly promise in the first three years. Again, putting some doubt on your claims of discrimination. Sorry my friend, being given an award for a thesis is not a free pass to tenure…

    The fact that blacks are currently way over represented in the Williams College political science department is clear evidence of systemic bias against young white scholars.

    Even though when you were hired, the Williams Faculty was overwhelmingly white male and even though your samples is based on a sample size of 4 IIRC? Do you really want us to believe that this is a scholarly argument? A sample size of 4… My goodness…

    You really have no substantive data now do you?

  88. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:23 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: My story is useful, in part, because it provides evidence that Obama holds to a long-standing commitment to Marxist socialist ideology, a commitment reflected in his time with Frank Marshall Davis, with me, with Alice Palmer and later Bill Ayers.

    Business leaders and employers are right to fear Obama…if he had his way their freedom and wealth would be sharply curtailed and confiscated by the government.

    Again, this is not helping you with your claims of being a political science scholar…

    Fascinating how you so quickly dig your own hole…

  89. avatar
    JPotter January 5, 2012 at 1:29 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: …economy was doing pretty good until Democrats took total control of Congress in January 2007. … I blame them for wrecking the U.S. economy …

    Hey, you’re free to blame whomever you want—what specific Congressional actions do you think caused Wall Street and the housing boom to go bust in less than 9 months?

    As for me …. this thread was more interesting when it was about Mars!

  90. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 1:29 am #

    - Dr. Conspiracy

    I’m just saying that nbc is leaning too hard on the Wahid Hamid quote in Remnick’s book which says: “We weren’t Marxists.” I’m just asking if they weren’t Marxists, then why does Remnick report that Boss and her friends in the Democrat Socialist Alliance were displaying a picture of Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad? I knew Boss, Chandoo and Obama and I know why the DSA was promoting Karl Marx – its because they were Marxists, just like me at the time.

  91. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:36 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I’m just saying that nbc is leaning too hard on the Wahid Hamid quote in Remnick’s book which says: “We weren’t Marxists.” I’m just asking if they weren’t Marxists, then why does Remnick report that Boss and her friends in the Democrat Socialist Alliance were displaying a picture of Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad?

    So your argument is that even though they claim that they were not marxists, that they must have been so because they had a banner of Marx… I see. So when you claim that Remnick supported you, you were not referring to the part where he cites Chandoo and Hamid but rather to the picture hanging over the Quad…

    Sigh… I am starting to see things more clearly from the Williams’ perspective here.

  92. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:40 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I wouldn’t lean so hard on the credibility of Kenneth Thomas. He is one of those losers who took five years, and not the normal four years, to graduate from Williams College.

    Yes, I understand the ad hominem argument quite well… Is that the best you have to offer?

    Sorry to have interrupted your digging…

  93. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 1:40 am #

    - nbc

    This sample size issue is a sign of how I know you don’t have a college degree. We are not talking about a sample, we are talking about the total population when we discuss the dominance of blacks in the Williams College political science department. There are no statistical issues involved when you are dealing with a population instead of a sample of the population.

    Have you figured out your answer to the question of why Obama friends were promoting the image of Karl Marx if I’m lying about young Obama and his friend’s commitment to Karl Marx’s philosophy? Facts from the liberal author David Remnick are stubborn things. It looks to me like my claims they were Marxists is verified by David Remnick’s book.

  94. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 1:49 am #

    - nbc

    I’m just reporting that I never claimed Williams was part of a “left-wing conspiracy.” You know me well enough just through these blog posts to see this is a lie promoted by a mentally unstable guy with deep personal issues. The sort of guy who would brag about charging $150 per hour.

    I also think it should be obvious that I never said I “was the only member of the Faculty who would vote Republican in the 1988 elections.” This just doesn’t sound like me. I do remember pointing out that among the entire faculty there were only three of us who were registered Republicans.

    Even so…why all this interest in my time at Williams College. The only reason it is relevant to me is that while I was there I got to know Obama’s favorite professor Roger Boesche better and hung out with one of the Occidental Marxist professors Obama mentions in Dreams From My Father, Carlos Egan. Boesche was a socialist and Egan was a Marxist. I would love to be interviewed on Obama’s teachers at Oxy.

  95. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:56 am #

    This sample size issue is a sign of how I know you don’t have a college degree. We are not talking about a sample, we are talking about the total population when we discuss the dominance of blacks in the Williams College political science department. There are no statistical issues involved when you are dealing with a population instead of a sample of the population.

    OMG this is just too funny. You made a claim that 50% of the polisci department involves blacks. When the sample size is 4, such a claim has little relevance. Surely anyone who knows statistics would know this. A scholar would do a more in depth analysis over time of the polisci department to see if this single ‘statistic’ is meaningful or just a fluke. Furthermore, your claims were about when you were hired and fired, when Williams’ was mostly white male faculty. Again you seem to be missing the point here, which is evidenced by your need to attack the messenger rather than provide a rational argument.

    As I and many others have asked you so many times now, where is the substantive data to support your claims? Anything beyond your claims? Any data? Anything?… You made such broad accusations about Williams and yet when asked for some substantive date you point to a sample size of 4 which includes two blacks and claim that this is somehow evidence that blacks are hired at a too high a ratio… Come on… Is that really your best answer? It does not provide much hope for your claim of being a ‘scholar’ though.

    Of the total faculty of 21, there appear to be 5 black people, 5 women. Hardly the 50% you were arguing based on the sample of assistant/associate professors for instance. Again, even today, the white male prevalence has yet to be addressed fully.

    It looks to me like my claims they were Marxists is verified by David Remnick’s book.

    Even though the book states the contrary?

  96. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:56 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I’m just reporting that I never claimed Williams was part of a “left-wing conspiracy.” You know me well enough just through these blog posts to see this is a lie promoted by a mentally unstable guy with deep personal issues.

    ROTFl… Now that is just too ironic in my opinion…

  97. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:58 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I also think it should be obvious that I never said I “was the only member of the Faculty who would vote Republican in the 1988 elections.” This just doesn’t sound like me.

    It sounds exactly like you IMHO

  98. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 1:59 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Even so…why all this interest in my time at Williams College.

    Because you made such poorly supported claims about being the victim of discrimination and affirmative action. It helps understand the level of credibility one may assign to your ‘grandiose’ claims.

  99. avatar
    John Reilly January 5, 2012 at 2:01 am #

    Dr. Drew: Why not respond to my inquiry about why what President Obama did in college has any value to our discussion? Or Dr. C’s observation that his friends hung worse on the walls? Were you commenting on Speaker Gingrich’s more recent history of dating while married? Or whatever Mr. Cain was doing? What about persistent stories about President Bush’s drug use?

    You met the President twice, and the two of you have divergent views and did not become lifelong friends. That’s all that happened.

    Separately, you are concerned that Williams seems to have an over-representation of Afriican-Americans in the Poli Sci department. So what. Life is unfair. Were you concerned about the underrepresentation of African-Americans or women as President? Tell us where you wrote about that. We have a population size of 44. Did I get the jargon right or do you need to see my degree? Shouldn’t we have had 22 women Presidents or 5 African-American Presidents by now? Maybe all that life is doing is balancing out the overrepresentation of African-Americans at Williams with the underrepresentation in the White House. The universe is in balance.

  100. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:08 am #

    Remember that Drew was asked to show that he suffered discrimination and he points to a present incoming faculty of assistant professors, four of them in total, 2 of them who are black as evidence.

    That misses the point twice: 1) it has no relevance on the hiring practices of Williams when Drew had his short stint there, during a time where Williams was known for its mostly white male faculty 2) it provides a single instance in time based on a small sample of 4.

    Both are significant flaws when making any argument, let alone a scholarly one.

  101. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:11 am #

    I am also surprised why he names Ayers, who other than host a party for Obama’s kick off, was not much involved with Obama.

    In a November 2008 interview, Ayers said that he knew Obama only slightly: “I think my relationship with Obama was probably like that of thousands of others in Chicago and, like millions and millions of others, I wished I knew him better.”

    But I am sure, Ayers must be lying…

    or

    The New York Times reported that Obama did not have a significant relationship with Ayers.According to several sources, Ayers played no role in starting Obama’s career, which was primarily launched when Deborah Leff, then president of the Joyce Foundation, suggested Obama be appointed as chairman of the six-member board that oversaw the distribution of grants in Chicago.

    Even the claims that Ayers somehow wrote Obama’s book is ill supported and unsubstantiated and actually contradicted.

  102. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:21 am #

    And then Alice Palmer…

    DrewMy story helps explain why Obama went on to hang out with people like Rev. Wright, Alice Palmer and Bill Ayers.

    He never really hung out with Ayers and his relationship with Alice appears to be quite interesting when Obama challenged Palmer’s signatures and invalidated her hasty run for office, leading only Obama to remain as a candidate. Hardly a love affair I would say…

  103. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 3:01 am #

    sfjeff: See, here is the thing. Your only claim for publicity is your supposed connection to young obama- without that connection you are just one more right winger claiming Obama is a Marxist- and they are a dime a dozen.

    That sums it up. Combine this with John’s obsession that he was held back by affirmative action and Obama managed to become our President and you can understand why he may not feel particularly friendly towards our President. He is blaming a lot of people of his misfortune, somehow missing the possibility that he may be to blame.

  104. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 3:44 am #

    Yeah…that pretty much sums up my impression of things too.

    Sounds like just another disgruntled crank with deep seated issues of insecurity who masks them by blaming the rest of the world for their failures, resenting success and having to desperately scream for attention and try to convince the world to pay attention to them…

    He should pair up with Ron Polarik. They could spend endless hours in huffy fantasy fancy, trying to out-prima donna each other…

    sfjeff: See, here is the thing. Your only claim for publicity is yoursupposed connection to young obama- without that connection you are just one more right winger claiming Obama is a Marxist- and they are a dime a dozen.

    And you haven’t gotten anyone to corrobarate your story. Which to me is questinable- my college GF would vouch for me if the story if it was true.

  105. avatar
    Somerset January 5, 2012 at 3:50 am #

    nbc: Because you made such poorly supported claims about being the victim of discrimination and affirmative action. It helps understand the level of credibility one may assign to your ‘grandiose’ claims.

    Exactly.

    His basic argument was “I’m an amazingly talented academic and scholar, I knew Barack Obama when he was at Oxy, therefore I am the most qualified person in the world to understand his motivations and ideologies.” You were doing a great job taking him apart with his second statement, so MikeD, myself and Slarti went after the first.

    He tried to deflect attention away from his own academic achievement by pointing out alleged racial favoritism in the Williams PolySci department, making the mistake of not only handing us the ammunition to debunk his claims, but also backing himself into a corner and forcing him to show us his publication record.

    It starts here: http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=3350&p=318211#p318211

  106. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 3:52 am #

    Ditto on both accounts. That has to be one of the most ironic statements borne out of classic projection that I’ve ever come across….

    Considering all the irony meter explosions and episodes of projection we’ve seen on display from various other Birthers here over the years… that really says something!

    As I mentioned above, Ron Polarik has some stiff competition here… LMAO!

    nbc: ROTFl… Now that is just too ironic in my opinion…

    nbc: It sounds exactly like you IMHO

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You know me well enough just through these blog posts to see this is a lie promoted by a mentally unstable guy with deep personal issues. The sort of guy who would brag about…

  107. avatar
    Lupin January 5, 2012 at 4:08 am #

    I feel obliged to point out that there is nothing wrong in being a soc ialist or a Marxist.

    Plenty of countries in Europe including France, Sweden, Germany, Spain, and arguably the UK if you define the “old” Labor Party as soc ialist have had soc ialist governments while remaining trusted and valuable partners in NATO, having their share of billionaires, etc.

    A lot of what Marx wrote remains a valid model to analyze social and economic factors; one is not obliged to agree with or believe in what he thought might be future trends (especially as reinterpreted by Lenin and Trotski who were the true ideological fathers of the USSR) to deny that Marx provides excellent analytical tools — today (with Capitalism in crisis and running against Democracy) more than ever.

    These terms are misused for their sheer irrational fear factor in US politics.

  108. avatar
    Mike Dunford January 5, 2012 at 4:25 am #

    @John Drew
    “Use some common sense, little avatar changer. If I was an African American and my thesis was good enough quality to win one of the top nine awards given by the APSA each year in recognition of extraordinary achievements in political science, then do you think I would have been allowed to go on to compete for tenure at Williams?”

    Do try to be more precise in your self-inflation, John. The award you won was one of nine dissertation awards given out by APSA. There are a large number of other awards given out by APSA, many of them for career achievement.

    In addition to the nine dissertation awards, there appears to be one major general excellence award (the Goodnow award). There are also eight career achievement awards, four book awards, and two paper awards. If we judge by the cash prize associated with the awards, the APSA rates most of those as more significant than the dissertation awards.

    Just so we’re clear, I’m not dismissing the work that you put in to your dissertation. It was recognized with an award, and it was almost certainly a superb dissertation. But you can’t stop there and expect to keep an academic job. Yes, you had potential. Based on the award you received, I’m happy to admit that you had tremendous potential. But you didn’t make the effort needed to realize that potential, and that’s a crying shame.

  109. avatar
    Mike Dunford January 5, 2012 at 4:39 am #

    nbc:
    Remember that Drew was asked to show that he suffered discrimination and he points to a present incoming faculty of assistant professors, four of them in total, 2 of them who are black as evidence.

    In addition to everything else you just pointed out, it’s worth noting that all four of those assistant professors have publication records while at Williams that dramatically exceed all of the work Drew did while he was employed there.

  110. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 5:25 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.
    misha – I spent a year living in England and I saw the results of socialized medicine.It creates bad teeth.

    I’ve seen people here with bad teeth. They drink well water, which lacks fluoride. Some brands of toothpaste in Israel lack fluoride. It has nothing to do with socialized medicine.

    I repeat: Medical care in Israel is equal to here, sometimes better.

  111. avatar
    Lupin January 5, 2012 at 5:43 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I spent a year living in England and I saw the results of socialized medicine. It creates bad teeth.

    This is, of course, complete rubbish and a transparent lie willfully propagated by American right-wing ideologues.

    THE GUARDIAN actually looked into the matter and found that some factors were purely cosmetics (fewer use of braces in Europe) and also attributable to higher water fluoridation in the US.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-22429,00.html

    Wiki:

    Water fluoridation, when feasible and culturally acceptable, has substantial advantages, especially for subgroups at high risk.[8] The U.S. Centers for Disease Control listed water fluoridation as one of the ten great public health achievements of the 20th century;[14] in contrast, most European countries have experienced substantial declines in tooth decay without its use, primarily due to the introduction of fluoride toothpaste in the 1970s.[3] The use of topical fluorides (such as in toothpaste) to prevent caries among people living in both industrialized and developing countries may help supplant the need for fluoridated water.[3] Fluoridation may be more justified in the U.S. because of socioeconomic inequalities in dental health and dental care.[15] While water fluoridation is a predominantly American phenomenon,[16] it has been introduced to many countries to varying degrees[17] with many countries having water that is naturally fluoridated to recommended levels and others, such as in Europe, using fluoridated salts as an alternative source of fluoride.[18]

    Generally speaking, this GUARDIAN article thorough debunks the many lies spouted by American right-wing ideologues about the NHS:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/aug/11/nhs-sick-healthcare-reform

  112. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 5:45 am #

    Lupin: I feel obliged to point out that there is nothing wrong in being a socialist or a Marxist.

    Senator Bernie Sanders runs as a Democrat-Socialist. The kibbutzim are pure communism. They prove that communism and democracy are not mutually exclusive. They are a raucous democracy. Every decision is turned into a Talmudic discussion.

    When my maternal grandfather first came to the States, he read Der Tag, a Yiddish communist paper. When it stopped publication, he switched to The Forward, a Yiddish socialist paper.

    It’s called the 1st Amendment. Look into it.

    When is Michele Bachmann going to return the $250K in farm subsidies she took?

  113. avatar
    Lupin January 5, 2012 at 5:46 am #

    In re dentistry, also of interest, this 2007 article from the NY TIMES:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/24/us/24kentucky.html?ref=todayspaper

  114. avatar
    Lupin January 5, 2012 at 5:55 am #

    In re “soc ialized medicine”:

    Over 1/3 of Americans are already part of a “soc ialized medicine” program where costs are much cheaper (Medicare: $6500 per person, VA: about $5000) than “private medicine” (about $8000):

    Medicare (2011) : 49 million
    Medicaid (2011) : 51.5 million
    Veterans Health Administration (2007) : 8 million
    Military Health Services – active and retired personnel (2011) : 9.5 million
    American Indian Health Services (2011) : 2.5 million
    Total: 120.1 million out of 312.9 million

    If you had proper media and proper politicians, the case could be made that it would be cheaper for both people and businesses to extend those programs, instead of going BOOGA BOOGA YURP on tv.

  115. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 6:18 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: young Obama was a ardent Marxist socialist

    So was Golda Meir.

  116. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 6:36 am #

    misha: When is Michele Bachmann going to return the $250K in farm subsidies she took?

    Or the matching federal funds Bachmann can apply for to pay her campaign debts by suspending her failed campaign instead of ending it?

    Michele has her very own taxpayer funded federal bailout!!!

    That was her political platform, right?

    “Bachmann said she ran for president in part because President Obama’s policies “based on socialism, are destructive to the very foundation of the Republic.” She vowed to “continue to fight” to battle Mr. Obama’s “agenda of socialism,” invoking socialism multiple times in her remarks.” (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57352112-503544/michele-bachmann-drops-out-of-gop-race/)

    No Government Assistance (unless it’s me, silly) ! ! !

    Do these GOP candidates not understand the meaning of hypocrisy or the concept of socialism?

    They must think American voters are pretty stupid.

  117. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 6:37 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I was in a very good position to identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs in 1980-1981.

    In college I was a Trotskyite; later a kibbutznik. Now I’m a registered Democrat.

    Your point is…

  118. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 6:42 am #

    Majority Will: No Government Assistance (unless it’s me, silly) ! ! ! Do these GOP candidates not understand the meaning of hypocrisy or the concept of socialism?

    Cotton growers are guaranteed a minimum price, by the US government.

  119. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 6:52 am #

    Scientist: Besides the US has socialized Medicine-it’s called Medicare

    Congress has a 24/7 physician, whose salary is paid for by the federal government. When a member of Congress needs hospitalization, they go to the Naval hospital. I don’t see anyone refusing because it’s government run healthcare.

  120. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 7:43 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D. later ties to Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers…and redistribution of wealth.

    All taxes are a redistribution of wealth.

    Reagan had close ties to Falwell, a bigot who was an ardent supporter of racial segregation. Falwell was adamantly opposed to the 1st Amendment, and publically called the 1st “a mistake,” and advocated an amendment to nullify the 1st, “with the Jewish people declared a protected minority.”

    Shrub called Ted Haggard weekly, who advocated harassment of non-Christians:

    “Pastor Ted…talks to President George W. Bush or his advisers every Monday…He moved the church to a strip mall. There was a bar, a liquor store, New Life Church, a massage parlor. His congregation spilled out and blocked the other businesses. He set up chairs in the alley. He strung up a banner: SIEGE THIS CITY FOR ME, signed JESUS. He assigned everyone in the church names from the phone book they were to pray for. He sent teams to pray in front of the homes of supposed witches—in one month, ten out of fifteen of his targets put their houses on the market. His congregation “prayer-walked” nearly every street of the city.”

    http://www.rickross.com/reference/fundamentalists/fund196.html

    McCain had close ties to John Hagee. Hagee described to his congregation Jesus’ Bar Mitzvah (!), explained how Jews control the world’s monetary supply, and demonstrated how the Magen David and the menorah are on US paper currency, in disguise:

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7706179979766534830&hl=en# Kettle, pot.

    Ayers was never prosecuted. The Justice Department dropped all charges.

  121. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 7:52 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: For a great look at why Obama’s ideology is a threat to American values, prosperity and our U.S. Constitution, I recommend you check out Michael Savage’s book, Trickle-Up Poverty.

    I recommend Michael Harrington’s The Twilight of Capitalism.

    http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-Capitalism-Michael-Harrington/dp/0671227599/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1325767739&sr=8-1

  122. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 8:13 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You silly avatar changer. LMAO The Democrat Socialist Alliance (DSA) – according to Remnick – hung up a huge sign featuring Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad. KARL MARX

    First of all, they were the Democratic Socialist Alliance not the Democrat Socialist Alliance. Since you can’t even get the name correct, your “expertise” on the matter is questionable. Second, the group at Occidental was affiliated with the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC) founded by Michael Harrington. I knew quite a few DSOC people at the tiime (late 1970s-early 1980s). Not only were they NOT Marxists, they were quite anti-Marxist. They sold “Solidarnosc” T-shirts to support the anti-Soviet workers in Poland and other Eastern European countries. They also strongly opposed the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and Chinese oppression in Tibet. They would have been far more likely to hang a poster of Lech Walesa than of Karl Marx.

    And don’t bore me with David Remnick. He wrote a book, Some of what’s in it is correct, some isn’t, just like any other book, Or did you think that everything in a book is automatiically true?

  123. avatar
    bovril January 5, 2012 at 8:28 am #

    To summarize

    Drew, once upon a time, went to one of the collegs that the President (God that must stick in your craw Drew) went to

    Drew was not ACTUALLY there at the same time as the President

    Drew ACTUALLY only met the President for (at best) a handful of hours a couple of decades ago in a few social venues where he (Drew) was simply one of MANY other (in his case incosequential) people

    Drew never ACTUALLY talked to the President beyond a few vacuous social mutterings

    Drew never ACTUALLY attended classes, participated in educational, social, political or personal endeavours with either the President or colleagues or friends of the President

    Based upon the fleeting, random, nay Brownian motion social equivalent of a couple of hand shakes, Drew has somehow managed to build a massive wealth of knowledge about the President, his background, intellect, education, political thought processes, educational, social and political evolution.

    The entire set of this individuals posts lead one to the inevitable conclusions that he is a fabulist with at best a tenuous grasp of facts and a particularly bad case of passive-aggresive entitlement.

    I believe the children of today would state with utter disdain that Drew is a LSOS

  124. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 8:40 am #

    bovril: Drew ACTUALLY only met the President for (at best) a handful of hours a couple of decades ago in a few social venues where he (Drew) was simply one of MANY other (in his case incosequential) people

    Drew never ACTUALLY talked to the President beyond a few vacuous social mutterings

    Drew never ACTUALLY attended classes, participated in educational, social, political or personal endeavours with either the President or colleagues or friends of the President

    That sounds a lot like Bill Ayers. Oh, the irony.

  125. avatar
    Arthur January 5, 2012 at 10:01 am #

    bovril: To summarizeDrew, only met the President for (at best) a handful of hours a couple of decades ago in a few social venues where he (Drew) was simply one of MANY other (in his case incosequential) peopleDrew never ACTUALLY talked to the President beyond a few vacuous social mutteringsDrew never ACTUALLY attended classes, participated in educational, social, political or personal endeavours with either the President or colleagues or friends of the President

    Well, when you put it THAT way, John Drew, in spite of his fine education, seems nothing more than just . . . . a fabulist. Imagine that: someone from WND making up stories . . . who’d a thunk it?

  126. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 5, 2012 at 10:46 am #

    Sometimes young people make visual statements as a critique on the prevalent culture. They do things just to get attention. They do things for the shock value. It would be a mistake to read too much into a poster a college student put up. You have a Ph. D. Tell us what kind of fallacy would that be?

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I’m just saying that nbc is leaning too hard on the Wahid Hamid quote in Remnick’s book which says: “We weren’t Marxists.” I’m just asking if they weren’t Marxists, then why does Remnick report that Boss and her friends in the Democrat Socialist Alliance were displaying a picture of Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad? I knew Boss, Chandoo and Obama and I know why the DSA was promoting Karl Marx – its because they were Marxists, just like me at the time.

  127. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 5, 2012 at 10:51 am #

    I’ll share my college Marx story. I was taking a philosophy class around 1970 and needed to look up a philosophical term. I went to the library and located a book called A Dictionary of Philosophy. The definition of the term basically said that Marx was right about this subject and others were wrong. When I looked for the publisher, it was the Soviet Encyclopedia Publishing House.

    So I wrote them and said that at least for a dictionary, definitions should more objective and balanced.

    They wrote back and said that only Marxist philosophy was objective and balanced.

  128. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 11:06 am #

    I had an enormous portrait of Jimi Hendrix hanging in my college dorm room.

    I guess that makes me a dedicated and lifelong Hendrixist but lately things just don’t seem the same.

  129. avatar
    J. Potter January 5, 2012 at 11:21 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: They wrote back and said that only Marxist philosophy was objective and balanced.

    The Soviet Encyclopedia Publishing House in Moscow? The works are a hoot! Straight out of 1984. If anyone is unfamiliar with the Soviet Encyclopedia and its history, I urge you to Google it and have a blast! Literally right out of 1984, rewriting references works at the whim of the party. Becoming more and more of a joke as the years rolled by. What a depressing place to work that must have been!

    Hopefully your library had other philosophy references on hand! I wonder where/why they had one from SE in their collections.

    “Objective and balanced”. Hmmm, that sounds familiar … hehe.

  130. avatar
    Arthur January 5, 2012 at 11:46 am #

    Speaking of influential posters . . . in college, I had a poster of the Swedish Bikini Team–did that automatically make me a disciple of Major Boobage?!

    Yes. And I still am. Just like my buddy Kenny McCormick: http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/164807/i-was-so-close

  131. avatar
    J. Potter January 5, 2012 at 11:49 am #

    Speaking of the Soviet Encyclopedia, reminds me of 2 thoughts on the nature of birtherism and Obama CTs in general:

    1. As we were all told when we were kids, 1 lie leads to another, then another, soon you are making new lies to cover for the old lies. Accepting, owning, and communicating the truth, may hurt a bit initially, but not nearly as much as living a lie does. And the truth is a heck of a lot less work … but also a lot less entertaining for others, so please do continue to fib away, ‘O’-denialists!

    2. Every time I pick up a new, lurid tale regarding Pres. O., like this bit about Mars, I like to try to fit it into the whole OCT corpus opus, as if they were all true … like some insane, hyper random biographical wannabe sci-fi / thriller novel. It already puts Forrest Gump to shame!

  132. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 11:49 am #

    J. Potter: The Soviet Encyclopedia Publishing House in Moscow? The works are a hoot! Straight out of 1984. If anyone is unfamiliar with the Soviet Encyclopedia and its history, I urge you to Google it and have a blast! Literally right out of 1984, rewriting references works at the whim of the party. Becoming more and more of a joke as the years rolled by. What a depressing place to work that must have been!

    Hopefully your library had other philosophy references on hand! I wonder where/why they had one from SE in their collections.

    “Objective and balanced”. Hmmm, that sounds familiar … hehe.

    I thought they just rebranded it to conservapedia for the gullible fright wing idiots.

  133. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 12:53 pm #

    Thought I should check in on this thread this morning. Given the damage Obama has done to the economy, I don’t think it makes sense to waste time discussing misha’s or lupin’s or scientist’s defense of socialism or Karl Marx. It would be pretty clear to objective observers that socialism has always lead to economic failure, unhappiness and oppression. As a political scientist, I recommend Hayek’s Road to Serfdom as a great introduction to why government control of the economy will always lead to poverty and oppression. As an ex-Marxist, ex-socialist myself, I understand where you are coming from. If I really thought socialism improved folk’s opportunities and financial success, then I’d still be a socialist myself.

    I’m also an ex-Democrat, in large measure, because of the way I was treated by affirmative action programs. I think there are a lot of white men and women like myself who were surprised at how they were treated in the job market by Democrat party elites. Given my experience, I would have to be insane to vote for a party that is so aggressively hostile to my career interests. Since I was recognized as one of the best scholars of my generation, it strikes me as implausible that I was not the victim of racial discrimination at the hands of liberal elites. This includes the moments in my life prior to working at Williams College and the moments in my life after working at Williams College. I think the hostility of Williams College to young whites is clearly evident in its current hiring practices which are obviously biased in favor of hiring blacks.

    (When I was honored by the APSA only four awards every year went out to the 500 plus new Ph.D.s in the field. It was the equivalent of earning a Gold medal in the Olympics. LIke an Olympic champion, I still benefit from this remarkable achievement and I get business from new graduate students seeking my advice on how to earn their Ph.D.)

    I’m grateful that a liberal author, David Remnick, verified my take on young Obama and his friends as Marxist socialists. In the book, Remnick reports the Democrat Socialist Alliance hung a large banner featuring Karl Marx…I don’t know what more proof you need of their affection for Marxism. I can report, from my face-to-face experience that Boss, Chandoo and Obama were all Marxists. I think liberals are being delusional if they cannot connect the dots and see that I’m telling the truth about young Obama’s extremist ideology.

    Finally, I have never argued that I believe Obama today is a Marxist socialist simply on the basis of meeting him and arguing with him 30 years ago. At the time when I met young Obama, however, I considered myself to be a Marxist, a socialist, and an enemy of the American government. I did not take my role as a revolutionary lightly. Neither did young Obama. I quit being a Marxist socialist when I realized this theory was not an adequate explanation of social change or a very good recipe for creating a better future. For more detailed information on Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers I recommend a book by liberal author Christopher Andersen, Barack and Michelle, which verifies the role Bill Ayers played in drafting Dreams From My Father.

  134. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 12:55 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: If you would like more information on the folks behind Fogbow and the lies I caught them telling about me, please see my blog at http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2011/12/dr-drew-crushing-fogbowers-and.html The leader of the Fogbow website is Bill Byran. Bryan is a crook who is no longer allowed to practice law in California because of his criminal behavior. http://www.wnd.com/2011/06/311093/I wouldn’t take the Fogbowers too seriously since they don’t hold up well to sunlight and transparency. Bob Ross, by the way, is the reason I’m no longer posting at Fogbow. I humiliated him repeatedly for the way he expressed doubts about David Garrow interviewing me for his book last month. Apparently, in Bob’s wacky world, a photograph is not enough evidence to convince him I was interviewed by Garrow. I guess Bob thinks liberal writers and people like me just naturally hang out together for the fun of it. What a joke! The folks at Fogbow finally pulled the plug when I won the debate and demonstrated Bob’s utter silliness.

    Funny no embarrrassment here. The only thing you showed is that you took a picture with Garrow. I notice there was transcript of the “interview” let alone any video of it. There was no actual interview posted anywhere. I have a picture of me with Lewis Black the comedian by that very same logic I guess we both interviewed each other.

  135. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 12:56 pm #

    Correction: I notice there was no transcript of the “interview” let alone any video of it. There was no actual interview posted anywhere. I have a picture of me with Lewis Black the comedian by that very same logic I guess we both interviewed each other. So Drew claims he was interviewed but the interview seems to be nowhere to be found.

  136. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 12:58 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Daniel:Bob Ross is a freak…even by Fogbow standards. He seriously said that having photographic evidence wasn’t proof that I was “interviewed” by Garrow. It was an absolutely silly thing to assert and displayed a profound lack of common sense. For a great look at why Obama’s ideology is a threat to American values, prosperity and our U.S. Constitution, I recommend you check out Michael Savage’s book, Trickle-Up Poverty. For an eye-openning look at why FDR’s policies made the Great Depression worse and longer than it should have been check out Burton Folsom’s book, New Deal or Raw Deal. I have no doubt that business owners and employers are frightened by Obama’s long-standing ties to Marxist socialist thought. I don’t see the economy getting much better until Obama is kicked out of office by the same swing voters who elected him in 2008.

    You’re the freak if said interview took place how come there is no copy of the interview? Oh that’s right you’re still “waiting for it” to be posted. No video, no transcript no interview. Taking a photograph with someone at an event of theirs doesn’t prove an interview

  137. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 1:00 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I don’t think it makes sense to waste time discussing misha’s or lupin’s or scientist’s defense of socialism or Karl Marx.

    I care more about their opinions than I ever will about yours.

    And it’s a good thing this isn’t your website either.

    Quick show of hands as to who agrees.

    Is Narcissistic Personality Disorder common among paranoid conspiracy bigots?

    Just curious.

  138. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 1:03 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Since I was recognized as one of the best scholars of my generation, it strikes me as implausible that I was not the victim of racial discrimination at the hands of liberal elites. This includes the moments in my life prior to working at Williams College and the moments in my life after working at Williams College. I think the hostility of Williams College to young whites is clearly evident in its current hiring practices which are obviously biased in favor of hiring blacks

    Gee, I have a real PhD in a real science and never found myself discriminated against in either academia or industry, despite being a white male. I haven’t spent the last 30 years talking about an award I won as a student. Instead, I got on with life and published a bunch of papers and earned patents and put drugs into cllinical trials.

    How many papers have you published in peer reviewed journals? Gotten any awards since grad school? You’re like the high school or college athlete who wasn’t quite good enough for the pros and is selling used cars somewhere and spending his evenings in bars regaling everyone about the big touchdown he scored 40 years ago. Very sad.

  139. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 1:21 pm #

    Scientist: Gee, I have a real PhD in a real science and never found myself discriminated against in either academia or industry, despite being a white male. I haven’t spent the last 30 years talking about an award I won as a student.Instead, I got on with life and published a bunch of papers and earned patents and put drugs into cllinical trials.

    How many papers have you published in peer reviewed journals? Gotten any awards since grad school?You’re like the high school or college athlete who wasn’t quite good enough for the pros and is selling used cars somewhere and spending his evenings in bars regaling everyone about the big touchdown he scored 40 years ago.Very sad.

    Al Bundy, Ph. D.

  140. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 1:31 pm #

    Bob Ross: You are really living up to your low reputation. As you can see, no one here or at Fogbow is rushing to your defense. I wrote a detailed article about what it was like to be interviewed by David Garrow and included a photo of him and me together outside my home in Laguna Niguel. I have e-mails from him introducing himself and setting up the interview. You are starting to sound like one of those guys who think President Bush faked 9-11.

  141. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 1:33 pm #

    Arthur: Speaking of influential posters . . . in college, I had a poster of the Swedish Bikini Team

    Majority Will: I had an enormous portrait of Jimi Hendrix hanging in my college dorm room.

    I had a poster of the sex positions of the Zodiac. I found a new one on eBay, and it hangs in my loft, to the consternation of my wife. “Please take it down. Our nieces saw it.”

    I also have a poster for Battleship Potemkin, and a poster of Leon Trotsky. One half of Trotsky’s face is an orthodox Jew, the other half of his face is a Red Army officer.

  142. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 1:39 pm #

    So hopefully “Dr” Drew has stopped dripping and moaning and blaming everyone else for his failed life.

  143. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 1:42 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I wrote a detailed article about what it was like to be interviewed by David Garrow and included a photo of him and me together outside my home in Laguna Niguel.

    All that, yet you couldn’t publish a couple of articles in your chosen field so you could have kept your job at Williams. Sad.

  144. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 1:48 pm #

    - Scientist

    Please… I saw racial discimination take place at Williams College against better qualified white scholars with my own eyes. I was in on those hiring decisions. I was shocked. The subsequent history of that department, where 50% of the new hires are black, confirms that nothing has changed regarding the anti-white bias of the Williams College political science department. in my field, only 10% of the Ph.Ds. go to non-whites.

  145. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 1:55 pm #

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): You’re the freak if said interview took place how come there is no copy of the interview?Oh that’s right you’re still “waiting for it” to be posted.No video, no transcript no interview.Taking a photograph with someone at an event of theirs doesn’t prove an interview

    A pompous, delusional troll should be measured in Taitz units (Tz).

  146. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 1:55 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Bob Ross: You are really living up to your low reputation. As you can see, no one here or at Fogbow is rushing to your defense. I wrote a detailed article about what it was like to be interviewed by David Garrow and included a photo of him and me together outside my home in Laguna Niguel. I have e-mails from him introducing himself and setting up the interview. You are starting to sound like one of those guys who think President Bush faked 9-11.

    Funny considering several have already but in the midst of you inflating your own blow up doll ego you missed that no one backs you up. You never posted them on your site once again where’s the interview why has it not been posted? I saw the photo you put up it does not show a house

  147. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 1:57 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – ScientistPlease… I saw racial discimination take place at Williams College against better qualified white scholars with my own eyes. I was in on those hiring decisions. I was shocked. The subsequent history of that department, where 50% of the new hires are black, confirms that nothing has changed regarding the anti-white bias of the Williams College political science department. in my field, only 10% of the Ph.Ds. go to non-whites.

    The discrimination you saw is that Williams discriminated against pompous fools who couldn’t even publish on a regular basis. Why is it you couldn’t even find an equal level job after Williams are you saying Williams somehow blacklisted you. You sound like nothing more than a person with sour grapes.

  148. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 1:57 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: 50% of the new hires are black

    That means 50% are white. You weren’t good enough to be one of them. Your task was to be so excellent that you could overcome discrimination just as minoriities did over many decades.

  149. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 2:00 pm #

    Bob Ross:

    I think you are getting into the area where it doesn’t make much sense for me to embarrass you any more. No one here is supporting your suggestion that I was never really interviewed by David Garrow. I’m starting to think that you are mentally ill.

  150. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 2:09 pm #

    - Scientist

    Don’t be silly. By national standards, my work was in the top 1% of my generation. It ended up being published almost word for word as I wrote it with only minor changes. You can’t get more excellent than that.

    It was more fun for me to move on and become a successful businessman with my own company. As I recall, a Williams College assistant professor was earning about $30,000 a year in 1989. This wasn’t enough to even buy a house out there. I made that much in one month last year.

    The whole thought of spending the rest of my life in a field where I was held back because I was Armenian-American instead of African-American had no attraction for me.

    Young white boys and girls have good reason to be angry at President Obama and at everyone else who is discriminating against them. Thankfully, the way I was treated by affirmative action is now illegal in CA. It should be illegal everywhere.

  151. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:10 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I’m grateful that a liberal author, David Remnick, verified my take on young Obama and his friends as Marxist socialists.

    Still misrepresenting Remnick I notice

    RemnickChandoo and Hamid, among others, helped “ignite” Obama politically. “In college, Hasan was a socialist, a Marxist, which is funny since he is from a wealthy family,” Mifflin said. “But he was socialist in the way we were back then—an idealist who believed in economic equality, that’s all. I am not sure how he defined it then, but he really studied it. Barack learned a lot from him, especially the notions of fairness and equality that you see in him today.” Chandoo, for his part, readily admits to his youthful radicalism, but says that Obama was never the least bit doctrinaire: “The only thing doctrinaire about him was his austerity!”

    To slap an ideological tag on Chandoo and Hamid, let alone Obama, is not only unfair; it also credits them with thinking far more programmatically than they did. “I would say we were idealistic and well-read in terms of understanding all the ideologies,” Hamid said. “I remember going home to Pakistan and sitting across from my mother in the summer waxing eloquent about the benefits of socialism. She said, ‘Wahid, this is all well and good, but I think you will grow up.’ I guess that’s what happened. We weren’t Marxists. We were idealistic and believed in the betterment of the lot of the masses and not just the few. If you describe that as socialist, then maybe we did have some socialist thoughts at the time.

  152. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 2:11 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    Bob Ross:

    I think you are getting into the area where it doesn’t make much sense for me to embarrass you any more.No one here is supporting your suggestion that I was never really interviewed by David Garrow.I’m starting to think that you are mentally ill.

    You’re a strange, little man.

    You’ve done nothing but embarrass yourself on a privately owned blog as far as I can see.

    Bob’s credibility is solid here. Yours? Pretty close to non-existent.

    “I’m starting to think that you are mentally ill.”

    Are you projecting?

  153. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:12 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: By national standards, my work was in the top 1% of my generation.

    A promising thesis but failure to show much evidence worthy to be allowed to continue on a tenure track position.

    As you explained so nicely

    DrewThe head of the political science department told me that I was not allowed to advance along the tenure track because of the poor quality of my scholarship.

    Let the facts speak for themselves but it is clear by now that despite a promising start, you have shown little to support your claims.

  154. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:14 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: It was more fun for me to move on and become a successful businessman with my own company.

    It’s fine to rationalize this after the fact but we can all see from your resume how you struggled to gain an academic foothold and failed. You yourself admitted to your struggles, so to claim it was ‘more fun to move on’ somehow fails to impress…

  155. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:14 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: The way I was harmed by affirmative action later on in California is now illegal.

    Again, no evidence is provided to support any claims of harm by affirmative action.

    Why is that Drew?

  156. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 2:19 pm #

    - nbc

    You are not dealing with the fact that Remnick reported that the members of the Democrat Socialist Alliance, led by my ex-girlfriend – Caroline Boss, hung a large sign in the Oxy Quad featuring Karl Marx. This looks like the behavior of a programmatic, doctrinaire group to me. I was a Marxist socialist myself when I participated in the activities of the Democrat Socialist Alliance in 1979. I really think you are living in an immature fantasy world if you think Remnick is not confirming my take on young Obama’s extremist ideology and the views of his Karl Marx supporting friends.

  157. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 2:20 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Bob Ross:I think you are getting into the area where it doesn’t make much sense for me to embarrass you any more. No one here is supporting your suggestion that I was never really interviewed by David Garrow. I’m starting to think that you are mentally ill.

    No one here is supporting your suggestion that you were interviewed. If the interview existed you should have no problems digging up the transcripts or video

  158. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 2:27 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Don’t be silly. By national standards, my work was in the top 1% of my generation. It ended up being published almost word for word as I wrote it with only minor changes. You can’t get more excellent than that.

    Excellence is lifetime. You wrote a good thesis. In some committee’s opinion, one of the best of that particular year. Then after that you did zip. That does NOT make you one of the best scholars of your generation. That title is reserved for those who have a continuous record of achievement in the years following. It’s like comparing a one-hit wonder to The Beatles. You don’t impress me. Not even a little bit.

  159. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 2:28 pm #

    Bob Ross:

    Trust me. You don’t understand what you are talking about. David Garrow is writing a book. It’s not the sort of thing where he interviews you and next day it is on YouTube. :-) That’s pretty funny if that’s what you think was supposed to happen. You are not the sharpest tool in the Fogbow shed, are you? If you had more experience with academic history books, then you would better understand what I mean when I wrote I was “interviewed” by him.

  160. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 2:33 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Bob Ross:Trust me. You don’t understand what you are talking about. David Garrow is writing a book. It’s not the sort of thing where he interviews you and next day it is on YouTube. That’s pretty funny if that’s what you think was supposed to happen. You are not the sharpest tool in the Fogbow shed, are you? If you had more experience with academic history books, then you would better understand what I mean when I wrote I was “interviewed” by him.

    Its been quite a while since the interview. You claimed originally it was about your supposed relationship with Obama and yet the interview still isn’t posted. Again you’re the one claiming to have been interviewed by an historian about a particular subject and yet can’t show the interview actually took place.

  161. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:33 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You are not dealing with the fact that Remnick reported that the members of the Democrat Socialist Alliance, led by my ex-girlfriend – Caroline Boss, hung a large sign in the Oxy Quad featuring Karl Marx.

    So that is your latest argument… As others have pointed out… Big deal… The direct responses from those who did know Obama contradict your claims about Obama
    Nuff said.

  162. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:35 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I really think you are living in an immature fantasy world if you think Remnick is not confirming my take on young Obama’s extremist ideology and the views of his Karl Marx supporting friends.

    That’s called projecting.. I understand that you have to bring down others as you cannot accept that a “girly chearleader” can defeat the Great Drew.

    Reality must be tough…

  163. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 2:36 pm #

    nbc: That’s called projecting.. I understand that you have to bring down others as you cannot accept that a “girly chearleader” can defeat the Great Drew.Reality must be tough…

    “But I scored 4 touchdowns in one game at Polk High”

  164. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:38 pm #

    ROTFL… Yes, Drew is living in a past where he fumbled an almost sure touchdown and never really recovered.

  165. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:39 pm #

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): No one here is supporting your suggestion that you were interviewed. If the interview existed you should have no problems digging up the transcripts or video

    Drew has some trouble backing up his claims, give him a decade or so…

  166. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 2:42 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I really think you are living in an immature fantasy world if you think Remnick is not confirming my take on young Obama’s extremist ideology and the views of his Karl Marx supporting friends.

    You’re living in an immature fantasy world if you think anyone does, or even should, care what Obama was interested in in his college years.

    Back in my college days I was a ultra-right wing conservative Evangelical Christian. I grew up. Obama did too. You should try it.

  167. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 2:45 pm #

    - nbc

    Remnick reports that Obama’s friends hung a huge picture of Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad. As far as I’m concerned this is powerful visual evidence that young Obama and his friends were Marxists, just as I have said since 2008. This banner was hung during the height of the Cold War while we were still in a deadly competition with the old USSR. Obama and his friends were basically supporting our Cold War enemy and you think this is no big deal. LMAO and RTFL. Remnick is a liberal Democrat. He is confirming my take on young Obama and his friends.

  168. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 2:49 pm #

    - Daniel

    On its own, my report on young Obama is of little importance. It becomes dramatically more significant, however, when it is fitted in with the total story of Obama’s ties to Marxist socialist thought. The best book on this topic is Stanley Kurtz’s book, Radical-In-Chief. Kurtz was originally on the fence regarding young Obama’s Marxist socialist ideology. He credits my account of young Obama’s ideological extremism for encouraging him to further investigate Obama ties to Marxist socialist leaders.

  169. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 2:52 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I don’t think it makes sense to waste time discussing misha’s or lupin’s or scientist’s defense of socialism or Karl Marx.

    Roosevelt got the idea for Social Security from von Bismarck. Bismarck got the idea from Karl Marx. Social Security and Medicare have kept millions of retirees out of poverty.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: It would be pretty clear to objective observers that socialism has always lead to economic failure, unhappiness and oppression.

    East Germany was nothing more than a continuation of the Nazi era. They dressed it up as communism, but in fact it was state capitalism.

    Philips of The Netherlands invented the compact cassette, and the Compact Disc. IKEA is the world leader of home furnishings. Volvo sets the world’s standards for crash integrity. My loudspeakers are Jamo, made in Denmark.

    Since my stroke, I am wholly dependent on the public sector.

    “socialism has always lead to economic failure, unhappiness and oppression” Name the countries. You want unhappiness and oppression? Try Cheney creating WMDs from whole cloth, and then invading so his cronies could get their paws on oil. So far, 4,484 US troops have died; 32,200 have been wounded, many missing eyes, limbs, 3rd degree burns, psychiatric cases; approximately 100K Iraqi civilians have died.

    The Christians of Iraq face annilahtion, and Bush and his evangelical amen chorus have not done one thing. Israel rescued the Jews of Yemen, Ethiopia, and Entebbe.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I’m also an ex-Democrat, in large measure, because of the way I was treated by affirmative action programs.

    I worked for an optometrist in NY. He wanted his son, who had a C average, to go to optometry school. He told me the exact amount of his contribution to the school’s endowment, and his son was admitted. The kid failed out his first semester. My half-brother did the same for a law school, and was admitted. You are opposed to affirmative action for the wealthy, correct?

  170. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:53 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: As far as I’m concerned this is powerful visual evidence that young Obama and his friends were Marxists, just as I have said since 2008.

    So you believe but Remnick’s quotes of Obama’s direct friends show otherwise…

    So what now… Again you are now left to make inferences based on poor data. Not the kind of approach I would consider scholarly.

  171. avatar
    red-diaper baby 1942 January 5, 2012 at 2:54 pm #

    John, to change the subject: did your wife ever get a job?
    I’ve certainly enjoyed this prolonged “conversation”, though it doesn’t seem to be going anywhere. In fact, these blogs seldom do; no-one is ever persuaded or changes their mind about anything. But I suppose they do serve as a way to blow off some steam, and they help to create a sense of community among those who think similarly .

  172. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 2:58 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    It would be pretty clear to objective observers that socialism has always lead to economic failure, unhappiness and oppression.

    I call your bluff. Make your case my “wanna be” political science scholar ;-)

    Now if you mean capitalism, then you have a case.

  173. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 3:03 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – nbcRemnick reports that Obama’s friends hung a huge picture of Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad. As far as I’m concerned this is powerful visual evidence that young Obama and his friends were Marxists, just as I have said since 2008. This banner was hung during the height of the Cold War while we were still in a deadly competition with the old USSR. Obama and his friends were basically supporting our Cold War enemy and you think this is no big deal. LMAO and RTFL. Remnick is a liberal Democrat. He is confirming my take on young Obama and his friends.

    How exactly does that show it? Hanging out a poster of someone somehow makes them true believers? Wow imagine all the teenage girls or teenagers that put up posters in their rooms or in college where John thinks somehow they believed everything the person in the poster believed. You’re ridiculous.

  174. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 3:03 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Obama’s ties to Marxist socialist thought.

    You were actively opposed to Nixon’s federal loan guarantee for Lockheed, correct? Nixon’s wage and price controls, correct? Same for Reagan’s approval for stiff tariffs on Japanese big bikes to help Harley, correct?

    You have written to your Representatives and Senators, opposing subsidies, correct? You have written to Michele Bachmann asking her to return the $250K of farm subsidies she took, correct? Bachmann tells the IRS she is a farmer, and tells everyone else she is a legislator. Tell me what you have done to stop this.

  175. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 3:06 pm #

    red-diaper baby 1942

    It was a funny story. We reached a point where it looked like she would never get a job at all so I worked with my business consultant to create a job for her within my grant writing company. I had everything set-up and she did it for about a week. Then she got a job outside the house. Two years of unemployment came to a sudden end within a week of her decision to quit looking for a job.

    This thread is getting dull. I posted a little at the NYT The Caucus after I read your comments here. The way I look at it we are fighting the 2012 campaign right here, right now. Oppostition researchers will be able to read these threads and decide what sort of information to feed the candidates. In my experience, people don’t admit that you’ve beat them or changed their minds. Instead, they give up posting or switch the subject.

  176. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 3:07 pm #

    red-diaper baby 1942: But I suppose they do serve as a way to blow off some steam, and they help to create a sense of community among those who think similarly .

    Just like the UN.

  177. avatar
    red-diaper baby 1942 January 5, 2012 at 3:07 pm #

    Let me add to me previous comment: as a lifetime academic myself (now happily retired, and with an excellent pension, since I live in a European social-democratic welfare state), I’m used to a style of debate that aims at genuine persuasion, in which the participants are interested in arriving at some form of at least provisional agreement on the interpretation of data, rather than merely repeating their own mantra and not listening to anyone else. That’s the biggest difference between scholarship and politics (or for that matter religion). Thanks be to god I’ve been able to spend my life in the academic world: we have our arguments and even our profound animosities, but at least we’re (by and large) disinterested in our pursuit of the truth. Perhaps, John, if you’d been able to spend your life in academia, you might understand that better.
    That, by the way, is why there can be no real dialogue between scientists and politicians on questions of the environment and climate change, or other issues involving scientific evidence; we have different ground rules of debate.
    By the way, I use “disinterested” in its original sense, now alas all but lost. It is NOT synonymous with “uninterested”.

  178. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 3:12 pm #

    - misha

    Tell me about your stroke.

    - nbc

    Tell me how you interpret the way Obama’s friends hung up a large sign, in a public area, of Karl Marx and what message they were trying to communicate about themselves with that outrageous behavior?

    How is Wahid Hamid’s comment that “We weren’t Marxists” somehow more convincing than the actual behavior of Obama’s friends when they promoted the ideas and image of Karl Marx at Occidental College?

    - bob ross

    If I hung a large poster of Karl Marx outside my home, then what message would I be sending my neighbors?

    Obama’s friends were pro-Karl Marx at a time when the USSR was occupying East Germany, Armenia, Georgia and other countries. They were pro-USSR when the “Evil Empire” was still at its most dangerous stage of development.

  179. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 3:17 pm #

    Scientist: who wasn’t quite good enough for the pros and is selling used cars somewhere

    Randall Terry sold used cars before founding Operation Rescue.

  180. avatar
    J. Potter January 5, 2012 at 3:25 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Tell me how you interpret the way Obama’s friends hung up a large sign,

    Sir, you are clearly, seriously, fixated on this poster idea! And making quite a leap in assuming that anyone displaying an image of Marx in the early 1980s was doing so in support of the USSR. Change the story to Lenin and you’ve got a better start.

    Was this the only image they were displaying? Was it a political rally? An educational event? An artistic display? How long was whatever it was on display? What was going on around this display? You’re making conclusions on a singular, undocumented, detail. Conclusions which, even if correct, are irrelevant. But, hey, good luck with that.

  181. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 3:32 pm #

    - misha

    I’m a grant writing consultant right now…not a car salesman. :-) I’ve brought in millions of dollars to help schools and charities in Southern California and around the nation. Tell me about your stroke? I’m most curious to learn whether or not you are a smoker and a drinker right now.

  182. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 3:36 pm #

    J. Potter

    The large Karl Marx banner was mentioned in David Remnick’s book, The Bridge. To me, it is further evidence that young Obama and his friends were Marxists. Obama, Chandoo and Boss were all active in the Democrat Socialist Alliance, the group that displayed the Karl Marx banner. I have always asserted that young Obama and his friends were Marxist socialists. Remnick provides compelling evidence that supports my argument. I think it is extremely important evidence because this banner appeared at the height of the Cold War. I have no doubt it may have given comfort to oppressors in the Soviet Union, China or Cuba.

  183. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 3:46 pm #

    J. Potter: Sir, you are clearly, seriously, fixated on this poster idea! And making quite a leap in assuming that anyone displaying an image of Marx in the early 1980s was doing so in support of the USSR. Change the story to Lenin and you’ve got a better start.

    Was this the only image they were displaying? Was it a political rally? An educational event? An artistic display? How long was whatever it was on display? What was going on around this display? You’re making conclusions on a singular, undocumented, detail. Conclusions which, even if correct, are irrelevant. But, hey, good luck with that.

    Maybe he has Groucho confused with Karl. Say the secret word? What is he hiding?

  184. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 3:48 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: misha
    Tell me about your stroke.

    Several years ago I had a brain aneurysm; I did not have any symptoms. I did not own a car, just my Honda bike. I put on my motorcycle jacket, walked out of my apartment, and shut the door. The aneurysm burst, and a neighbor found me on the floor in front of my door. They called the socialist fire department, and I woke up one month later in the hospital. Penndot revoked my license, and I have to be examined by their physician, and start all over: written test, road test, just like getting a license for the first time. I have not yet been retested. The socialist hospital I was in, is owned by the city. I am wholly dependent on the public sector.

    I tried working, and lasted half a day.

    My neurosurgeon told me the aneurysm I had was worse than a stroke; the blood vessel totally dissected, and I had to relearn to walk. It took 2 years for my brain to take over what was stored in the tissue that died. I have a service dog to hold on to, because I lost my balance and fell twice. She also is learning to use a K9 rescue telephone.

    I have made several written complaints to government agencies, because I was denied service, and my dog was refused entry. There isn’t any private charity who will do for me what government agencies have done.

    I am tired of Ron and Rand Paul’s blathering.

  185. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 3:51 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – mishaTell me about your stroke. – nbcTell me how you interpret the way Obama’s friends hung up a large sign, in a public area, of Karl Marx and what message they were trying to communicate about themselves with that outrageous behavior? How is Wahid Hamid’s comment that “We weren’t Marxists” somehow more convincing than the actual behavior of Obama’s friends when they promoted the ideas and image of Karl Marx at Occidental College? – bob rossIf I hung a large poster of Karl Marx outside my home, then what message would I be sending my neighbors? Obama’s friends were pro-Karl Marx at a time when the USSR was occupying East Germany, Armenia, Georgia and other countries. They were pro-USSR when the “Evil Empire” was still at its most dangerous stage of development.

    Maybe you’re doing it for an artistic reason? See that’s the problem you make an inference based on your total lack of information I would at least ask the person’s views or better yet ask why they hang it up instead of jumping to a conclusion.

  186. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 3:52 pm #

    - misha

    Again, I’m curious. Do you smoke and drink now?

  187. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 3:54 pm #

    - Bob Ross

    As I’ve said, I was dating the girl running the Democrat Socialist Alliance. :-) I know exactly why they flew a Karl Marx banner. They were out and out Marxists. According to Remnick, Boss and Chandoo were among young Obama’s closest friends. Both were Marxists. How is it plausible to you that young Obama was not a Marxist?

  188. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 3:57 pm #

    Well said! I completely agree.

    Lupin:
    In re “soc ialized medicine”:

    Over 1/3 of Americans are already part of a “soc ialized medicine” program where costs are much cheaper (Medicare: $6500 per person, VA: about $5000) than “private medicine” (about $8000):

    Medicare (2011) : 49 million
    Medicaid (2011) : 51.5 million
    Veterans Health Administration (2007) : 8 million
    Military Health Services – active and retired personnel (2011) : 9.5 million
    American Indian Health Services (2011) : 2.5 million
    Total: 120.1 million out of 312.9 million

    If you had proper media and proper politicians, the case could be made that it would be cheaper for both people and businesses to extend those programs, instead of going BOOGA BOOGA YURP on tv.

  189. avatar
    J. Potter January 5, 2012 at 3:57 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: The large Karl Marx banner was mentioned in David Remnick’s book,

    This is a detail mentioned in a book. I am floored. 1 book? Apparently in passing, as you have provided no add’l detail? And I thought you were saying you were excellently positioned to gain firsthand knowledge of young Obama’s true political leanings?

    I’m gonna hang up a pic of Marx. One outside the house. One at work. I’ll let you know what people say.

  190. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 4:00 pm #

    That sums it up pretty well.

    bovril:
    To summarize

    Drew, once upon a time, went to one of the collegs that the President (God that must stick in your craw Drew) went to

    Drew was not ACTUALLY there at the same time as the President

    Drew ACTUALLY only met the President for (at best) a handful of hours a couple of decades ago in a few social venues where he (Drew) was simply one of MANY other (in his case incosequential) people

    Drew never ACTUALLY talked to the President beyond a few vacuous social mutterings

    Drew never ACTUALLY attended classes, participated in educational, social, political or personal endeavours with either the President or colleagues or friends of the President

    Based upon the fleeting, random, nay Brownian motion social equivalent of a couple of hand shakes, Drew has somehow managed to build a massive wealth of knowledge about the President, his background, intellect, education, political thought processes, educational, social and political evolution.

    The entire set of this individuals posts lead one to the inevitable conclusions that he is a fabulist with at best a tenuous grasp of facts and a particularly bad case of passive-aggresive entitlement.

    I believe the children of today would state with utter disdain that Drew is a LSOS

  191. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 4:02 pm #

    LMAO! Good point!

    Majority Will: That sounds a lot like Bill Ayers. Oh, the irony.

    bovril: Drew ACTUALLY only met the President for (at best) a handful of hours a couple of decades ago in a few social venues where he (Drew) was simply one of MANY other (in his case incosequential) people
    Drew never ACTUALLY talked to the President beyond a few vacuous social mutterings
    Drew never ACTUALLY attended classes, participated in educational, social, political or personal endeavours with either the President or colleagues or friends of the President

  192. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:07 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: According to Remnick, Boss and Chandoo were among young Obama’s closest friends. Both were Marxists. How is it plausible to you that young Obama was not a Marxist?

    Given the feedback from those who knew him and given the fact that Obama has not since then shown any Marxist tendencies, I would say quite plausible.

  193. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 4:09 pm #

    So, you were one type of crazy ideological anti-American nut in your youth and all you’ve done is become a different type of crazy ideological anti-American nut in your older days…

    So what you’re telling us is that you’ve always been an unstable paranoid and angry alarmist pants wetter…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: At the time when I met young Obama, however, I considered myself to be a Marxist, a socialist, and an enemy of the American government. I did not take my role as a revolutionary lightly.

  194. avatar
    J. Potter January 5, 2012 at 4:09 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I know exactly why they flew a Karl Marx banner.

    Now, where was the banner again? Was it on mars? The Marxists were the first Marxists to go Marxing around on Mars? With Mighty Mighty Marxin’ Obama, that is?

    So NASA is Marxist, too?

  195. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 4:09 pm #

    - g

    I urge you to read my article in American Thinker, “Meeting Young Obama.” This way you will be able to judge the accuracy of my evaluation of young Obama’s radical ideology.

  196. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 4:13 pm #

    - g

    Please. I’m a business owner, a published author, and an alternate on the Orange County Republican Central Committee. I think it should be clear to any normal person that I have abandoned the radical extremism of my youth and adopted more mainstream ideological views. Obama, however, appoints people like Anita Dunn and Van Jones to high level White House jobs. I’m terrified that Obama doesn’t not understand or respect our capitalist economic system.

  197. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 4:14 pm #

    * Raises hand in agreement with Majority Will*

    Majority Will:

    I care more about their opinions than I ever will about yours.

    And it’s a good thing this isn’t your website either.

    Quick show of hands as to who agrees.

    Sure seems that way…

    My hypothesis – paranoia stems from a heightened irrational sense of fear and thus is a severe form of insecurity. Therefore it makes sense that those with such high levels of insecurity would also be susceptible to Narcissistic Personality Disorder – a common defense that manifests in extremely insecure people.

    Majority Will:
    Is Narcissistic Personality Disorder common among paranoid conspiracy bigots?

    Just curious.

  198. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 4:16 pm #

    - nbc

    You are starting to be a joke. Remnick reports that Obama’s friends hung a picture of Karl Marx in the quad during the middle of the Cold War and you still don’t believe that Obama and his friends were Marxists? What’s wrong with you? Read Stanley Kurtz’s book, Radical-In-Chief and you’ll see even more details regarding Obama’s ties to this dangerous extremist ideology.

  199. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:17 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You are starting to be a joke. Remnick reports that Obama’s friends hung a picture of Karl Marx in the quad during the middle of the Cold War and you still don’t believe that Obama and his friends were Marxists?

    So that is your evidence that Obama was a Marxist even though his closest friends consider this ridiculous?

    I see…

  200. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 4:18 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Remnick reports that Obama’s friends hung a huge picture of Karl Marx in the Oxy Quad. As far as I’m concerned this is powerful visual evidence that young Obama and his friends were Marxists, just as I have said since 2008.

    I know that this might be beyond your ability to comprehend, but it MIGHT have been an ironic statement. Andy Warhol painted Mao and he wasn’t a Maoist. I take your fixation on Obama’s distant past as part of your personality disorder in which you expect that the fact that you published a good thesis means that the world should bow down to you for the rest of your life.

    But on a more general note, here’s the issue you face. Whether you like it or not, Obama is the incumbent President and incumbent Presidents stand or fall on their record in office and their program for the next 4 years, not on college pranks or who their roommates were. When some on the Left brought up Bush’s National Guard records in 2004, I took that as a sign that he would be re-elected. When your opponents have to go back 30 years, that says they are not very focused on the here and now.

    FWIW, here is my perspective on the 2012 election. The Republican Congress has very kindly (for Obama) laid down a marker in the Ryan plan, which says, “Here is a voucher for Medicare. If it isn’t enough to buy you a decent plan, tough.” Obama has said he will veto such a plan and he is credible on that count. The Republican candidates jumped to support it. The Republicans have said “Not a penny in revenues from the richest, come wars, hurricanes, or plague.” Obama has said, let’s have a balanced plan. I think Obama’s vision is more appealling, no matter what he spent his college years doing.

  201. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 4:19 pm #

    Doc C:

    Have you considered adding American Thinker to The Ugly list in the footer section of your site’s pages?

  202. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 4:19 pm #

    - g

    Remnick confirms the radicalism of young Obama and his friends. Remnick is a liberal author, hardly a conspiracy theorist. I have an award-winning Ph.D. in political science and have taught political economy at some of the finest schools iin the nation. I think you’ll find that it is very difficult to protect Obama from the charge that he was a Marxist socialist while he was a sophomore at Occidental College. The evidence in overwhelming…

  203. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:19 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Obama, however, appoints people like Anita Dunn and Van Jones to high level White House jobs. I’m terrified that Obama doesn’t not understand or respect our capitalist economic system.

    You may be terrified but there is no doubt that President Obama very well understand our (flawed) capitalist economic system and its impacts on the poor and middle class.

    To conclude from this that somehow President Obama is a Marxist is not of much scholarly value as it is speculative and lacks, once again, substantive data.

  204. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 4:19 pm #

    LOL! I like it!

    So, what do you propose as the Tz-score range for pompous delusional trolls and where would you place this one on that scale..?.

    Come on MW, we need a baseline in order to start using the Tz metric! :)

    Majority Will: A pompous, delusional troll should be measured in Taitz units (Tz).

  205. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:20 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I urge you to read my article in American Thinker, “Meeting Young Obama.” This way you will be able to judge the accuracy of my evaluation of young Obama’s radical ideology.

    It appears to be at odds with what his closest friend claim. So here we have your opinion based on a fleeting meeting that happened 30 years ago versus those who knew him.

    Ouch…

  206. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:22 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Remnick confirms the radicalism of young Obama and his friends. Remnick is a liberal author, hardly a conspiracy theorist.

    Remnick does nothing of the kind

    Chandoo and Hamid, among others, helped “ignite” Obama politically. “In college, Hasan was a socialist, a Marxist, which is funny since he is from a wealthy family,” Mifflin said. “But he was socialist in the way we were back then—an idealist who believed in economic equality, that’s all. I am not sure how he defined it then, but he really studied it. Barack learned a lot from him, especially the notions of fairness and equality that you see in him today.” Chandoo, for his part, readily admits to his youthful radicalism, but says that Obama was never the least bit doctrinaire: “The only thing doctrinaire about him was his austerity!”

    To slap an ideological tag on Chandoo and Hamid, let alone Obama, is not only unfair; it also credits them with thinking far more programmatically than they did. “I would say we were idealistic and well-read in terms of understanding all the ideologies,” Hamid said. “I remember going home to Pakistan and sitting across from my mother in the summer waxing eloquent about the benefits of socialism. She said, ‘Wahid, this is all well and good, but I think you will grow up.’ I guess that’s what happened. We weren’t Marxists. We were idealistic and believed in the betterment of the lot of the masses and not just the few. If you describe that as socialist, then maybe we did have some socialist thoughts at the time.

    Source: Remnick, David (2010-04-06). The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama (p. 104). Knopf. Kindle Edition.

    All he has done is stated that there was a Marx banner over the Quad… Sorry my friend, by any scholarly standard that does not measure up.

  207. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 4:23 pm #

    Yeah, the delusional troll really lives in a “Charlie Sheen winning” world in his own head, doesn’t he?

    It is quite clear from reading the breadth of the forum that he’s got it completely backwards.

    In agreement with John Drew, king of pompous insecurity = John Drew

    In agreement with Bob Ross, NBC & Fogbow’s conclusions = EVERYONE ELSE.

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Funny considering several have already but in the midst of you inflating your own blow up doll ego you missed that no one backs you up. You never posted them on your site once again where’s the interview why has it not been posted? I saw the photo you put up it does not show a house

  208. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 4:26 pm #

    - scientist

    I think the issue is more serious than that. Obama lied about his ties to radical extremists like Bill Ayers in 2008 and there was no literature for voters to read to check out the facts. Today, swing voters will be able to Google this thread and read that young Obama’s friends hung a banner promoting the ideas of Karl Marx in David Remnick’s book, The Bridge.

    These swing voters will be able to read my face-to-face description of young Obama’s extremist ideology.

    Swing voters will be able to say that Obama fooled them in 2008, but he cannot fool them in 2012. Swing voters understand that they will be harmed by affirmative action and screwed over by high unemployment if Obama gets another four years. Obama is no friend to swing voters. He holds to a radical extremist perspective that most of them believe is unAmerican.

  209. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 4:26 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Tell me about your stroke? I’m most curious to learn whether or not you are a smoker and a drinker right now.

    I never smoked, never used anything illicit, my blood pressure was normal, and alcohol was once a year at a Christmas party. Alcohol is boring. I did my homework in the backroom of my grandfather’s liquor store, while he and my mother waited on customers. He got into the liquor trade by accident. During the Great Depression, no one needed another clergyman, so my grandfather gave up his rabbinic studies, built a still in his basement, and then opened a store when the 18th Amendment was repealed on December 5, 1933.

    I think it’s heredity. My mother told me her father had 3 major strokes before I was born, and he fully recovered. He had zero deficiencies. I just have some balance problems, and I lost my photographic memory. My grandfather had a photographic memory, as did his son, my maternal uncle.

  210. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 4:28 pm #

    G:
    LOL!I like it!

    So, what do you propose as the Tz-score range for pompous delusional trolls and where would you place this one on that scale..?.

    Come on MW, we need a baseline in order to start using the Tz metric!

    Quantifying nutballs should be based on how many times they make the same mistakes but keep expecting different results?

    I shudder to think that the current crop of delusional birther trolls might aspire to achieve a GigaTaitz (GTz) like some sort of perverse Moore’s law in action.

  211. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 4:34 pm #

    - nbc

    I think it is clear that I was a very close friend of at least one of young Obama’s closest friends. :-) It’s not like I was a stranger visiting with other strangers when I met young Obama for the first time. I knew Chandoo from the previous anti-apartheid movement. My ex-girlfriend was young Obama’s classmate. Obama showed his true colors to me and I provided him with the latest in Marxist socialist thought. My take on young Obama has been deemed credible by at least four nationlly known authors and their publishers. Obama’s friends hung a banner promoting Karl Marx, according to Remnick – a liberal author. How, in your view, is this behavior consistent with the idea that they were not Marxists? I’ve already exposed you as a faux scholar for your silly misunderstanding of the difference between a population and a sample. You will learn the difference during your first year of college statistics.

  212. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 4:37 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Obama lied about his ties to radical extremists like Bill Ayers in 2008

    No he didn’t. You are the liar. They served on a charitable board together. You know, charity, doing things for OTHERS (a concept you ought to check out). Besides, Ayers has done some very positive things to make up for his past errors. You have not.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Today, swing voters will be able to Google this thread and read that young Obama’s friends hung a banner promoting the ideas of Karl Marx in David Remnick’s book, The Bridge.

    Did Obama hang it? In fact, it is not clear EXACTLY who hung it is it? besides, swing voters don’t Google conspiracy sites and they don’t listen to failures like you. Especially when they know that you are a partisan Republlcan hack.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: These swing voters will be able to read my face-to-face description of young Obama’s extremist ideology.

    You met him briefly twice at parties.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Swing voters understand that they will be harmed by affirmative action and screwed over by high unemployment if Obama gets another four years.

    Unemployment is headed down. You should keep up with the news. Go to a mall. tell me if you can find parking. I can’t. The economy is gaining strength. Smart people are positioning themseleves accordingly. I would give you investment advice, but not for free.

  213. avatar
    Sef January 5, 2012 at 4:38 pm #

    Majority Will: Quantifying nutballs should be based on how many times they make the same mistakes but keep expecting different results?

    I shudder to think that the current crop of delusionalbirther trolls might aspire to achieve a GigaTaitz (GTz) like some sort of perverse Moore’s law in action.

    I think we can add a corollary to this measurement, akin to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The product of a birther lawyers “Taitziness” and their probability of success in a court is less than or equal to 3.14159265

  214. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:43 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Obama showed his true colors to me and I provided him with the latest in Marxist socialist thought.

    So the story goes, but that is far from the claim that Obama was or is a Marxist, a position which is contradicted by his closest friends. So who should we believe? Someone who met President Obama some 30 years ago fleetingly, or those who knew him well?

    The answer my friends is obvious. That you now are pointing to ‘scholarly research’ when referring to non peer reviewed books full of speculation does not give you any more credibility my friend. Scholars do not just publish books, the publish in peer reviewed journals. If only you had realized this during your time at Williams.

  215. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 4:44 pm #

    Oh how delusional! What an imaginary sense of pretend importance you have!

    The internet is cluttered with blogs and commentary, full of anonymous wannabe’s and inconsequential a-holes with dumb opinions.

    If you think any of this is “fighting the 2012″ campaign or has anything to do with it whatsoever, you’re just too sad for words.

    Any good opposition researcher will be focusing his time on digging into real info on the candidates records and pasts from real sources and video records.

    If they are wasting their time trolling the internet for the equivalent of chain-email old wives tales by disgruntled whiners and gullible ignoramuses, then they are wasting their time.

    That’s the truly pathetic joke about you folks – you waste all this time trolling with clear intent to make up mud you think you can sling and think you’re participating in some “clever” propoganda war, caring only to sow doubt and “persuade” the gullible.

    It is a foolish effort and lost cause. The only one’s susceptible to such obvious rot are those that are already factored in as not planning to vote a certain way. Anyone with a brain or not blinded by ideology is going to see through your made up smears and not only not be convinced, but turned off by the blatent lies and kooky tales. Your silly propaganda games only serve to preach to the converted and by duping the dupes even more, all you do is serve to untether them further from reality and make them less aware of what is going in the real world around them.

    So go for it! Waste your time. All you serve to do is undermine your own goals by destroying any credibility you may have had by spouting nonsense and therefore immunizing any broader public beyond your little already-converted-choir towards simply ignoring and discounting you entirely. And your gullible group living in their little self-reinforced bubble of myths only becomes even more blind to any real-world dynamics in play and therefore less prepared and less aware of where their chances actually stand in any election.

    So great, keep them distracted and focused on bogeyman fairy tales and susceptible to clicking the payPal buttons of all the manipulative grifters out there preying on their fears. That just leaves them less money and time to devote to any real-world serious efforts that would have any chance of a true impact or change in improving their candidates fortunes or harming the fortunes of their opposition.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: The way I look at it we are fighting the 2012 campaign right here, right now. Oppostition researchers will be able to read these threads and decide what sort of information to feed the candidates. In my experience, people don’t admit that you’ve beat them or changed their minds. Instead, they give up posting or switch the subject.

  216. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:45 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I think the issue is more serious than that. Obama lied about his ties to radical extremists like Bill Ayers in 2008

    Again a speculative and unsubstantiated claim from Drew. We have grown used to this unscholarly approach by now, but it does not hurt to continue to point out how he continues to make assertions but fails to support them with anything substantive.

  217. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 4:45 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: He holds to a radical extremist perspective

    Examples, please. If he did not rescue GM, there would have been 1M unemployed within one month.

    So let’s hear examples about his radical, extremist perspective.

    Here’s one from Huckabee: “I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution,” Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. “But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that’s what we need to do — to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards…”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/15/huckabee-amend-constituti_n_81600.html

    Then there’s John Anderson: Three times (in 1961, 1963, and 1965), Anderson introduced a constitutional amendment to attempt to “recognize the law and authority of Jesus Christ” over the United States.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Anderson

  218. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 4:45 pm #

    - scientist

    The liberal author, Christopher Andersen, revealed that Obama turned to Bill Ayers for help in drafting Dreams From My Father. There is no doubt, among reasonable observers, that Obama lied about his ties to Bill Ayers. Ayers is our nation’s number one unrepentant terrorist.

    Remnick provides vivid evidence that young Obama’s closest friends were Marxists. I can Twitter this blog out to swing voters to bring this information to their attention. I have almost 60K Twitter followers and was paid to live-blog the Republican presidential debated by Sulia. I can easily bypass the mainstream media given the new technology.

    I was dating the leader of the Democrat Socialist Alliance when I met young Obama at her home in Palo Alto. I was hardly some disinterested stranger. I was intimately involved with one of Obama’s closest friends and political allies while he was at Occidental College.

    My wife was unemployed for over two years thanks to the failed policies of the Obama administration. I don’t think we will ever forget what it was like for her to look for work, go on interviews, and face continual rejection in this terrible labor market.

  219. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:47 pm #

    G: Any good opposition researcher will be focusing his time on digging into real info on the candidates records and pasts from real sources and video records.

    Exactly but remember, Drew never really may have come to understood this fully during his short stint at Williams. Perhaps things would have been different if someone would have pointed out that scholars publish and publish in peer reviewed journals and that a lack of such a publication record is sufficient a reason to be denied to proceed towards tenure as the head of the Polisci Department at Williams tried to explain to Drew.

  220. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:48 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: The liberal author, Christopher Andersen, revealed that Obama turned to Bill Ayers for help in drafting Dreams From My Father.

    Another unsubstantiated claim this time by Andersen.

    Fascinating how a scientific analysis of the work does not even support such a conclusion…

  221. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 4:50 pm #

    Sef: I think we can add a corollary to this measurement, akin to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The product of a birther lawyers “Taitziness” and their probability of success in a court is less than or equal to3.14159265

    Excellent idea. The political decedent follows an irrational set that will never FEEEEE-neeeeesh.

  222. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:50 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: My wife was unemployed for over two years thanks to the failed policies of the Obama administration.

    Is she also blaming others for her misfortune? How unfortunate…

  223. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 4:51 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I have almost 60K Twitter followers and was paid to live-blog the Republican presidential debated by Sulia. I can easily bypass the mainstream media given the new technology.

    I understand that you feel very important, so good luck in your revenge. But lets not confuse your number of twitter followers with accuracy of your claims or the quality of your ‘scholarship’.

  224. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 4:53 pm #

    - g

    I think your are underestimating the power of Twitter and blog sites to spread the news about young Obama’s extremist ideology. The only reason my take on young Obama has appeared in four books is that it came to public attention through YouTube, Twitter, and alternative media sites like NewsMax.

    Ultimately, the story only took hold because of its credibility. Nevertheless, it would have been much easier to ignore if I didn’t have the help of modern communications tools. When I tried to get my story out in 2008, the media paid no attention to it. That will be much more difficult in 2012.

    The reason nbc is attacking me with nonsense is to undermine that credibility and to make my comments harder to digest. Personally, I think that long threads raise an article’s visibility in Google searches.

  225. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 4:55 pm #

    I’m with you on this. What an utterly peculiar and irrelevant nit on inconsequence for someone to obsess over and even more sadly, to think it matters or anyone cares squat about it at all!

    Somethings are just so unbelievably petty and stupid on their face, that it barely merits response to point that out. Yet this pathetic joker keeps ranting on about it as if anyone cares…

    …sorry crazy John, but we don’t. Hate to tell you, but you just come across like some vagrant raving lunatic here and you only have your own weird peculiar obsessive hang-ups to blame for that. Right now, you seem less sane or believable than some wild-eyed drugged out bum on a street corner raving about alien anal probes and the end of the world…

    HINT – lack of response to crazies does not mean other agree with the crazy person. It means that they are so crazy that most would rather ignore them altogether and let them mutter to themselves in a corner… Here and there, the rest of the folks milling about will strike up a conversation with each other and be able to point and joke about the crazy perosn in the corner…but that too just means one thing – everyone else agrees that person is crazy and doesn’t believe or care about the nonsense he rambles on about…

    J. Potter: Sir, you are clearly, seriously, fixated on this poster idea! And making quite a leap in assuming that anyone displaying an image of Marx in the early 1980s was doing so in support of the USSR. Change the story to Lenin and you’ve got a better start.

    Was this the only image they were displaying? Was it a political rally? An educational event? An artistic display? How long was whatever it was on display? What was going on around this display? You’re making conclusions on a singular, undocumented, detail. Conclusions which, even if correct, are irrelevant. But, hey, good luck with that.

  226. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 4:58 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I’m terrified

    and that is the root of your problem…

  227. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 5:01 pm #

    Drew- I don’t care what some “liberal author” says. I don’t believe something just because someone writes it in a book. Same with Remnick. He wasn’t there.. You claim you were yet you can’t cite a single actual statement by Obama. Did you actuually speak with him? If so what did he say exactly?

    As for your wife, what field is she in? Here are the facts. When Obama took office, jobs were being lost at around 800,000/month nd had been since Lehman went bust.. Once the stimulus passed and the money started flowing (by June009) the job losses ceased and the numbers turned positive. Here is a graph http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/non-farm-payrolls
    Swing voters will be able to Google that too, my friend.

    Besides, according to you, you are brilliant and make huge sums of money. Are you telling me your family can’t live comfortably on your income?

  228. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 5:01 pm #

    - nbc

    I’m pretty sure that the number of folks following me on Twitter is a solid measure of my credibility and the impact of my testimony on young Obama. P.J. Foggy – the disbarred lawyer – who runs Fogbow only has 59 followers. Mimi – @_ccm – only has 1,414 followers. I would say in the marketplace of ideas, the folks at Fogbow are not gaining much influence compared to folks like me.

  229. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 5:04 pm #

    Christopher Andersen on CNN

    Andersen on Ayers

    “Neither one of them denied it. ”

    I putting up the accurate picture that they knew eachother, that hehelped a little bit, gave his opinion, he did not wrote his Obama book.

    As to Andersen being liberal, I have not seen any evidence one way or the other so far.

    Andersen claims that there were two people who confirmed this but they remain unnamed…

    Fascinating how quick some people are to jump to conclusion based on such flimsy evidence…

  230. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 5:05 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Obama’s radical ideology

    Romney believes American Indians are the lost tribe of Israel. That is radical ideology.

  231. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 5:06 pm #

    OK-So let’s ask any swing voters here what’s more important: whether you can get health care when you’re old and sick or who Obama’s friends might have been in college and what they did in their free time?

  232. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 5:06 pm #

    - scientist

    Please. I used to teach political economy at some of our nation’s finest schools. The economy started going south in 2007 after Democrats gained total control of Congress. It is now getting better because Republicans have regained partial control of Congress. Obama predicted that the stimulus package would keep unemployment under 8%. Instead, it never went below 8%.

  233. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 5:07 pm #

    Sorry, I won’t waste my time.

    Unfortunately for you, by the time I came to this thread, there was already a long history of conversation on display in order for me to make impressions and come to a judgment.

    I’ve concluded that you are a delusional nut. Therefore, why would I have any interest in what you wrote or have to say. I’ve heard you make a bunch of claims and then seen the responses you were referring to from others here and on the link to the very thread you referenced on Fogbow. Your version of events consistenly seems to not hold up and the threats seem to back up what everyone else is saying and be consistently opposite to how you portray it.

    So, I’ve concluded that what you say has no merit and can’t be trusted at all and is usually the opposite of what apparently happened or went down.

    So again, why should I care about your opinions, rants or what you might have written?

    Any “source” or reference you’ve used to back you up turns out to be nothing but another two-bit kook site or hack RWNJ propaganda site…and nothing I’d consider to be a credible or meaningful source at all. Michael Savage? Please. He’s considered such a nut that England has him on their No-Fly list. So hate to tell ya, but when you cite generally regarded kooks and cranks to back you up…doesn’t help your credibility there either.

    The world is full of hacks who write fan-fic all over the net. Why would I waste my serious time paying any whit of attention to yours?

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - g

    I urge you to read my article in American Thinker, “Meeting Young Obama.”This way you will be able to judge the accuracy of my evaluation of young Obama’s radical ideology.

  234. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 5:08 pm #

    misha: Romney believes American Indians are the lost tribe of Israel. That is radical ideology.

    I don’t know, misha. Around here, we have a tribe called the Shmohawks. Or is it the Mohawks? I forget.

  235. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 5:09 pm #

    Hi Johnny! Looks like you’ve found another group of people to pwn you–congratulations! (although I am beginning to worry about your masochistic tendencies).

    I thought I’d mention John’s enormous hypocrisy (to go with the enormous ego) since I didn’t see where it had been pointed out previously in this thread. In an article on Oh, For Goodness Sake (I believe this occurred about a year ago, but I’m not sure) it was suggested that Johnny worked for Ann Coulter when he was a grad student in Cornell. This was based on his own statement that he was “Ann Coulter’s teaching assistant”. Now, to people in academia, this obviously means that Ann was a student in a class or recitation that he taught, not his supervisor, but, in what I suspect is a common error for non-academics, OFGS misinterpreted it. Despite an enormous hue and cry by the most important person in the world (that being Mr. Drew himself), it wasn’t until recently that OFGS noted and corrected the error. In Johnny’s words, this behavior by OFGS was “unprofessional”. Leaving aside the fact that I doubt that OFGS is a significant source of income for the owner and I’m not sure exactly what “professional” standard of ethics bloggers are bound by, it would naturally follow that any standards to which OFGS must be held should apply to little Johnny’s very own blog as well.

    His response to this HYENAS* breach of journalistic ethics and the painful pwning he received at the hands of the Fogbow? He found information purporting to “out” various members of the Fogbow** and published said information on his very own blog. Now this information contained several significant errors of fact including incorrectly connecting the real identity of an uninvolved person with an online persona and repeating lies about Foggy regarding issues that are matters of public record. As far as I could tell, he made absolutely no attempt to verify any of this before publishing it on his blog. His source? One of KenyanBornObamAcorn’s videos.

    Little Johnny Drew has shown himself to be hypocritical, egotistical to the point of narcissism, completely unwilling to acknowledge critiques, incapable of or unwilling to provide objective evidence in support of his arguments, and he’s got the worst case of Obama Derangement Syndrome I’ve every seen that didn’t include birtherism.

    I believe that all of this is due to little Johnny being colossally butt-hurt at the (clearly justified) decision of Williams College to tell him to “take a hike”. While Johnny was still in denial*** that his failure could be in any way due to his own shortcomings (which are legion–my opinion), he received a “major award” for his thesis which validated his belief that he had been treated unfairly and thus was born a confirmation bias which may dwarf even the birther greats. When President Obama sprung on the scene and John viewed his two-decades distant memory of their past interaction through the lens of this confirmation bias, he saw in President Obama the personification of every wrong that had been done to him. While President Obama has managed to unite the best of the African and American parts of his heritage, all we’ve seen from Johnny is a sense of entitlements he is owed for being a white male and a sense of victimhood from identifying with his “poor Armenian”**** heritage.

    Just my $0.02.

    * stolen from Suranis (it’s a joke Johnny–a play on the word “heinous”)

    ** Johnny, I’d like to make it very clear that I’m not talking about myself–the only things you’ve said about me are things that I have willingly and intentionally revealed about myself, information easily obtainable with the previous (plus a few trivial errors of fact that you threw in), and erroneous speculation based on that information (which I find hilarious). If I was worried about my name being associated with what I say as “Slartibartfast”, do you think I would have revealed it? (sorry, I didn’t mean to use logic on you–I know that you don’t understand it…)

    *** a state he remains in to this day.

    **** which is just to suggest that this is how I think John sees himself–no generalization about Armenians is implied.

  236. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 5:09 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Please. I used to teach political economy at some of our nation’s finest schools.

    Only one. And you got fired.

  237. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 5:09 pm #

    Some scientific data

    Dr Peter Millican, a philosophy don at Hertford College, Oxford, has devised a computer software program that can detect when works are by the same author by comparing favourite words and phrases.

    He was contacted last weekend and offered $10,000 (6,200) to assess alleged similarities between Obama’s bestseller, Dreams from My Father, and Fugitive Days, a memoir by William Ayers.

    Ayers, now a university professor in Chicago, co-founded the Weathermen, a radical 1960s underground group that bombed government buildings in Washington and New York. The Republicans accuse Obama of “palling around” with him.

    The offer to Millican to prove that Ayers wrote Obama’s book was made by Robert Fox, a California businessman and brother-in-law of Chris Cannon, a Republican congressman from Utah. He hoped to corroborate a theory advanced by Jack Cashill, an American writer.

    Fox and Cannon each suggested to The Sunday Times that the other had taken the initiative.

    Cannon said that he merely recommended computer testing of the books. He doubted whether Obama wrote his autobiography, adding: “If Ayers was the author, that would be interesting.”

    leading to the conclusion that

    Millican took a preliminary look and found the charges “very implausible”. A deal was agreed for more detailed research but when Millican said the results had to be made public, even if no link to Ayers was proved, interest waned.

    Millican said: “I thought it was extremely unlikely that we would get a positive result. It is the sort of thing where people make claims after seeing a few crude similarities and go overboard on them.”

    Cited here

    Millican has shared with us his analysis which shows no support for the thesis that Ayers wrote Obama’s book

  238. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 5:09 pm #

    - scientist

    Unfortunately, the history of socialized medicine shows that the elderly are at great risk under socialized medicine. In England, for example, many older people were left to die rather than allow them to run up steep medical bills. I can’t imagine anything more frightening than knowing that the same government bureaucracy that harmed me with affirmative action will be deciding whether or not I get medical help.

  239. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 5:12 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – scientistUnfortunately, the history of socialized medicine shows that the elderly are at great risk under socialized medicine. In England, for example, many older people were left to die rather than allow them to run up steep medical bills. I can’t imagine anything more frightening than knowing that the same government bureaucracy that harmed me with affirmative action will be deciding whether or not I get medical help.

    How is our system any different when insurance companies decide what your limit is and basically leave you to die

  240. avatar
    J. Potter January 5, 2012 at 5:13 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – nbcI’m pretty sure that the number of folks following me on Twitter is a solid measure of my credibility and the impact of my testimony on young Obama. P.J. Foggy – the disbarred lawyer – who runs Fogbow only has 59 followers. Mimi – @_ccm – only has 1,414 followers. I would say in the marketplace of ideas, the folks at Fogbow are not gaining much influence compared to folks like me.

    Try this one on: sane reasonable people have no motivation to follow either side of this … either the nuts babbling about their nuttery, or the (speaking for myself) the understimulated and easily amused types that enjoying prodding the nuts to see what kind of noises they make. The scope of your irrelevance is measured by how many followers you don’t have. Here’s an idea, go hire a social media marketing firm, and have them try to boost your numbers. See how well it works!

    As for the followers you do have, beyond the few who may be monitoring you out of curiosity, and another few who may be tasked with simply *monitoring* you, birds of a feather, Mr. Drew.

  241. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 5:14 pm #

    - scientist

    I was not “fired.” That is a lie. I was given an extra additional year of employment starting in the fall of 1989. Instead of taking that, I resigned in disgust.

  242. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 5:17 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – scientistPlease. I used to teach political economy at some of our nation’s finest schools. The economy started going south in 2007 after Democrats gained total control of Congress. It is now getting better because Republicans have regained partial control of Congress. Obama predicted that the stimulus package would keep unemployment under 8%. Instead, it never went below 8%.

    Ah there you go making unsubstantiated claims. What specific measures did the democrats put in place in 2007 that caused the downfall of the economy? What specific measures did the republicans put in place to help the economy in 2011?

  243. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 5:17 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: The economy started going south in 2007 after Democrats gained total control of Congress

    So, is it your contention that house prices would have continued to rise forever and the “AAA-rated” CDS/MBS carnival would have continued forever if only there had been Republican Congresses? Remember a guy called Greenspan? A Randian fool like too many Republicans. Of course, even he had the sense to come before Congress in 2008 and admit that the idea that markets are self-regulating was wrong. But I’ll bet you wouldn’t have the balls to admit that.

  244. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 5:18 pm #

    - nbc

    I think it is perfectly obvious that Obama does not have the skill set needed to write Dreams. The best passages are clearly reflections of other work done by Bill Ayers. The best example, to me, is Obama’s description of his white girlfriend in Dreams. This character is an exact match with Bill Ayer’s girlfriend Diane Oughton. For the record, I never saw young Obama friendly with a girl at any of the times I saw him on campus or at off campus events. I think that the reason there are no Obama girlfriends is that there are no Obama girlfriends.

  245. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 5:18 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – scientistI was not “fired.” That is a lie. I was given an extra additional year of employment starting in the fall of 1989. Instead of taking that, I resigned in disgust.

    Sure but all we have is your word. Yet you claim you were dismissed over discrimination. Funny how the more times you tell your story the more twisted it becomes.

  246. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 5:19 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – nbcI think it is perfectly obvious that Obama does not have the skill set needed to write Dreams. The best passages are clearly reflections of other work done by Bill Ayers. The best example, to me, is Obama’s description of his white girlfriend in Dreams. This character is an exact match with Bill Ayer’s girlfriend Diane Oughton. For the record, I never saw young Obama friendly with a girl at any of the times I saw him on campus or at off campus events. I think that the reason there are no Obama girlfriends is that there are no Obama girlfriends.

    Why is it you believe Obama doesn’t have the skillset required to write dreams? You’ve shown nothing to prove your theory.

  247. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 5:19 pm #

    OK, gang. I need to go and deal with some business. I’ll check in later this evening. Regards, JCD

  248. avatar
    Suranis January 5, 2012 at 5:21 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - scientist

    Unfortunately, the history of socialized medicine shows that the elderly are at great risk under socialized medicine.In England, for example, many older people were left to die rather than allow them to run up steep medical bills.I can’t imagine anything more frightening than knowing that the same government bureaucracy that harmed me with affirmative action will be deciding whether or not I get medical help.

    Whats the Johnster is talking about is that some 70+ year old men were diagnosed with prostate cancer, which is slow growing and especially so in old people, and were not told for the simple reason that on average something else will kill them before the prostate cancer would become a problem, and the process of treatment would drastically worsen their quality of life and would in fact shorten their life span. In short, they were better off not knowing.

    Yeah, some beurocracy.

  249. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 5:22 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I was not “fired.” That is a lie. I was given an extra additional year of employment starting in the fall of 1989. Instead of taking that, I resigned in disgust.

    You were denied tenure and given a year to look for another job. That’s “fired” in academia.

  250. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 5:25 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – Bob RossAs I’ve said, I was dating the girl running the Democrat Socialist Alliance. I know exactly why they flew a Karl Marx banner. They were out and out Marxists. According to Remnick, Boss and Chandoo were among young Obama’s closest friends. Both were Marxists. How is it plausible to you that young Obama was not a Marxist?

    Can this person confirm you were dating her and that you did not in fact paste a photo of her head onto one of your blowup dolls and drive in the carpool lane?

  251. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 5:26 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Unfortunately, the history of socialized medicine shows that the elderly are at great risk under socialized medicine. In England, for example, many older people were left to die rather than allow them to run up steep medical bills.

    So your solution is what?

    Drew and Paul Ryan have that all taken care of. Kick the oldsters off Medicare completely. No bureaucracy. just no care period. Better yet, get rid of Social Security too, so they can die quickly.

    Oh, I REALLY hope millions of swing voters Google this thread so they can see what a great guy Drew is.
    Suranis: Whats the Johnster is talking about is that some 70+ year old men were diagnosed with prostate cancer, which is slow growing and especially so in old people, and were not told for the simple reason that on average something else will kill them before the prostate cancer would become a problem, and the process of treatment would drastically worsen their quality of life and would in fact shorten their life span. In short, they were better off not knowing.

  252. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 5:27 pm #

    Sorry, but everything I’ve seen from you here comes off kooky and pitifully obsessive and awfully insecure and overcompensating.

    *nothing* you’ve said comes across mainstream in the least. Not mainstream in general. Not mainstream in terms of the serious right or conservative views in the spectrum either.

    Full-metal-paranoid and obsessive delusional wingnuttery is where I’d classify and junk the kind of kooky and utterly unimportant stuff you sadly fixate on.

    Sorry, but your rants here come across so desperate and over-the-top that you’ve only served to destroy any credibility or caring I would normally have on meeting someone new. You seem to be full of a lot of BS that doesn’t hold up and you seem desperate to view some minor inconsequential enounters with a young Obama at a party decades ago into some sad claim for attention or fame. You seem desperately hung up and fixated on past failures and a need to have somewhere else to point the blame, other than yourself.

    Sorry, but that sounds like the behaviors of someone who is a broken “nobody”, desperate to pretend and convince others that they are somehow important and willing to tell outrageous whoppers to get people to “like them”…but so fake and creepy in their attempts to do so, that they only backfire and scare others away. So I sense someone who is so utterly socially inept that they are completely without a clue as to why they have difficulties in life and in making conversations and are utterly without the normal human skills to do anything but hurt themselves further. Thus, I am more likely to find it credible that you’re life is a string of self-inflicted failures that you can’t stop nor even capable of comprehending why they happen; than to take serious any claim you make about your “success” or “talent”.

    The Al Bundy analogy someone else here recently made seems to work on some level…but then again, Al Bundy is only a has-been and doesn’t seem to also be a deeply scarred and emotionally broken individual. You do.

    I could care less what you do for a living or what you claim your accomplishments or career is. You’ve come across so unbelievable that I take anything you claim about yourself (other than that one paper from long ago, which seems to be backed up) with mroe than a “grain of salt”, as the saying goes. You seem to be a “very important person” only within the fantasy-world you build up to protect yourself with in your own mind.

    All I see is signs of an utter disaster with no self-awarness. The humanity in me wants to feel pity, but the annoying obsessive crazy rants are such a turn of, that I simply don’t care and only serve to lessen any curiosity I might have about you or what you think at all.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - g

    Please.I’m a business owner, a published author, and an alternate on the Orange County Republican Central Committee.I think it should be clear to any normal person that I have abandoned the radical extremism of my youth and adopted more mainstream ideological views.Obama, however, appoints people like Anita Dunn and Van Jones to high level White House jobs.I’m terrified that Obama doesn’t not understand or respect our capitalist economic system.

  253. avatar
    Reality Check January 5, 2012 at 5:35 pm #

    Sounds like politely fired in m book but fired nonetheless.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - scientist

    I was not “fired.”That is a lie.I was given an extra additional year of employment starting in the fall of 1989.Instead of taking that, I resigned in disgust.

  254. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 5:41 pm #

    Come on Bob, you know that all of Johnny’s blow-up dolls have his own face on them…

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Can this person confirm you were dating her and that you did not in fact paste a photo of her head onto one of your blowup dolls and drive in the carpool lane?

  255. avatar
    J. Potter January 5, 2012 at 5:42 pm #

    Reality Check: I was given an extra additional year of employment starting in the fall of 1989.Instead of taking that, I resigned in disgust.

    And it’s ummm …. let’s see, it just changed again, get’s so hard to keep track ….. hmmm. It’s … oh, right! 2012!

    So, if you bother to scuttle back after taking care of your “business”, entertain us with what you’ve done lately? since invading Panama?

  256. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 5:49 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I think it is perfectly obvious that Obama does not have the skill set needed to write Dreams.

    Purely speculative and lacking any substantive support. I have shown how a scientific analysis shows no support for your thesis.

    As to your claims about Diana, I assume you can make an argument with the necessary data that would allow us to determine the relevance of your claims?

    I think that the reason there are no Obama girlfriends is that there are no Obama girlfriends.

    Well you only saw him two times, his friends appear to know better but I understand that you have you beliefs, regardless of any substantive support.

  257. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 5:49 pm #

    Slartibartfast: Come on Bob, you know that all of Johnny’s blow-up dolls have his own face on them…

    You’re so right John Drew is so into John Drew that he’s in John Drew

  258. avatar
    Mike Dunford January 5, 2012 at 5:52 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    (When I was honored by the APSA only four awards every year went out to the 500 plus new Ph.D.s in the field.It was the equivalent of earning a Gold medal in the Olympics.LIke an Olympic champion, I still benefit from this remarkable achievement and I get business from new graduate students seeking my advice on how to earn their Ph.D.)

    John, why do you insist on telling lies that are very easy to check on and refute?

    APSA’s website has a list of the available dissertation awards. Clicking on each of the awards lets you get a list of the previous winners.

    You won the Anderson award in 1989.
    Jeffrey Herbst won the Almond award in 1989.
    Mark Graber won the Corwin award in 1989.
    Carol Hager won the Lasswell award in 1989.
    Yossi Shain won the Reid award in 1989.
    Victoria Hattam won the Schattschneider award in 1989.
    Tai-Shuenn Yang won the Strauss award in 1989.
    Roy T. Meyers won the White award in 1989.

    According to APSA, all of those are dissertation awards. Moreover, you know that there were more than four, because we went through this on the Fogbow thread.

    If you keep lying about the little stuff, especially in ways that seem calculated to inflate your own minimal accomplishments at the expense of others, how can we trust you on the big things?

  259. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 5:54 pm #

    After Johnny failed as an academic he apparently failed as a loan officer (not even nepotism was enough to help him) and now runs some sort of grant-writing business (which, as with everything else, he makes claims about while providing nothing to support those claims…).

    J. Potter: And it’s ummm …. let’s see, it just changed again, get’s so hard to keep track ….. hmmm. It’s … oh, right! 2012!

    So, if you bother to scuttle back after taking care of your “business”, entertain us with what you’ve done lately? since invading Panama?

  260. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 5:57 pm #

    *yawn* Why do you presume to think I care or think what a bunch of young college kids thought or did in the distant past and care-free follies of their youth matters at all? Young people get carried away with all sorts of fantasy idealistic notions and also tend to experiment in all sorts of ways. It is part of youth and growing up.

    I’ve never cared whether Bush or Clinton or Obama did drugs or other common indescretions in their past. Nor would I care what politicians or political movements they were inspired by in their distant youth.

    So for me, it doesn’t even need to reach the level of caring about the inconsequential trivia of your oh-so-brief enounters at a few random parties in days of yore. I find the whole excercise so irrelevant and boring and utterly meaningless to anything to do with the state of affairs in 21st century America, that I don’t even need to address it at all.

    …And there you go again, desperately having to tell me that you have a PhD and calling yourself “award winning”… like I care? …like that somehow matters *how* exactly? Are you really that stupid to realize that you haven’t said the same thing already over and over again? Do you realize that *real* successful people don’t have to waste their time convincing others of their credentials or so pitifully and pathetically making and endless plea for attention?

    The very fact that you keep bringing it up and even have to use your “PhD” in your internet handle reeks of a desperate need for not only attention, but also to *have* to convince others that you somehow matter. What it signals is just the opposite – you come across as a pathetic and desperate loser, with so little going for himself and so berift of anything of consequence to say, that you have to hide behind artificially puffing yourself up in the frantic and futile hope than anyone will pay attention to you at all.

    Simply put, you have nothing to really offer. If you did, your credibility would rest on the content of your statements and the quality of your supporting arguments and evidence and not have to rely on endlessly trying to remind others that, “hey, look at me…I’m a somebody, really, honest…please will someone pay attention and listen to me…please…?”

    Your “evidence” and arguments are neither credible nor “overwhelming” nor consequential in any sense of the term.

    So “bully for you” that *you* care about these issues. Pat yourself on the head for being in your own corner, there.

    Nobody else cares, though. At least not me -not one whit. Nor does it seem anyone else here does either.

    I suggest you find a nice little safe-site full of other rabid ODS sufferers, eager in their own pitiful scars and pain to eat-up any anti-Obama rumors they can desperately latch on to. Maybe in those safe-little bubbles you can take advantage of their own obsessive-compulsive blind hatred and gullibility and finally find someone to pay attention to you…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - g

    Remnick confirms the radicalism of young Obama and his friends.Remnick is a liberal author, hardly a conspiracy theorist.I have an award-winning Ph.D. in political science and have taught political economy at some of the finest schools iin the nation.I think you’ll find that it is very difficult to protect Obama from the charge that he was a Marxist socialist while he was a sophomore at Occidental College.The evidence in overwhelming…

  261. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 6:11 pm #

    Bob,

    I think that John Drew has such a high opinion of John Drew that he literally cannot conceive of anyone who isn’t John Drew that doesn’t share John Drew’s opinion about John Drew. If a person (presumably not John Drew) doesn’t mention John Drew as often as John Drew would like (this comment probably doesn’t mention John Drew as often as John Drew thinks that John Drew should be mentioned–even including this completely gratuitous “John Drew”) that make John Drew sad and anyone who makes John Drew sad must be a horrible person because everyone, whether or not they are John Drew (this is in John Drew’s mind we’re talking about…), knows just how wonderful John Drew is. Remember the zeroth law of John Drew:

    You’ve vastly underestimated the importance of John Drew.

    Not to mention the first law of John Drew:

    You’ve vastly underestimated the significance of the zeroth law of John Drew

  262. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 6:18 pm #

    I should probably mention that the (n+1)st law of John Drew says that you have vastly underestimated the nth law of John Drew, except when n=infinity – 3, in which case it is “Douglas Hofstadter rules!”. The ensuing paradox may be blamed on Gödel’s theorem, but the important thing to remember is that it’s not John Drew’s fault.

  263. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 6:20 pm #

    *rolls eyes*

    *sigh* Here we go again, nothing but trotting out the same tired old nonsense and lies that didn’t make a difference last time – the only time in which such mudslinging bogeyman rumours could have had an impact.

    Concerns (including smears) about a candidate or their past may have some impact on certain people’s choices when someone is first running for an office.

    However, an incumbent President is simply judged based on their record and comparison to the alternative. Simple as that.

    You can make up all the crazy lies and spin and spout simplistic bogeyman nonsense phrases of “marxism” or what-not and it doesn’t matter, nor does it have any connection to reality. Such amateur-hour tall-tales only work on the already-converted, desperately clinging to excuses to justify their irrational fears and hatreds. They simply don’t hold up or work beyond that audience and I hate to tell you, that audience and their votes are already factored into the electoral equation.

    They weren’t part of Obama’s overwhelming vote win last time, nor would any serious person worry about where their votes go this time. It is simply pretty obvious and clear.

    As someone else here aptly said, Bill Ayers association to Obama is practically as tenuous and inconsequential as yours is to him. Neither matter nor had any impact on Obama or his decision making. You are simply both irrelevant and unconnected to anything impacting how this Administration operates.

    You can say “radical” until your lungs turn blue. Nothing over the past few years has been “radical” in any sense of the term. For a supposed “marxist”, there sure has been nothing but another Wall-Street favoring, Goldman-Sachs graduate financial team in place all along. Nor is “Obamacare” in any real or meaningful way “socialized medicine”, since all it does is prop up the private insurance industry and direct people not already on medicare, medicaid or the VA to continue to get their health insurance from private industry sources.

    Your hollow arguments and bogeymen are stupid arguments that only appeal to stupid people and gullible paranoids. Doesn’t matter how many times you say it…there is no fantasy magic in the world that can make your wishful thinking or repetition change reality.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - scientist

    I think the issue is more serious than that.Obama lied about his ties to radical extremists like Bill Ayers in 2008 and there was no literature for voters to read to check out the facts.Today, swing voters will be able to Google this thread and read that young Obama’s friends hung a banner promoting the ideas of Karl Marx in David Remnick’s book, The Bridge.

    These swing voters will be able to read my face-to-face description of young Obama’s extremist ideology.

    Swing voters will be able to say that Obama fooled them in 2008, but he cannot fool them in 2012.Swing voters understand that they will be harmed by affirmative action and screwed over by high unemployment if Obama gets another four years.Obama is no friend to swing voters.He holds to a radical extremist perspective that most of them believe is unAmerican.

  264. avatar
    Scientist January 5, 2012 at 6:21 pm #

    Slarty-As an academic scientist, how do you react to John’s assertion that winning an award for your dissertation automatically makes you one of the outstanding minds of your generation and basically entitles you to tenure at a first-rate institution even if you publish nothing while there?

  265. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 6:22 pm #

    LOL! A GigaTaitz… priceless! :)

    Majority Will: Quantifying nutballs should be based on how many times they make the same mistakes but keep expecting different results?
    I shudder to think that the current crop of delusional birther trolls might aspire to achieve a GigaTaitz (GTz) like some sort of perverse Moore’s law in action.

  266. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 6:27 pm #

    Personally, I would think that the mathmatical expression most representative of their chances is:

    i

    Sef: I think we can add a corollary to this measurement, akin to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The product of a birther lawyers “Taitziness” and their probability of success in a court is less than or equal to3.14159265

  267. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 6:58 pm #

    Nope. You are overestimating here and more importantly, completely failing to grasp the segmented reality of how social networking and the internet truly functions.

    Once you get beyond a mainstream site or official site of consequence, you are dealing with special-interest sites and amateur blogs. The audiences drawn to those are already self-selected by interest.

    Most of the hack propaganda sites are nothing but self-contained little fantasy bubbles. They practice constant self-censorship and therefore attract and appeal only to those looking to feed an already existing confirmation bias.

    Propaganda also has a limited reach. It only works on the gullible, the lazy and those who are already locked in a specific mindset and just looking for excuses to reinforce what is already there.

    It simply doesn’t work on the vast remainder of society – that includes those strongly on a differing side of an issue, locked into their own mindset and therefore not reachable by their “opposition”.

    More importantly, that vast remainder also includes those that simply think rationally or who look for verification before swallowing what someone tries to “sell” them wholesale. Propoganda attempts only serve to work against these latter types, because honesty and truth are favored and any con artist or tall tale teller will quickly be found out and as soon as the propoganda is revealed for what it is, these types will not just reject it, but be driven in the opposite direction from it, out of sheer disgust, as a result.

    So sorry, but hate to burst your bubble and another one of your delusional fantasies of over-inflated importance and worth, but spreading silly little lies on the internet is going to result in so little return for the effort required, that it truly amounts to nothing and being an utterly inconsequential waste of time. In mathmatics, we would refer to this as the “limit approaches zero”.

    Any real forum or open site will be so full of other opinions and real issues that propaganda is not only openly called out and ridiculed, but even more importantly, not even paid any attention to by the vast majority of readers who are there for other interests and reasons. Further, it will quickly become lost admidst the sheer volume and swirl of other issues and commentary and often buried so deep that very few will ever see it and even fewer will remember or care.

    Any special-interest forum is already a self-selected narrow audience. If it is an open forum, propaganda lies will be found out and debunked in the open. Again, they have now lost their effect, except to those already converted.

    Only on a censored private forum can propaganda survive unchallenged. But these types of sites are usually agenda-driven sites, so they are only sought out and infested by the already converted. So there, you get to preach to the choir.

    But even in all this, commentary on any site may have an extent of permanence, but still usually has a limited viable “shelf life” as new stories and new commentary comes in and again, what someone said days or weeks ago is buried and lost in the mix. Very few other eyeballs will ever come across it.

    Same rules are true to who follows what on twitter, etc.

    You are simply wasting time on a futile battle in a vast, but fragmented online see. Then again, a “virtual” battle probably has appeal to delusional and susceptibly gullible folks like you – it simply isn’t “real” and online, you can pretend to be important and ignore your utter inconsequentialness and utter futility of your “propagdana mission” in the real physical world…

    You simply waste time with hollow words, because they are easy and anyone with a keyboard can type with little effort. As the old saying goes, quantity does not equal quality. Made up stories are just words. Whether you say it or type it, it takes very little effort or creativity to be a hack liar and scam artist.

    But the rewards match the effort. Other than being able to damage your own reputation and make yourself an online laughingstock, they simply don’t translate to impacting reality. That requires real world effort.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - g

    I think your are underestimating the power of Twitter and blog sites to spread the news about young Obama’s extremist ideology.The only reason my take on young Obama has appeared in four books is that it came to public attention through YouTube, Twitter, and alternative media sites like NewsMax.

    Ultimately, the story only took hold because of its credibility.Nevertheless, it would have been much easier to ignore if I didn’t have the help of modern communications tools.When I tried to get my story out in 2008, the media paid no attention to it.That will be much more difficult in 2012.

    The reason nbc is attacking me with nonsense is to undermine that credibility and to make my comments harder to digest.Personally, I think that long threads raise an article’s visibility in Google searches.

  268. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 7:03 pm #

    *yawn* Again, who cares. Your twitter followers…seriously? What a joke.

    Unless you can put up some Charlie Sheen or Ashton Kutcher level numbers, you’re just an inconsequential joke, preaching to a small choir of already converted dupes and self-congratulating cranks.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - nbc

    I’m pretty sure that the number of folks following me on Twitter is a solid measure of my credibility and the impact of my testimony on young Obama.P.J. Foggy – the disbarred lawyer – who runs Fogbow only has 59 followers.Mimi – @_ccm – only has 1,414 followers.I would say in the marketplace of ideas, the folks at Fogbow are not gaining much influence compared to folks like me.

  269. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 7:07 pm #

    Health care and real world problems only.

    A pragmatic like me simply doesn’t care about any petty and irrelevant stupid stuff that has no bearing on either solving the problems at hand or preventing policies that would make certain situations even worse…

    Scientist:
    OK-So let’s ask any swing voters here what’s more important: whether you can get health care when you’re old and sick or who Obama’s friends might have been in college and what they did in their free time?

  270. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 7:07 pm #

    Scientist,

    I think my mentions of Johnny’s “major award”, which are references to the leg with fishnet stocking lamp that the dad won in A Christmas Story says it all. I don’t, however, consider myself an academic scientist anymore–I’ve trying to test the value of my skills in the market, so I’ll soon have empirical evidence of what they are worth–not that they could ever compare to the value John Drew assigns to John Drew’s abilities.

    G,

    You know, when I saw the term GTz, my first thought was “that’s intellectually impossible”, but now I think that JD might require something in the TeraTaitz range… I have to agree that it would require imaginary numbers to describe the probability of birther success (and likely negative probabilities as well, since they do damage to their own cause).

    G:
    LOL!A GigaTaitz… priceless!

  271. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 7:14 pm #

    What a load of crap! Such lazy and foolish statements prove to me that you don’t know what you are talking about and demonstrate that you are ill-qualified to teach on the subject.

    The factors that cause an economy to collapse or recover are complex and long-ranging. The impacts of legislation are rarely felt in the near-term and often take many months after being signed into law to even go into partial-effect…and usually years to truly have an impact.

    Please, tell us SPECIFICALLY what legislation passed in 2007 or 2008 “caused” the economic collapse…

    Come on bright boy…let’s hear some specifics… this should be good for a laugh!

    Face it John, you are full of weak sh*t and you are just talking out your @ss… What an utter joke you are!

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - scientist

    Please.I used to teach political economy at some of our nation’s finest schools.The economy started going south in 2007 after Democrats gained total control of Congress.It is now getting better because Republicans have regained partial control of Congress.Obama predicted that the stimulus package would keep unemployment under 8%.Instead, it never went below 8%.

  272. avatar
    Sterngard Friegen January 5, 2012 at 7:15 pm #

    The pissant also known as John C. Drew, Ph.D., wrote a thesis on child labor. As a result, he is now V.O. Key, George Catlin, Ralph W. Conant, Karl Deutsch, Henry Kissinger, Nelson Polsby and Anthony Downs.

    His field of knowledge is vast, primarily because of his accomplishment of writing 8 grant requests in the last 12 years. He spends the rest of his time promoting himself as the greatest and most misunderstood political scientist who ever lived.

    As I said, a pissant.

  273. avatar
    sfjeff January 5, 2012 at 7:24 pm #

    John,

    You keep saying “trust me”.

    Seriously why should we?

    No one has corroborated what you said that young Barack Obama said.
    You have misrepresented what Hasan has said- implying that Hasan has confirmed that Obama was a Marxist.
    You quote Remnick- inviting us to believe his/her quotes- yet you don’t believe Remnick’s conclusions.

    Reading through all of this- I still don’t see any actual corroboration that you even actually met Obama.

    What stands out to me- over and over again- is that your ex-girlfriend won’t comment in support of your claims. You keep saying ‘trust me’ but apparently your ex-girlfriend doesn’t trust you enough to support your claim.

    You have nothing to corroborate the association you keep trying to make between Obama and the Democratic Socialist Union(or whatever it is called) who supposedly put up the Marxist poster.

    Now, if I were to claim that I had met someone in college, and my friends were at that meeting- frankly any of my friends in college wouldn’t hesitate to verify that if I were to ask them. Why won’t yours? Why don’t your college friends trust you?

    I don’t care about what you have or have not accomplished in life- I don’t care whether what you think happened to you because of affirmative action or not. I care about your claims regarding President Obama.

    You have made claims regarding President Obama in college, that you have not provided any actual corroborating evidence for. Your account of his supposed “Marxism” is based upon your recollection only- and is supported only by your interpretation of what his friends are supposed to have been or done. This is just not credible.

    And the rest of your claims just don’t hold up to rational scrutiny- that Obama must have been a Marxist because two of his friends were Marxists? Seriously- i went to college too- and I had friends that were conservative born Again Christians, members of the Palestinean Students Union

    And then we move onto your claims that he is an unrepentant Marxist. I have not seen one thing President Obama has done as President that I would consider a “Marxist” action.
    No Marxist that I know of would have engineered the rescue of a private corporation and then arranged to sell it back to the private market.
    No “Marxist” would have proposed a mandatory health insurance using private insurers.
    And certainly no “Marxist” would have missed an opportunity to let private business collapse- as President Obama could have done if he had let Banks and GM fail- to show the failures of capitalism.

    That you- a PHD in poly sci consider President Obama’s actions to be indicative of a Marxist makes me believe you are blinded by your own ideology.

  274. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 7:28 pm #

    sfjeff: the Democratic Socialist Union(or whatever it is called)

    I believe that it was the Judean People’s Front… or was it the People’s Front of Judea?

  275. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 7:28 pm #

    Hi Slarti!

    Long time no see, my friend! Good to hear a post from you!

    Your assessment seems to concur with everything else so far.

    As you know, we get a lot of kooks that come over hear and attempt their propaganda spiel for awhile before realizing it won’t fly in this forum.

    So far, I’d rate this as one of the least impressive one’s on almost all accounts. I mean seriously, a whole desperate attention-whoring tale based on 2 minor incidents of rubbing elbows with someone at a few college parties several decades ago??? That has to be a new record of grasping at tenuous straws for attention! I’d have to rate it amongst the weakest and lamest things we’ve ever heard here…and that sure say’s a lot.

    Then again, this all pops up on a blog post about some nutter thinking Obama is a time traveller from Mars…so I’ll still put that as even crazier…but then again, it sure seems the right thread for this nut to pop up, that’s for sure!

    In the attention-starved and blatently obvious inflated-ego to mask deep insecurities and failures category…I’d say he ranks above Apuzzo and is in Ron Polarik territory. Polarik may still take the prize as most pathetic and desperate…but this joker is sure doing his best to convince me he might merit Polarik-level loserishness…

    Slartibartfast: Little Johnny Drew has shown himself to be hypocritical, egotistical to the point of narcissism, completely unwilling to acknowledge critiques, incapable of or unwilling to provide objective evidence in support of his arguments, and he’s got the worst case of Obama Derangement Syndrome I’ve every seen that didn’t include birtherism.

  276. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 7:33 pm #

    Slartibartfast: I believe that it was the Judean People’s Front… or was it the People’s Front of Judea?

    Conjugate that verb.

  277. avatar
    sfjeff January 5, 2012 at 7:34 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: – nbc. For the record, I never saw young Obama friendly with a girl at any of the times I saw him on campus or at off campus events. I think that the reason there are no Obama girlfriends is that there are no Obama girlfriends.

    I will point out- that we have more confirmation of Obama’s girlfriends, than we have of yours.

    Should we use your own example as a confirmation that you never had any girlfriends?

  278. avatar
    misha January 5, 2012 at 7:36 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I used to teach political economy at some of our nation’s finest schools.

    I teach a class on masturbation. If I’m not there on time, they start without me.

  279. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 7:41 pm #

    Sounds like another myth you are just making up and attempting to propagate here. I don’t buy it.

    For someone who repeatedly claims to be a PhD who taught at a college, you seem pretty uncapable of backing up your wild crank claims with credible evidence and links, as any student could easily do.

    So put up or shut up, “bright boy”. Let’s see you prove the nonsense you spout instead of just pulling lazy made-up BS out of your @ss…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - scientist

    Unfortunately, the history of socialized medicine shows that the elderly are at great risk under socialized medicine.In England, for example, many older people were left to die rather than allow them to run up steep medical bills.I can’t imagine anything more frightening than knowing that the same government bureaucracy that harmed me with affirmative action will be deciding whether or not I get medical help.

  280. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 7:48 pm #

    Who cares what you think? Hate to tell you, but you are merely an inconsequential nobody with delusions of adequacy. The world is full of a-holes with “opinions”… I don’t pay attention to most of those, so why should I pay attention to yours?

    Sorry, but you are simply amongst the minority in your merely sour-grapes biased “opinion” here.

    Count me in the category with most of the world, who has no reason to question or doubt that Obama wrote his own autobiography…

    Nor are we going to be “persuaded” otherwise by random unhappy kooks seeking attention on the internet…

    More importantly, count me in the category that didn’t care whether he’d ever written a book at all in terms of reasons to choose a candidate for President or to impact their performance in that office.

    Again, you just come across as a sad and petty little angry person, wailing away about completely inconsequential and irrelevant issues… what a pathetic and meaningless cause….

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - nbc

    I think it is perfectly obvious that Obama does not have the skill set needed to write Dreams.The best passages are clearly reflections of other work done by Bill Ayers.The best example, to me, is Obama’s description of his white girlfriend in Dreams.This character is an exact match with Bill Ayer’s girlfriend Diane Oughton.For the record, I never saw young Obama friendly with a girl at any of the times I saw him on campus or at off campus events.I think that the reason there are no Obama girlfriends is that there are no Obama girlfriends.

  281. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 7:53 pm #

    If that is what he was alluding to, what you said sure doesn’t match up with how he’s trying to package and sell it at all…

    Suranis: Whats the Johnster is talking about is that some 70+ year old men were diagnosed with prostate cancer, which is slow growing and especially so in old people, and were not told for the simple reason that on average something else will kill them before the prostate cancer would become a problem, and the process of treatment would drastically worsen their quality of life and would in fact shorten their life span. In short, they were better off not knowing.
    Yeah, some beurocracy.

  282. avatar
    Rickey January 5, 2012 at 7:53 pm #

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): I have a picture of me with Lewis Black the comedian by that very same logic I guess we both interviewed each other.

    I have a picture of me with my arm around the late Marilyn Chambers. I guess that means that she and I – well, I’m sure you get my drift.

  283. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 7:58 pm #

    LMAO!!
    Glad you appreciated the “i” reference too… :)

    Slartibartfast: G,
    You know, when I saw the term GTz, my first thought was “that’s intellectually impossible”, but now I think that JD might require something in the TeraTaitz range… I have to agree that it would require imaginary numbers to describe the probability of birther success (and likely negative probabilities as well, since they do damage to their own cause).

  284. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 8:01 pm #

    Exactly!

    sfjeff: And then we move onto your claims that he is an unrepentant Marxist. I have not seen one thing President Obama has done as President that I would consider a “Marxist” action.
    No Marxist that I know of would have engineered the rescue of a private corporation and then arranged to sell it back to the private market.
    No “Marxist” would have proposed a mandatory health insurance using private insurers.
    And certainly no “Marxist” would have missed an opportunity to let private business collapse- as President Obama could have done if he had let Banks and GM fail- to show the failures of capitalism.

    That you- a PHD in poly sci consider President Obama’s actions to be indicative of a Marxist makes me believe you are blinded by your own ideology.

  285. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 8:19 pm #

    G,

    Hello! Sorry I’ve not been around–I’ve been distracted by a myriad of shiny things… By the way, can you send me an email? I think I have a bad address for you.

    I’ve greatly enjoyed your point of view on this thread, as it is pretty much how I imagined someone unbiased and rational would react to his pointless, unsupported drivel (I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but I don’t like Johnny very much…). I completely agree that he’s well into Polarik territory (who also has a “soft” PhD… hmm… I wonder if Polarik ever won a “major award” like Johnny…). I think that he is useful to compare to birthers in order to determine how he is similar (probably due to advanced Obama Derangement Syndrome) and how he differs (not sharing their particular delusion*). I would also note that there is absolutely no evidence which would indicate that John has a sense of humor and while absence of evidence is not evidence of absence I believe that John’s funny bone, so to speak, is evidently absent. In my opinion, this is what makes the Drew toy so much fun to play with. If you’re lucky, you will have annoyed him enough for him to start making wild speculations regarding who you are and what you do and then try to insult you as if his delusions were true–for someone with no sense of humor, the effect is extremely comical! Which just goes to show that even if you can’t make a joke you can still be a joke…

    * He has indicated that he believes that science has disproved evolution (which indicates a world of confusion on its own…) and he did some bragging on his linear regression prowess (as shown in the bestest thesis in the world) until I called him out on talking pseudo-math and challenged him to demonstrate his unparalleled ability at statistical analysis–he hasn’t gotten around to it yet, and I’m not sure how much longer I can keep holding my breath… ;-)

    misha: Conjugate that verb.

    Misha,

    Slartibartfast is doing his John Drew impression so in true John Drew style he is unable to even acknowledge any comment (by someone other than Slarti pretending to be John Drew or even by John Drew himself) which might indicate anything that wasn’t completely positive about me (which is to say me as John Drew in my hypothetical John Drew impersonation rather than the actual John Drew). Is that clear?

  286. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 8:27 pm #

    OK, I’m back.

    1) Williams College: I don’t think it is fair to suggest I was “fired” by Williams College. :-) As I said, I had a year left on my contract. I was not even allowed to advance into the tenure process. It was obvious to me, at the time, that this was a political move designed to keep a young white conservative, anti-affirmative action person out of the department. Today, 50% of the new hires in the political science department are black. Currently, 5 out of the 19 people in the department are black. This is in a world where whites make up 90% of the Ph.Ds in the field. I saw anti-white discrimination take place at Williams College while I was on the faculty there. The fact that I won the William Anderson award from the APSA is objective proof of my rather startling talent as a young scholar. My thesis was later published almost exactly as it was written and it now available for purchase. I have gone on to leverage my training and expertise at American government and public policy to establish my own management consulting company and to win millions of dollars in funding for non-profit charities and educational institutions.

    2) Obama’s College Girlfriends: Don’t you think it is strange that I don’t remember a single girl hanging out with young Obama. As far as I can tell, there are no photos of him with ex-Occidental College girlfriends. There is no evidence of any romances in young Obama’s life. You would think in a world where every move made by Herman Cain is carefully documented that there would be one ex-Obama girlfriend out there discussing what it was like to be on a date with young Obama. I think Obama is lying to the American public about a lot more than his youthful commitment to Marxist socialist ideology. He is lying about having girlfriends too…after all one of the few stories we have about a girlfriend in Dreams is really a story about Bill Ayer’s girlfriend Diane Oughton. I mean, really, why hasn’t a single Obama girlfriend ever been interviewed?

    3) Obama’s Karl Marx Loving Friends: Remnick’s book came out after I went public with my story on the radicalism of young Obama and his friends. My contact was specifically with two of those friends – Boss and Chandoo. (I was dating Boss at the same time she was running the Democrat Socialist Alliance at Oxy.) The fact that Remnick reports that the DSA hung a banner celebrating Karl Marx should be proof enough to a reasonable person that young Obama’s friends were Marxists. Chandoo, by the way, called himself a Marxist socialist and admitted his youthful radicalism in Remnick’s book. Remnick is a liberal…not a RWNJ. :-) I have admitted that I was a Marxist socialist myself when I first met young Obama.

    4) Documentation: I have provided researchers like Stanley Kurtz and David Garrow with dated photos of me and Boss together and with a copy of a card she sent me at the time we were involved in a long-distance romance.

    5) Please Look at the Source Documents: For a look at my story, in my own words, I recommend reading two articles I wrote for American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/john_drew/

    6) Other Collaboration: After I was interviewed by Ronald Kessler, he followed up and sought to interview everyone involved in my debate with young Obama in 1980. Chandoo had an opportunity at that time to say the event never happened and he did not. Both Boss and President Obama were given a fair opportunity to respond to my statements by Kessler and both declined to be interviewed. I take “no comment” as tacit agreement with my take on what happened that evening. Everyone involved was given a fair opportunity to question my integrity and say that I was a liar. They passed on the opportunity.

  287. avatar
    Rickey January 5, 2012 at 8:27 pm #

    Was young man Obama a radical? Not according to Remnick’s book, which “PhD Drew” loves to quote out of context:

    NYPIRG [New York Public Interest Research Group] was seen as a Naderite group, and seen as kind of wishy-washy and bourgeois. But Barack was getting students involved in bread-and-butter issues and he was very good at it. And, while Barack himself was not a radical, he had read, he could speak that language if need be.” p. 121

    In that section of the book Remnick is writing about Obama’s activities in 1985.

    I also noticed that Drew’s name doesn’t appear in the index of Remnick’s book. The author writes 600 pages about Obama, yet he fails to mention the man who knew Obama so very well.

  288. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 8:35 pm #

    Hey, no worries! Yeah, it might be a few days, (due to some other things I’m tied up with…that I’ve already fallen behind by getting distracted here again), but I’ll definitely send you an email with a good address…be patient, I won’t foget. ;)

    Wow…”science disproves evolution”…LOL! That’s a new one! Not that I care what such an obviously damaged and completely unimportant random nut on the internet thinks about anything…but the premise is so laughably backwards…and you brought it up…so I had to comment. ;)

    Slartibartfast: G,
    Hello! Sorry I’ve not been around–I’ve been distracted by a myriad of shiny things… By the way, can you send me an email? I think I have a bad address for you.

  289. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 8:36 pm #

    - Rickey

    Personally, I’m puzzled by why Remnick did not interview me too. I think he must have seen the article about me debating young Obama in the Ron Kessler piece that came out in February 2010 – prior to the publication of The Bridge.

    My theory is that Remnick knew I existed and did not interview me on purpose because it would have spoiled the argument that young Obama was not a programmatic or doctrinaire Marxist socialist. Frankly, I would think that a political scientist like myself would be a highly credible judge of young Obama’s ideological beliefs.

    Nevertheless, my take on young Obama has been featured in Michael Savage’s Trickle Up Poverty, Jack Cashill’s Deconstructing Obama, Stanley Kurtz’s Radical-In-Chief, and Paul Kengor’s Dupes. You can find my name in the index of those book, for sure.

  290. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 8:40 pm #

    Ironically, I’m most annoyed that I’m being attacked here for lacking a sense of humour. Here’s a video taped version of my standard stump speech on meeting young Obama…it looks like I’m getting plenty of laughs with this audience. See, http://youtu.be/HEQ6L2QIMUo

  291. avatar
    Mike Dunford January 5, 2012 at 8:48 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    1) Williams College: I don’t think it is fair to suggest I was “fired” by Williams College. As I said, I had a year left on my contract.I was not even allowed to advance into the tenure process.It was obvious to me, at the time, that this was a political move designed to keep a young white conservative, anti-affirmative action person out of the department.Today, 50% of the new hires in the political science department are black. Currently, 5 out of the 19 people in the department are black.This is in a world where whites make up 90% of the Ph.Ds in the field. I saw anti-white discrimination take place at Williams College while I was on the faculty there. The fact that I won the William Anderson award from the APSA is objective proof of my rather startling talent as a young scholar. My thesis was later published almost exactly as it was written and it now available for purchase.I have gone on to leverage my training and expertise at American government and public policy to establish my own management consulting company and to win millions of dollars in funding for non-profit charities and educational institutions.

    As I recall from our previous discussions, when you say that Williams would not let you stay on the tenure track, what you mean is that they said that they would not be renewing your contract for another 3 years, yes?

    And as I recall from our previous discussions, when you talk about your “rather startling talent as a young scholar”, you are referring to a dissertation that was largely authored while you were a student at Cornell, was accepted by their faculty for a degree, was not given any award until after Williams parted ways with you, and does not actually constitute what any objective observer would consider to be “work done at Williams”, yes?

    And as I recall from our previous discussions, when you talk about your “rather startling talent as a young scholar”, you’re referring to a track record that included the following publications during your time at Williams:

    , yes?

    And as I recall from our previous conversations, you are unwilling or unable to provide the name of one “less qualified” minority candidate who accepted a job you were refused, yes?

  292. avatar
    Mike Dunford January 5, 2012 at 8:53 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: http://youtu.be/HEQ6L2QIMUo

    Holy shit. I would encourage people to watch that video, yes. If nothing else, it casts doubt on Drew’s claims to have been well regarded as a teacher.

  293. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 9:02 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    Ironically, I’m most annoyed that I’m being attacked here for lacking a sense of humour.Here’s a video taped version of my standard stump speech on meeting young Obama…it looks like I’m getting plenty of laughs with this audience.See, http://youtu.be/HEQ6L2QIMUo

    aww a crazy old man got an open mic

  294. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 9:12 pm #

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): aww a crazy old man got an open mic

    He reminds me why I despise self-important blowhards with far too much spare time and so very little sense.

    It’s Buzz Killington . . .

    “‘I’ve quite a mastery of the humorous yarn (laughs). For example, do any of you know the tale of how cornmeal came to be?”
    “Now, who here likes a good story about a bridge?”

  295. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 9:13 pm #

    Good grief! Who cares. You were let go and you are still suffering from sour grapes over it all these years later. Neither of which speaks well for you.. ok, the end. Sorry, but I could care less to be bored by your sad-sack life story any more.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: 1) Williams College: I don’t think it is fair to suggest I was “fired” by Williams College.

    *yawn* Again, who cares?

    This has to be the dumbest point of attack and lame reasoning from you yet.

    For one, you’ve admittedly barely brushed elbows with the guy. Hell, I’m sure there are thousands of random idiots out there who’ve attended at least *3* parties that Obama was also at in his youth…so you don’t even rate amongst those inconsequential nobodies.

    Second, if your whole argument is that during two minor incidents of being at the same party with someone else that you didn’t see them with a girlfriend at the time…. I mean seriously??? That is your argument? ROTFLMAO! Then again, this from the guy that uses that same wisp of barely having met someone to sadly latch onto as his small “claim to fame”…and to pretend he knows anything about the guy or his ideology…

    Look, who cares if Obama had a girlfriend at that time or not. Heck, who cares if the man ever got laid before he got married at all? I mean seriously, dude, you have some major jealously issues and feelings of your own inadequacy on display here that you are hung up over such stuff. Only tells us more about you than anything.

    The President however? Gee, happily married and many years into his one and only marriage and he and his wife have two beautiful and well-behaved young daughters. Oh, and he’s part of the most exclusive career club on the planet – only the 44th person to ever to be US President! Yeah, sounds like he’s doing pretty good there…

    You however…not so much…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: 2) Obama’s College Girlfriends:

    *snore*. Who cares. Seriously, you’ve got issues. Go see a therapist for that obvious jealousy and resentment you carry around.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: 3) Obama’s Karl Marx Loving Friends:

    And that proves what exactly? How tired and sad. The only “documentation” you offer is something that doesn’t seem to prove much of anything at all and is only related to some minor and irrelevant petty hang-up you have over a long-distant and irrelevant past that you are stuck in… boy, you are one of the most scarred individuals I’ve ever encountered!

    Your entire life since college and your little thesis must be such an utter miserable failure and disaster for you to be so fixated and hung up on minor incidents from well over two decades ago… This has to be one of the saddest sagas I’ve ever seen play out in my life!

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: 4) Documentation: I have provided researchers like Stanley Kurtz and David Garrow with dated photos of me and Boss together and with a copy of a card she sent me at the time we were involved in a long-distance romance.

    Sorry, you are a sad joke and just some random desperate loser. Remind me again why I would care to visit your site or give a squat about what your opinion or “credentials” are? Oh that’s right… I don’t and I won’t bother to waste my time. Heck, if I’m going to waste my time getting a laugh at crazy nonsense, I’d waste time checking on some freak like the TimeCube guy before I wasted time with your site. At least his crazy is so out there it is mildly entertaining. You, just boring and bitter with about the lamest story to tell I’ve seen yet.

    But hey, maybe you can find some some bitter sad sack on the street with even a less tenuous claim to Obama than you. Maybe someone that bumped into his cart at the grocery store once and who plans to write a book about his obvious deep personal connection and communist connections to China, because the guy saw a pack of Ramen noodles in the cart…

    …Yeah…find us *that* guy! Because then you wouldn’t be the lamest and most inconsequential sad sack we’ve come across here…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: 5) Please Look at the Source Documents: For a look at my story, in my own words, I recommend reading two articles I wrote for American Thinker at

    Seriously???? Oh please! That is the lamest argument by you yet!

    Hate to burst your widdle bubble there John, but did it ever occur to you, what everyone else has realized is *sooo* blindingly obvious about why none of them bothered to reply to you???

    Hint..hint… because you are irrelevant and a nobody and of no consequence whatsoever at all! They have absolutely NO reason to care what you say or waste their time responding to you. You are just as meaningless and unimportant as every other random looser with a loud mouth and made up claims out there. You are not special. Heck, whiny pathological liars with crappy meaningless lives striving for attention are everywhere. Saying you are a dime a dozen is assigning too much value to you or what you say!

    Wow…I really thought Ron Polarik was the most pathetic ODS-suffering nobody desperate for attention on the internet…but you…you may have him beat!

    I really didn’t think that was possible…so there you go…I’m going to bestow you the “Saddest Clown” prize! Now you have *two* prizes you can brag about for the rest of your life… *woo hoo*

    So quick…you better make a desperate search to find that angry grocery cart guy and hope he’s got to be out there somewhere…amongst the tens of thousands of similar random people who’s run into Obama at the grocery store…and hope you find him quickly!

    Because unless you can produce *that* guy… I seriously doubt we can find another contender better suited for the “Saddest Clown” prize…and you really will have that around your neck to kvetch about for the rest of your bitter life….

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: 6) Other Collaboration: After I was interviewed by Ronald Kessler, he followed up and sought to interview everyone involved in my debate with young Obama in 1980. Chandoo had an opportunity at that time to say the event never happened and he did not. Both Boss and President Obama were given a fair opportunity to respond to my statements by Kessler and both declined to be interviewed. I take “no comment” as tacit agreement with my take on what happened that evening. Everyone involved was given a fair opportunity to question my integrity and say that I was a liar. They passed on the opportunity.

  296. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 9:17 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I was not even allowed to advance into the tenure process. It was obvious to me, at the time, that this was a political move designed to keep a young white conservative, anti-affirmative action person out of the department.

    And despite this you have failed to provide any supporting evidence for your beliefs. Perhaps you have overlooked a far more plausible and logical explanation such as the quality of your academic scholarship. Given your poor track record in publications, it is not unreasonable to reach the conclusion that while your thesis may have been promising, you had failed to show what it takes to gain tenure?

    You have made many assertions which have so far remained totally unsubstantiated, you repeat the same unsubstantiated assertions without any effort to provide any logic, reason or more relevantly substantive evidence. All you claim that you, as an award winning assistant Professor should have deserved all the deference from your department. Apparently the faculty, or the head of the faculty had his reservations and while you attribute this to discrimination or affirmative action, or other ‘flavor of the day explanations’, you have utterly failed what I see as the foundation of any scholarly attempt, namely to provide substantive evidence not just speculation and rumor.

    Your claims would have made more sense if you could have shown some evidence, or if your career had shown that you were a good scholar. But I am not sure that this is evident from your track record.

    How many publications? Peer reviewed? Over what time period. What grants, proposals to fund your research have you been able to lay your hands on, what academic successes beyond your short stay at Williams?

    I believe these are reasonable questions.

  297. avatar
    Thinker January 5, 2012 at 9:23 pm #

    I want to emphasize to those of you who are wasting electrons on John Drew that he used one of KBOA’s videos in an attempt to “out” Fogbow members. KBOA–the deadest of the birfer dead-enders. KBOA who thinks that the fact that the Library of Congress contains material written by Vattel is “proof” that the 2-citizen parents=NBC BS is correct. KBOA, who thinks that Jefferson taught Vattel at William and Mary. KBOA, who thinks that every mention of the term “law of nations” is a reference to Vattel’s book. This is the level of researcher that Mr. Drew relies on to make his points. To paraphrase KBOA herself: Pffft, FAIL. Womp, womp.

    Slartibartfast:
    His source?One of KenyanBornObamAcorn’s videos.

  298. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 9:31 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: . Today, 50% of the new hires in the political science department are black. Currently, 5 out of the 19 people in the department are black.

    Funny how you have to note 50% rather than the far more modest number of 2 out of 4… Not much evidence by any scholarly standard. 5 out of 19 being black, I counted 5 out of 21 , either way, that number is quite reasonable. Women are under-represented while white males are certainly over represented in this sample, as I said, Williams was in your days mostly a white male faculty, so the claim that you were a victim of affirmative action,once again, defies logic.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: after all one of the few stories we have about a girlfriend in Dreams is really a story about Bill Ayer’s girlfriend Diane Oughton. I mean, really, why hasn’t a single Obama girlfriend ever been interviewed?

    Purely speculative again and based on a single data point which can be interpreted in many ways but requires one to accept that Ayers wrote Obama’s book even though any scholarly analysis denies such a possibility. But perhaps you can provide us with an appropriate scholarly analysis that shows otherwise?

    As to Remnick, he quotes Obama’s friends who, unlike you, have known him for more than a fleeting visit and discussion 30 years ago, and who have claimed that the idea of Obama being a Marxist or having been one is somewhat ridiculous.

    Chandoo and Hamid, among others, helped “ignite” Obama politically. “In college, Hasan was a socialist, a Marxist, which is funny since he is from a wealthy family,” Mifflin said. “But he was socialist in the way we were back then—an idealist who believed in economic equality, that’s all. I am not sure how he defined it then, but he really studied it. Barack learned a lot from him, especially the notions of fairness and equality that you see in him today.” Chandoo, for his part, readily admits to his youthful radicalism, but says that Obama was never the least bit doctrinaire: “The only thing doctrinaire about him was his austerity!”

    To slap an ideological tag on Chandoo and Hamid, let alone Obama, is not only unfair; it also credits them with thinking far more programmatically than they did. “I would say we were idealistic and well-read in terms of understanding all the ideologies,” Hamid said. “I remember going home to Pakistan and sitting across from my mother in the summer waxing eloquent about the benefits of socialism. She said, ‘Wahid, this is all well and good, but I think you will grow up.’ I guess that’s what happened. We weren’t Marxists. We were idealistic and believed in the betterment of the lot of the masses and not just the few. If you describe that as socialist, then maybe we did have some socialist thoughts at the time.

    Source: Remnick, David (2010-04-06). The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama (p. 104). Knopf. Kindle Edition.

    So all you have is a banner and your belief that Obama must have been a Marxist because he hung out with people you consider to have been Marxists. Fine, if that is the best you can argue, then from a purely academic position, you have failed miserably in making your case.

    That you in addition 1) use ad hominems whenever people raise valid objections 2)feel the need to inflate your own achievements further undermines your position.

    Since you have made much of self contradictions, I will end with the following

    #FollowSaturday @augustine25 < Attended college with the "original" (Non-media hyped) Barry Soetoro Obama (via @ffhelper) about 4 hours ago via #FollowFriday Helper Retweeted by 1 person VRWCTexan Tom T.

    Augustine25 is John Drew’s alias

    On February 17, 2010, Dr. Drew wrote on ResistNet:

    The larger issue is my relationship with Obama. In truth, I only met him twice.

    Again, we see a trend of inflation of importance… That does not provide a good foundation for a scholarly, academic argument.

    Oh and as to John’s suggestions about Obama

    Lisa Jack, who was an Occidental contemporary and has published photographs taken in those years, commented on a chance meeting with Obama:

    Jack appreciated Obama when she ran into him that summer in a Honolulu nightclub — he a local, she a visiting summer student. “He was sitting there with a woman on each lap. They were babes, and I’m not a babe.”

    Tough when the facts somehow do not add up.

  299. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 9:33 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Ironically, I’m most annoyed that I’m being attacked here for lacking a sense of humour.

    Oh no, you ability to provide us with much laughter is appreciated ;-)

  300. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 9:38 pm #

    Oh and for those who are not aware, Drew has a history when responding to Ken Thomas he resorts, as he has done here, to some very funny claims…

    Fascinating. Sad but fascinating. Am I the only one who sees this?

  301. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 9:45 pm #

    - nbc

    I think it is odd that the people around young Obama claim he had lots of girlfriends, and yet none of these girlfriends has ever been interviewed by the media.

    What’s up with that? Lisa Jack doesn’t say she was Obama’s girlfriend, only that she once saw two girls sitting on his lap. I think Jack is lying. I don’t see young Obama doing that…

    Obama himself claims he had a lot of girlfriends in Dreams From My Father, and yet there isn’t even a photo of him even close to a girlfriend. Obama’s romantic life is as vague and hidden as nbc’s true identify. Why is nbc afraid to reveal his/her real identity? Why isn’t there a single, verified girlfriend in young Obama’s life?

  302. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 9:51 pm #

    Quick comparison ;-)

    obamaconspiracy.org
    Traffic 0.00024
    world rank 747,684
    US Rank 199,006

    thefogbow.com
    Traffic 0.00044
    world rank 255,391
    US Rank 60,019

    anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com
    Traffic 0.000023
    world rank 5,057,867
    US Rank N/A

    Just saying…

  303. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 9:55 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I think it is odd that the people around young Obama claim he had lots of girlfriends, and yet none of these girlfriends has ever been interviewed by the media.

    Yes, how odd… But we have much second hand information of people seeing him date girls

    One of Obama’s male roommates while he was at Columbia, whom he’d first met at Occidental, described a young man popular with the ladies:

    Siddiqi said his female friends thought Obama was “a hunk.”

    “We were always competing,” he said. “You know how it is. You go to a bar and you try hitting on the girls. He had a lot more success. I wouldn’t out-compete him in picking up girls, that’s for sure.”

    That few remember him could be easily explained by him not having many long term relationships but he surely appears to be a hit with the girls…

  304. avatar
    Suranis January 5, 2012 at 9:57 pm #

    I would like an Olympic Medal please, because I had the potential to win one but decided not to bother competing or even training because I knew how good I was because I won one single race.

  305. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 9:58 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Obama himself claims he had a lot of girlfriends in Dreams From My Father

    Page number please… I found three references to girlfriend in the book. Can you help me out here…

  306. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 9:59 pm #

    KBOA is a whole different type of obsessive loser. John just seems to be some random bitter guy with a desperate need to get attention.

    KBOA however…she’s comes across more Fatal Attraction… except Obama has no idea who she is…. still, her reaction to everything is like a jilted stalker who just can’t accept that people just aren’t “in to them”. So she comes across more of the “psycho nut” variety. Others have reported that she’s openly admitted to being a tweaker and meth head…so that would explain a lot of the weird flights of frenetic mania she demonstrates. Then again, I personally can’t confirm this nor do I care about her and her personal problems in life enough to bother finding out. If she ended up going quiet for a long time, I’d probably just suspect she did something really stupid and was probably in a jail cell somewhere… but nothing important enough to make national news.

    Thinker:
    I want to emphasize to those of you who are wasting electrons on John Drew that he used one of KBOA’s videos in an attempt to “out” Fogbow members. KBOA–the deadest of the birfer dead-enders. KBOA who thinks that the fact that the Library of Congress contains material written by Vattel is “proof” that the 2-citizen parents=NBC BS is correct. KBOA, who thinks that Jefferson taught Vattel at William and Mary. KBOA, who thinks that every mention of the term “law of nations” is a reference to Vattel’s book. This is the level of researcher that Mr. Drew relies on to make his points. To paraphrase KBOA herself: Pffft, FAIL. Womp, womp.

  307. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 10:02 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I think Jack is lying. I don’t see young Obama doing that…

    yes I understand why you believe anyone who contradicts you must be lying.. But then again she was far more a friend of Obama than you who met him twice fleetingly, 30 years ago.

    By that standard we could turn the table on you…

  308. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 10:03 pm #

    Yeah…because we heard so many news stories and reports from prior President’s college and high school girlfriends…

    …oh wait…we didn’t. Nevermind.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - nbc

    I think it is odd that the people around young Obama claim he had lots of girlfriends, and yet none of these girlfriends has ever been interviewed by the media.

    What’s up with that?Lisa Jack doesn’t say she was Obama’s girlfriend, only that she once saw two girls sitting on his lap.I think Jack is lying.I don’t see young Obama doing that…

    Obama himself claims he had a lot of girlfriends in Dreams From My Father, and yet there isn’t even a photo of him even close to a girlfriend.Obama’s romantic life is as vague and hidden as nbc’s true identify.Why is nbc afraid to reveal his/her real identity?Why isn’t there a single, verified girlfriend in young Obama’s life?

  309. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 10:05 pm #

    ROTFLMAO!

    Suranis:
    I would like an Olympic Medal please, because I had the potential to win one but decided not to bother competing or even training because I knew how good I was because I won one single race.

  310. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 10:07 pm #

    Sorry, but Obama’s romantic life is quite obvious. Happily married with 2 beautiful and well-mannered children. Sounds like quite the family man success story and winner in that department!

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Obama’s romantic life is as vague and hidden

  311. avatar
    nbc January 5, 2012 at 10:10 pm #

    G: Sorry, but Obama’s romantic life is quite obvious. Happily married with 2 beautiful and well-mannered children. Sounds like quite the family man success story and winner in that department!

    And president of the USA… Considering that Drew may have met our President during a fleeting visit, it must be hard that Obama turned out to be so successful. State Senator, US Senator, President, with Columbia and Harvard education.

    He is da man!!

  312. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 10:17 pm #

    Hey Johnny, it looks like your personal attacks on me (really just you attacking the delusional straw man version of me that you have created) just made people wonder why you couldn’t refute my arguments–why do you think that is?

  313. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 10:18 pm #

    - nbc

    If the people reporting, second-hand, that young Obama had tons of girlfriends, then it seems like it would be easy to find at least the tiniest little bit of evidence of one of these romantic relationships. As far as I know, there are zero pictures of young Obama with a girl available to the public. Not a single woman has ever been interviewed as an Obama girlfriend.

    This is particularly odd since we know so much about the romantic relationships of Obama’s closest friends at Occidental College – including Boss and Chandoo. Ironically, Margot Mifflin and I have been among the most honest and most objective observer’s of the young Obama.

    My personal report, of course, is that I never saw Obama around a girl in anything that looked like a romantic relationship.

    The only report we have on Obama’s sexual experience comes from Larry Sinclair. See, http://www.wnd.com/2011/11/365989/

    Frankly, my take on young Obama is a better fit with Sinclair’s story than with Lisa Jack’s. We know from Remnick’s book, The Bridge, that Obama’s sophomore year at Occidental College was filled with cocaine usage. The sort of random homosexual behavior described by Sinclair is a good fit with the sort of things discussed on the Oxy campus…especially by members of the English literature department where Obama studied.

    It seems to me that the public has not really fully understood Obama because the media has failed to thoroughly investigate his past. If he was so popular with the girls, then why hasn’t even one of them been interviewed?

  314. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 10:19 pm #

    nbc: And president of the USA… Considering that Drew may have met our President during a fleeting visit, it must be hard that Obama turned out to be so successful. State Senator, US Senator, President, with Columbia and Harvard education.

    He is da man!!

    And unlike whoever the fright wing troll, the President has a terrific sense of humor.

  315. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 10:19 pm #

    Should Johnny’s marriage be considered a failure because he doesn’t have children? After all, isn’t that the whole point?

    G:
    Sorry, but Obama’s romantic life is quite obvious.Happily married with 2 beautiful and well-mannered children.Sounds like quite the family man success story and winner in that department!

  316. avatar
    JPotter January 5, 2012 at 10:20 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: my standard stump speech on meeting young Obama…

    You have a “standard stump speech” about a 30-yr old chance encounter?
    So far the picture of Karl Marx has received no comment.
    I’ll hang one tomorrow at work and let you know how it goes.

  317. avatar
    Mike Dunford January 5, 2012 at 10:21 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    Hey Johnny, it looks like your personal attacks on me (really just you attacking the delusional straw man version of me that you have created) just made people wonder why you couldn’t refute my arguments–why do you think that is?

    Because he can’t?

  318. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 10:24 pm #

    I’m sure the good folk here put a high value on the credibility of Larry Sinclair… do you ever do any research into a source before you use it? It has become painfully obvious why Williams fired you.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Frankly, my take on young Obama is a better fit with Sinclair’s story than with Lisa Jack’s.

  319. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 10:27 pm #

    Mike Dunford: Because he can’t?

    He’s a major award winning political science PhD–surely that’s not true!

  320. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 10:29 pm #

    John,

    What is the relevance of my employment history to my critique of your statements and character?

  321. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 10:29 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I think it is odd that the people around young Obama claim he had lots of girlfriends, and yet none of these girlfriends has ever been interviewed by the media.

    Possibly because who Obama dated, like what political ideology interested him, is of no consequence or interest to any sane person.

  322. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 10:33 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: It seems to me that the public has not really fully understood Obama because the media has failed to thoroughly investigate his past.

    Please tell me, “Dr” Drew, what other past Presidents of the USA have you demanded this level of “investigation” from?

  323. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 10:34 pm #

    Do you mean to imply that someone who is obsessed with a couple of conversations that occurred decades ago and a job he lost (also decades ago) due to his own incompetence is not sane? (presumed incompetence, that is–his behavior here and elsewhere suggests that he was a poor performer, academically speaking)

    Daniel: Possibly because who Obama dated, like what political ideology interested him, is of no consequence or interest to any sane person.

  324. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 10:34 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    John,

    What is the relevance of my employment history to my critique of your statements and character?

    Probably the same relevance that Obama’s college sex life is to his eligibility as POTUS.

  325. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 10:34 pm #

    - nbc

    Here’s a picture of me as a young man at Occidental College. See, http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2009/11/augustine-25-remembers-face-to-face.html

    This came out in 2009 before I was interviewed by Ronald Kessler in that NewsMax piece. All I’m asking is why don’t we see a similar picture from young Obama’s life if – as Lisa Jack say – he was so thoroughly popular with girls at Occidental College.

    At this point, I think it makes more sense to say that Obama is lying about his heterosexual relationships. This should raise serious issues about his honesty and integrity. In Dreams From My Father, Obama claims that a lot of girls – black and white – broke his heart. Well, why doesn’t he give us just one name so we can follow up with that.

    You are always demanding collaboration and evidence from me. Why isn’t it fair for us to demand evidence from Obama that he was as popular with the girls as he and his friends claim him to be? See what I mean?

  326. avatar
    Northland10 January 5, 2012 at 10:35 pm #

    Slartibartfast: Hello! Sorry I’ve not been around–I’ve been distracted by a myriad of shiny things…

    Michigan schools going to and winning bowl games?

    Nice to see you around, even if it is for the poster who I now just scroll past after getting the initial experience of him at fb (and he needs to remember…. Publish or Perish).

  327. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 10:35 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    Do you mean to imply that someone who is obsessed with a couple of conversations that occurred decades ago and a job he lost (also decades ago) due to his own incompetence is not sane? (presumed incompetence, that is–his behavior here and elsewhere suggests that he was a poor performer, academically speaking)

    I’m not professionally qualified to pronounce “Dr” Drew insane…. but I would certainly put money on it.

  328. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 10:42 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You are always demanding collaboration and evidence from me. Why isn’t it fair for us to demand evidence from Obama that he was as popular with the girls as he and his friends claim him to be? See what I mean?

    Possibly because a married, successful, educated man who claims to have had girlfriends in college is an ordinary, and hardly surprising claim, of no consequence to anyone, and so the barest of evidence is enough to satisfy any reasonable person.

    On the other hand, a professional loser who drips and moans about how bad the world has been to him, and who only met The present POTUS in passing, and was of no importance then or since, claiming that the President of the United States has falsified every part of his past including his sexual preferences, and has managed to somehow get elected President despite lying about things that are nobody’s damn business anyways…. well that’s an extraordinary claim, and as such requires extraordinary evidence.

    Maybe that’s the difference?

  329. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 10:42 pm #

    - Daniel

    Please… nbc is always demanding more evidence from me, more proof, more data.

    Meanwhile, we cannot verify many of the claims made in Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father.

    One of the most interesting of those claims is that Obama dated a wealthy white woman who took him for a boat ride on the family’s lake.

    Later investigation by Jack Cashill, however, shows that this story actually matches Bill Ayer’s description of his relationship with Diane Oughton. If Obama is claiming that he dated a wealthy white woman in his book, then what is wrong with us asking for evidence to back that up?

    If Obama just made that girlfriend up out of thin air, then he can share that news with us all and the matter will die out. The bottom line is that we should expect our president to be a person of honesty and integrity.

    If Obama dated all the girls he says he dated, then why hasn’t a single one of them ever gone public with the story?

    Fogbow just did a huge story about all the people who knew young Obama. You know what caught my attention? Not a single one of the people they mentioned was an ex-Obama girlfriend. Not one.

  330. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 10:43 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Why isn’t it fair for us to demand evidence from Obama that he was as popular with the girls as he and his friends claim him to be? See what I mean?

    What other President have you demanded proof of sexual preference from “Dr” Drew?

  331. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 10:43 pm #

    “If he was so popular with the girls, then why hasn’t even one of them been interviewed?”

    Here’s one of many extensive interviews with one of the President’s former girlfriends.

    http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/02/the_michelle_obama_interview_h.html

    Gee. That was easy. And I don’t even have a Ph.D.

    Are NPDs usually pathological liars too?

  332. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 10:46 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - Daniel

    Please… nbc is always demanding more evidence from me, more proof, more data.

    Meanwhile, we cannot verify many of the claims made in Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father.

    One of the most interesting of those claims is that Obama dated a wealthy white woman who took him for a boat ride on the family’s lake.

    Later investigation by Jack Cashill, however, shows that this story actually matches Bill Ayer’s description of his relationship with Diane Oughton.If Obama is claiming that he dated a wealthy white woman in his book, then what is wrong with us asking for evidence to back that up?

    If Obama just made that girlfriend up out of thin air, then he can share that news with us all and the matter will die out.The bottom line is that we should expect our president to be a person of honesty and integrity.

    If Obama dated all the girls he says he dated, then why hasn’t a single one of them ever gone public with the story?

    Fogbow just did a huge story about all the people who knew young Obama.You know what caught my attention?Not a single one of the people they mentioned was an ex-Obama girlfriend. Not one.

    Maybe that’s because you are making the extraordinary claims?

    And really, you still havn’t explained why anyone should give a flying fuck at a rolling donut about all this?

    Nor have you listed all the other Presidents you have demanded this sort of detail from?

    Maybe it’s time you answered a few questions “Dr”.

  333. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 10:48 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - Daniel

    Please… nbc is always demanding more evidence from me, more proof, more data.

    Meanwhile, we cannot verify many of the claims made in Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father.

    One of the most interesting of those claims is that Obama dated a wealthy white woman who took him for a boat ride on the family’s lake.

    Later investigation by Jack Cashill, however, shows that this story actually matches Bill Ayer’s description of his relationship with Diane Oughton.If Obama is claiming that he dated a wealthy white woman in his book, then what is wrong with us asking for evidence to back that up?

    If Obama just made that girlfriend up out of thin air, then he can share that news with us all and the matter will die out.The bottom line is that we should expect our president to be a person of honesty and integrity.

    If Obama dated all the girls he says he dated, then why hasn’t a single one of them ever gone public with the story?

    Fogbow just did a huge story about all the people who knew young Obama.You know what caught my attention?Not a single one of the people they mentioned was an ex-Obama girlfriend. Not one.

    Maybe that’s because you are making the extraordinary claims?

    And really, you still havn’t explained why anyone should give a flying f*^&% at a rolling donut about all this?

    Nor have you listed all the other Presidents you have demanded this sort of detail from?

    Maybe it’s time you answered a few questions “Dr”.

  334. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 10:48 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    I’m sure the good folk here put a high value on the credibility of Larry Sinclair…do you ever do any research into a source before you use it?It has become painfully obvious why Williams fired you.

    For being an insufferable douche bag?

  335. avatar
    Rickey January 5, 2012 at 10:49 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - Rickey

    Personally, I’m puzzled by why Remnick did not interview me too.I think he must have seen the article about me debating young Obama in the Ron Kessler piece that came out in February 2010 – prior to the publication of The Bridge.

    My theory is that Remnick knew I existed and did not interview me on purpose because it would have spoiled the argument that young Obama was not a programmatic or doctrinaire Marxist socialist.Frankly, I would think that a political scientist like myself would be a highly credible judge of young Obama’s ideological beliefs.

    Nevertheless, my take on young Obama has been featured in Michael Savage’s Trickle Up Poverty, Jack Cashill’s Deconstructing Obama, Stanley Kurtz’s Radical-In-Chief, and Paul Kengor’s Dupes.You can find my name in the index of those book, for sure.

    You’re puzzled? That is not surprising, given your grossly inflated opinion of yourself. My guess is that Remnick does not believe any of the garbage you have been spewing and that he did not want to poison his book by including your falsehoods.

    You consider being cited by Michael Savage and Jack Cashill to be a badge of honor? It is no wonder that people on the far right are the only ones who take you seriously.

    You and Jerome Corsi give Political Science a bad name.

  336. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 10:51 pm #

    - Daniel

    Please… A ton of people are very interested in the truth about Obama’s sexual preferences. It seems to me that the fact that not one single girlfriend has ever gone public is a matter of great public interest.

    In Christoper Andersen’s book, Barack and Michelle, Michelle’s brothers told her that Obama was not gay. The point is why did they have to even say that to her? What had Obama been doing prior to that moment which made her interested in their “investigation” of Obama.

    I think it is ironic that the folks posting here are demanding unlimited information from me regarding my thesis, my Ph.D., my job record – virtually everything about me – and yet you balk at the simple suggestion that Obama name even one girlfriend in his life prior to marrying Michelle Obama.

    Isn’t it puzzling to you that Obama claims he had plenty of girlfriends and yet not a single one has ever been identified? I think that is shocking. We know all about the love life of Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, John McCain – but absolutely zero about Obama. His friends claim he was surrounded by young women, yet there is zero evidence to back up this claim.

  337. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 10:55 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - Daniel

    Please…A ton of people are very interested in the truth about Obama’s sexual preferences.It seems to me that the fact that not one single girlfriend has ever gone public is a matter of great public interest.

    In Christoper Andersen’s book, Barack and Michelle, Michelle’s brothers told her that Obama was not gay.The point is why did they have to even say that to her?What had Obama been doing prior to that moment which made her interested in their “investigation” of Obama.

    I think it is ironic that the folks posting here are demanding unlimited information from me regarding my thesis, my Ph.D., my job record – virtually everything about me – and yet you balk at the simple suggestion that Obama name even one girlfriend in his life prior to marrying Michelle Obama.

    Isn’t it puzzling to you that Obama claims he had plenty of girlfriends and yet not a single one has ever been identified?I think that is shocking.We know all about the love life of Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, John McCain – but absolutely zero about Obama.His friends claim he was surrounded by young women, yet there is zero evidence to back up this claim.

    You call a handful of birther nutbags a “lot”?

    And How many other Presidents have you dmended they prove their sexual preferences of?

    The only reason you choose to pretend we don’t know as much about Obama as we do about Cain is that you don’t like what you know about Obama, so you pretend it doesn’t exist.

    How many more years of your pathetic life are you going to waste dripping and moaning about how everyone else is to blame for your failures?

  338. avatar
    SluggoJD January 5, 2012 at 10:56 pm #

    WTF, did PooPooPolarik morph into DooDooDrew?

    I guess I just don’t see what’s so special about our latest lunatic. Chronic liar, full of himself, able to con some of the people all of the time, milking the birther issue for every dime he can get…seriously, anyone who gives credence to Larry Sinclair is full of it.

  339. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 10:57 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Isn’t it puzzling to you that Obama claims he had plenty of girlfriends and yet not a single one has ever been identified?

    Not in the least. You see it’s none of my damn business, and it’s not at all important to his job as POTUS.

    Sorry I can’t be as obsessed as you are about his sexual performance.

  340. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 10:58 pm #

    - majority rule

    See what I mean? You tested my claim and found zero interviews with ex-girlfriends. The article you cite is an interview with Michelle Obama.

    If Obama is a gay man pretending to be straight, I would think that this would impact his performance as president, don’t you?

    A detailed interview from at least one of the girlfriends Obama claims to have dated would easily clear up the matter.

    You demand research and proof from me. Why aren’t you demanding research and proof to back up Obama’s claims that he led a heterosexual life prior to meeting and marrying Michelle Obama. As I’ve said, not a single girlfriend has ever been interviewed. Not one.

  341. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 11:02 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You demand research and proof from me. Why aren’t you demanding research and proof to back up Obama’s claims that he led a heterosexual life prior to meeting and marrying Michelle Obama. As I’ve said, not a single girlfriend has ever been interviewed. Not one.

    Because Obama’s not a pathetic loser dripping and moaning about how bad the world is to him, and making up all sorts of ridiculous conspiracies about things that don’t matter in the least about people he has an obvious axe to grind over…..

    You, on the other hand, are that pathetic loser.

    Therein lies the difference.

  342. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 5, 2012 at 11:02 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    Bob,

    I think that John Drew has such a high opinion of John Drew that he literally cannot conceive of anyone who isn’t John Drew that doesn’t share John Drew’s opinion about John Drew.If a person (presumably not John Drew) doesn’t mention John Drew as often as John Drew would like (this comment probably doesn’t mention John Drew as often as John Drew thinks that John Drew should be mentioned–even including this completely gratuitous “John Drew”) that make John Drew sad and anyone who makes John Drew sad must be a horrible person because everyone, whether or not they are John Drew (this is in John Drew’s mind we’re talking about…), knows just how wonderful John Drew is.Remember the zeroth law of John Drew:

    You’ve vastly underestimated the importance of John Drew.

    Not to mention the first law of John Drew:

    You’ve vastly underestimated the significance of the zeroth law of John Drew

    Slarti you’re assuming too much we all know that laws are called John Drews

  343. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 11:04 pm #

    Daniel

    You aren’t keeping up with the news. Don Fulsom has gotten a ton of media attention for supposedly outing Richard Nixon. See, http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=35516

    In the book Nixon’s Darkest Secrets: The Inside Story of America’s Most Troubled President, Fulsom says Nixon had an affair with Charles “Bebe” Rebozo.

    If people are digging up dirt on Richard Nixon, then why aren’t we seeing a similar effort to identify Barack Obama’s old girlfriends?

  344. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 11:04 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: If Obama is a gay man pretending to be straight, I would think that this would impact his performance as president, don’t you?

    If he was an invisible purple spotted unicorn from Betelguese IV, pretending to be straight, it still would not impact his performance as President, because the premise is not worthy of attention from any reasonable person.

    I only care if he can run the country. I’m sorry I can’t be as obsessed as you are about where he puts his genitalia.

  345. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 11:06 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    Daniel

    You aren’t keeping up with the news.Don Fulsom has gotten a ton of media attention for supposedly outing Richard Nixon. See, http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=35516

    In the book Nixon’s Darkest Secrets: The Inside Story of America’s Most Troubled President, Fulsom says Nixon had an affair with Charles “Bebe” Rebozo.

    If people are digging up dirt on Richard Nixon, then why aren’t we seeing a similar effort to identify Barack Obama’s old girlfriends?

    Yeah I didn’t care about any of that drek either.

    You seem inordinately interested in the sex of Presidents

  346. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 11:06 pm #

    Daniel: Not in the least. You see it’s none of my damn business, and it’s not at all important to his job as POTUS.

    Sorry I can’t be as obsessed as you are about his sexual performance.

    There’s no shame if he fantasizes about the President.

  347. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 11:09 pm #

    Majority Will: There’s no shame if he fantasizes about the President.

    There might be for the President

  348. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 11:13 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: See what I mean? You tested my claim and found zero interviews with ex-girlfriends. The article you cite is an interview with Michelle Obama.

    Listen, troll. I didn’t test squat. She was a former girlfriend. If he only had one serious girlfriend, good for him. He obviously found his soulmate and has a beautiful, loving family.

    You, on the other hand, reek of am extremely petty and desperate need for validation and in some ways much too weird and sad for this forum.

  349. avatar
    Northland10 January 5, 2012 at 11:13 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: If Obama is a gay man pretending to be straight, I would think that this would impact his performance as president, don’t you?

    A detailed interview from at least one of the girlfriends Obama claims to have dated would easily clear up the matter.

    Good God!!! What is the color of the sky on your planet? Many of us the real world separate any sexual interest with our actual day job, even if that job is nearly 24/7. Do you understand the word, obsessive?

  350. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 11:14 pm #

    Daniel: There might be for the President

    Good point.

  351. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 11:15 pm #

    Northland10,

    You’re half right (I’m a natural-born MSU fan* with a BS and an MS from State who greatly enjoyed Cousins’ last game–my enthusiasm for UofM’s victories is, shall we say, somewhat less… ;-)). And how about those LIONS! :-D

    You really have to thank Johnny for me showing up here–I was playing with him on the Fogbow (before he got kicked off for being a misogynistic git) and his blog and when I saw he was here and how brutally he was being pwned by you guys (special mention to Misha and the rest of the red brigade–well done!), I just had to join in the fun…

    I’ve been out of academia and working on a sekrit project** for a while now–publish or perish isn’t really my game anymore either, although I’m looking to have my work judged on its merits which seems to be a foreign concept to Johnny*** who, near as I can tell, thinks that he deserves recognition due to his status as an oppressed white male (who won a major award for past research after he was fired for not producing any new research in three years… this is the greatest tragedy in the history of the world, by the way). We’ll see what happens.

    * Blood and Soil

    ** it’s not really a secret, but I think that pretending it is annoys Johnny…

    ***he doesn’t really get the whole “science” thing… or the “math” thing, or the “reality” thing for that matter.

  352. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 11:16 pm #

    Daniel:

    The real issue here is Obama’s integrity and honesty. He lied about his close ties to Bill Ayers. He lied about his ties to Marxist socialist ideology.

    I think it is reasonable to ask if he is now lying about his sexuality and the nature of his relationship with Michelle Obama. He sure likes to present the image that he is a heterosexual. I have no doubt that part of the reason people voted for him is that they assumed he was not gay and that names and addresses of former girlfriends would be readily available.

    Today, we see a very different story. We live in a world where the media is obsessed with Richard Nixon’s sexual behavior, but shows absolutely no interest at all in whether or not Obama – and at least two of his friends – are lying about his popularity with girls.

    I’m just amazed that people at this site are demanding that I turn over my employment records and personal information, and yet display no interest in the possibility that Obama is out and out lying about his life in Dreams From My Father. Imagine what Dreams would have read like if Obama had told the truth? It would be a very different book and I doubt Obama would still be president.

  353. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 11:18 pm #

    Yes, that’s pretty much where I was going with that…

    Majority Will: For being an insufferable douche bag?

  354. avatar
    richCares January 5, 2012 at 11:19 pm #

    John C. Drew you lied about your relationship with Obama
    see: http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/?p=16905

  355. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 11:21 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I’m just amazed that people at this site are demanding that I turn over my employment records and personal information,

    I don’t care who you are. What little tripe you’ve spewed here is nauseating enough.

  356. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 11:26 pm #

    You mean like you are doing? LOL! Wow…is there anything you don’t project your own failures onto?

    Again, who cares? Why are you so jealous of the president and hung up his dating record back in college? WTF? Do you have some sick sexual obsession or fansasies about Obama yourself? I mean really, Larry Sinclair? You just keep doing whatever you can to further damage your credibility don’t you? Are you trying to express your own latent homosexuality here? Is that was this is really about??

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: If the people reporting, second-hand

  357. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 11:26 pm #

    Majority Will:

    I think it is very odd that you would persecute me when I’m telling the truth about young Obama’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought, but then display no interest in demanding that Obama prove one of the most important claims he makes in Dreams From My Father.

    You strike me as a typical liberal. You really can’t handle the truth. Do you really think for one minute that our drug using president wasn’t having sex from the moment he entered Occidental College to the moment he married Michelle Obama. Please, give me a break.

    If he was having, as he claims, intense heterosexual experiences, then why hasn’t a single girl or female partner come forward to verify this? Why should we wait until Obama leaves office to determine whether or not he really dated a wealthy white woman whose family owned a farm with a lake? If Obama is lying about stuff like that, I want to know the truth now – not later.

  358. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 11:29 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    Daniel:

    The real issue here is Obama’s integrity and honesty.He lied about his close ties to Bill Ayers.He lied about his ties to Marxist socialist ideology.

    I think it is reasonable to ask if he is now lying about his sexuality and the nature of his relationship with Michelle Obama.He sure likes to present the image that he is a heterosexual.I have no doubt that part of the reason people voted for him is that they assumed he was not gay and that names and addresses of former girlfriends would be readily available.

    Today, we see a very different story.We live in a world where the media is obsessed with Richard Nixon’s sexual behavior, but shows absolutely no interest at all in whether or not Obama – and at least two of his friends – are lying about his popularity with girls.

    I’m just amazed that people at this site are demanding that I turn over my employment records and personal information, and yet display no interest in the possibility that Obama is out and out lying about his life in Dreams From My Father.Imagine what Dreams would have read like if Obama had told the truth?It would be a very different book and I doubt Obama would still be president.

    No the real issue is you CLAIM he lied, and you CLAIM it’s significant, and you CLAIM his relationship with his wife is somehow your business. Are you seeing a trend here?

    Obama’s claims are on the face, normal and ordinary, and his visible life now bears out those normal, ordinary claims. No more evidence is required, since it’s none of my business any ways.

    YOU are the pathetic loser making grandiose, extraordinary claims about things which are none of your damn business, and which run counter to what any sane person can see. YOU are the one who needs to provide extraordinary hard objective and substantive evidence to support your extraordinary claims, not Obama. Your pathetic and ridiculous conjecture arising from speculation drawn from your obsession with Obama’s genitalia do not qualify as evidence, nor does any of the drek you’ve drooled out onto the forum floor here.

    Obama gets the benefit of the doubt, both from common sense, and from a presumption of innocence ( I assume you’re at least somewhat familiar with that term, mr polisci expert).

    You, the loser making the wild accusations, get no such benefit. The burden of proof rests squarely on your shoulders. The burden of proof is not satisfied by coulda/woulda/shoulda, Mr Polisci expert.

  359. avatar
    Rickey January 5, 2012 at 11:29 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:

    I think it is reasonable to ask if he is now lying about his sexuality and the nature of his relationship with Michelle Obama.He sure likes to present the image that he is a heterosexual.I have no doubt that part of the reason people voted for him is that they assumed he was not gay and that names and addresses of former girlfriends would be readily available.

    My experience has been that people who are obsessed with the sexual preferences of others are often conflicted about their own sexuality.

    So what is the true story, Dr. Drew? Did Obama reject your advances during one of your fleeting meetings with him at Occidental?

  360. avatar
    Daniel January 5, 2012 at 11:30 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I think it is very odd that you would persecute me when I’m telling the truth about young Obama’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought, but then display no interest in demanding that Obama prove one of the most important claims he makes in Dreams From My Father.

    If you don’t wish to be ridiculed, stop being ridiculous.

  361. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 11:40 pm #

    G,

    Little Johnny doesn’t understand that arguments have merits that are independent of who presents the argument. I do admit that I am somewhat mystified that Johnny thinks I would be embarrassed about information which I posted about myself, but since by that point he didn’t really have any credibility left to loose, it’s kind of a moot point…

  362. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 11:47 pm #

    Again, no one cares what you think. I clearly think you are a pathological liar with severe issues and one of the worst inferiority complexes I have ever seen. Your bizarre hang-ups only reveal insights into you and say nothing at all about Obama, a man you barely ever met and clearly didn’t know. Your weird fixation on his college dating life is seething with obvious jealousy…and potentially indicating some weird sexual obsessions of your own.

    Guess what. He’s President AND happily married with 2 beautiful children.

    And you…you’re nobody.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    - nbc

    Here’s a picture of me as a young man at Occidental College.See, http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2009/11/augustine-25-remembers-face-to-face.html

    This came out in 2009 before I was interviewed by Ronald Kessler in that NewsMax piece.All I’m asking is why don’t we see a similar picture from young Obama’s life if – as Lisa Jack say – he was so thoroughly popular with girls at Occidental College.

    At this point, I think it makes more sense to say that Obama is lying about his heterosexual relationships.This should raise serious issues about his honesty and integrity.In Dreams From My Father, Obama claims that a lot of girls – black and white – broke his heart.Well, why doesn’t he give us just one name so we can follow up with that.

    You are always demanding collaboration and evidence from me.Why isn’t it fair for us to demand evidence from Obama that he was as popular with the girls as he and his friends claim him to be?See what I mean?

  363. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 11:54 pm #

    By “a ton of people” you mean you…and a few freaks.

    The rest of America…not so much.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Please… A ton of people are very interested in the truth about Obama’s sexual preferences. It seems to me that the fact that not one single girlfriend has ever gone public is a matter of great public interest.

    Correction: A few people, who’ve caught you in previous lies about yourself, have pressed for clarification from you on claims which you seem to be the one bringing up in the first place.

    The rest of us…we don’t care about you or your past at all. Not interested in you. Sorry. You are neither interesting nor important. Just crazy and desperate for attention. Sad.

    Again, where is there a requirement for someone to have a girlfriend before they marry their wife? A lot of Evangelicals would take serious issue with that…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I think it is ironic that the folks posting here are demanding unlimited information from me regarding my thesis, my Ph.D., my job record – virtually everything about me – and yet you balk at the simple suggestion that Obama name even one girlfriend in his life prior to marrying Michelle Obama.

  364. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 5, 2012 at 11:54 pm #

    - richCares

    Let’s get one thing straight. I NEVER said I was a classmate of Obama’s. My ex-girlfriend was Obama’s classmate. Not me.

    [Personal information redacted, Doc], the OFGS blogger, makes a lot of mistakes in her report on me including using a Twitter post which mentioned my @Augustine25 address, but did not come from me. It is clear from the context that it was a Follow Friday post made by someone who wanted others to follow me. It was not a tweet from me. It would be silly for me to tweet people to Friday Follow me.

    Nevertheless, [Personal information redacted, Doc] has also made the foolish mistake of asserting that I worked for Ann Coulter while she was an undergraduate student at Cornell University. This was a silly error that any responsible person would have understood if they had the least amount of experience in higher education.

    I brought both these issues to [Personal information redacted, Doc]s attention immediately, but she did nothing to correct the record. She is an irresponsible blogger who makes very silly mistakes.

  365. avatar
    G January 5, 2012 at 11:55 pm #

    Well said.

    Daniel: Possibly because a married, successful, educated man who claims to have had girlfriends in college is an ordinary, and hardly surprising claim, of no consequence to anyone, and so the barest of evidence is enough to satisfy any reasonable person.

    On the other hand, a professional loser who drips and moans about how bad the world has been to him, and who only met The present POTUS in passing, and was of no importance then or since, claiming that the President of the United States has falsified every part of his past including his sexual preferences, and has managed to somehow get elected President despite lying about things that are nobody’s damn business anyways…. well that’s an extraordinary claim, and as such requires extraordinary evidence.

    Maybe that’s the difference?

  366. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 11:56 pm #

    Northland10,

    See what I mean?

    Johnny,

    Which of the statements I’ve made about you would be impacted by answer to any of the questions you ask? Why?

    p.s. Are you even aware how badly this line of attack is failing you or why?

  367. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 5, 2012 at 11:59 pm #

    While Johnny is a malicious blogger who recklessly and negligently makes significant errors of fact.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: She is an irresponsible blogger who makes very silly mistakes.

  368. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 12:05 am #

    BS. We only know about Cain’s wife, the woman he had a recent affair with and women who came forward claiming he harrassed them.

    We don’t know nor do we care or need to know anything about who he dated in his youth.

    Same with Gingrich and McCain – we know of affairs they had cheating on their wifes, because it played out while they were in public office!

    We know nothing about who they dated when they were young. Nor would it matter. Nor do we care.

    So you’re analogies have ALL just been busted.

    Note: Everyone you put as a reference is someone who cheated on their wifes and/or failed in marriage one or several times.

    Compared to Obama – been married to the SAME woman all along, with two healthy and well-adjusted children. So he’s been a shining example of traditional family values and a success story in that regards, while the others are known for their public adult failures.

    You really are a consumed with bitter jealousy of Obama aren’t you…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Isn’t it puzzling to you that Obama claims he had plenty of girlfriends and yet not a single one has ever been identified? I think that is shocking. We know all about the love life of Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, John McCain – but absolutely zero about Obama. His friends claim he was surrounded by young women, yet there is zero evidence to back up this claim.

  369. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 12:11 am #

    Are you a gay man pretending to be straight John? Is that what this really is about? It sure seems like it… I mean, what other explanation can there be for how only you are hung up with Obama’s sex life? At first I thought you were just jealous of him…but now I see it is more than that… an unrequited crush that makes you feel like a spurned lover…

    …maybe you are like KBOA after all.

    Sorry, but we’re not here to be your analysis couch for your own personal sexual hangups and issues. If you are trying to finally come out of the closet, find somewhere that cares to do it.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: If Obama is a gay man pretending to be straight, I would think that this would impact his performance as president, don’t you?

  370. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 12:13 am #

    g.

    LMAO Wow! You just don’t get it. If Obama is lying about his youthful heterosexual relationships – as appears to be the case – then he is only living the illusion of a healthy marriage as POTUS.

    Frankly, your case would be much stronger if there was evidence of even one single girlfriend in Obama’s life prior to meeting Michelle Obama.

    Just one…

    People are obsessed with claims that Richard Nixon was gay, why isn’t there the same level of interest in whether or not Obama is gay.

    Right now, the only report we have of anyone messing around with Obama comes from Larry Sinclair. If Sinclair is correct, then Obama was the sort of high risk guy who used drugs and put Michelle’s health and safety at risk through contact with other men. Obama might have killed Michelle with the AIDS virus if Sinclair’s story is correct.

    Obama looks like a very different person if you view his through the lens that reminds you not a single girlfriend has ever been pictured with young Obama or reported dating young Obama. Not a single one…

  371. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 12:16 am #

    Wow… so you lack logic skills too, I see. That was one of the worst irrelevant connect-the-dots attempts I’ve seen recently. For someone who claims to have a PhD, you sure come off like a really stupid person.

    I’m starting to agree with others here that I’ve been too light in my assessment of your problems. Your level of illogic and intense obsession could be more than just an extremely bitter sore loser with low self-esteem and many recent years of failure to his name…is sounds like it has morphed into a full blown psychosis of some sort.

    If you aren’t clinically mentally ill *and* mentally challenged, then you sure do a good job of presenting yourself that way.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    Daniel
    You aren’t keeping up with the news.Don Fulsom has gotten a ton of media attention for supposedly outing Richard Nixon. See, http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=35516
    In the book Nixon’s Darkest Secrets: The Inside Story of America’s Most Troubled President, Fulsom says Nixon had an affair with Charles “Bebe” Rebozo.
    If people are digging up dirt on Richard Nixon, then why aren’t we seeing a similar effort to identify Barack Obama’s old girlfriends?

  372. avatar
    Daniel January 6, 2012 at 12:18 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You just don’t get it. If Obama is lying about his youthful heterosexual relationships – as appears to be the case – then he is only living the illusion of a healthy marriage as POTUS.

    Nooooooooooo………

    YOU just don’t get it.

    Nobody cares that you are obsessed with your delusions of the sex life of the President.

    We don’t care what you’ve dreamt up about him.

    You’re right, I don’t care that you think he’s lying. I don’t care if you think he’s a narwal in disguise either, for which you’ve given an equal amount of credible evidence.

    If I cared at all about all the myriad ridiculous conspiracies people have made up about Obama, I’d end up wasting my life obsessed with woulda/shoulda/coulda… in short, I’d be you.

  373. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 12:21 am #

    No he hasn’t. Sorry, but NO evidence whatsoever of him lying on any of that.

    YOU however have been telling whoppers here at such a rate that you are obviously pathological…

    So again, the only common pattern I see is your continued ability to merely PROJECT your own failings onto others.

    Therefore, again quite telling. What you are really saying here is that YOU are a liar. Yeah, we know that.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: The real issue here is Obama’s integrity and honesty. He lied about his close ties to Bill Ayers. He lied about his ties to Marxist socialist ideology.

  374. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 12:22 am #

    g.

    Obama is the one who asserts he dated girls and was involved in heterosexual relationships prior to marrying Michelle Obama. I’m just saying that there is zero proof that those assertions are true. nbc demands that I back up what I write with proof. Why is it so strange to ask Obama to prove what he wrote in Dreams was truthful?

    The issue here is not sex. The issue is honesty and integrity. Based on my experience, I think Obama lied to the public in Dreams and created a false narrative about himself – including his supposed ties to girls and his neglected ties to Marxist socialist extremists.

    Basically, Obama is a liar. He is lying about his sexual history and his intellectual history in Dreams. I think it is important for the media – and for bloggers – to confront Obama on both issues. Remnick confirmed my take on young Obama’s Marxist views but did not interview a single Obama girlfriend. Neither did Christopher Andersen in his book, Barack and Michelle.

    The issue here is Obama’s honesty and integrity. Why should we have a president who is living a lie everyday he is in office?

  375. avatar
    Daniel January 6, 2012 at 12:23 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Obama looks like a very different person if you view his through the lens

    …of madness

  376. avatar
    Daniel January 6, 2012 at 12:24 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Obama is the one who asserts he dated girls and was involved in heterosexual relationships prior to marrying Michelle Obama. I’m just saying that there is zero proof that those assertions are true

    And I’m saying nobody sane cares

  377. avatar
    Daniel January 6, 2012 at 12:26 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: The issue here is Obama’s honesty and integrity. Why should we have a president who is living a lie everyday he is in office?

    I’d rather have a president who lies about having college girlfriends over a President who lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction.

    Nobody ever died over a locker room bragging

  378. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 12:29 am #

    Where do you come up with this nonsense? Sorry, I watch and read a lot of news and often have some news channel on in the background while I’m working. Haven’t come across any massive stories about Nixon’s sexual behavior. In fact, I can’t recall a single one. Nada. Zip. I’m sure, somewhere, someone wrote some book about the topic and somwhere, on some channel *someone* then talked about it, but “media is obsessed with Richard Nixon’s sexual behavior”…sorry that never happened.

    Again, what is with you and your creepy, bizarre fetish obsession with President’s and their sex lives? First Obama and now Nixon…*eeeww*. You really, really have some disturbing personal issues and hang-ups going on. Go have your coming out party somewhere else.

    Neither this blog nor its readers care about the sexual pasts of this President nor prior ones. Get over it and move on. *sheesh*

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Today, we see a very different story. We live in a world where the media is obsessed with Richard Nixon’s sexual behavior,

  379. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 12:34 am #

    You can attack me all you want on a personal basis, but it doesn’t change the fact that I’m applying the same common sense that helped me win the William Anderson Award from the APSA. It is the same common sense that makes me a successful business owner today.

    If Obama is telling the truth about the girlfriends he knew prior to meeting Michelle Obama, then how come no one has ever interviewed those women and debriefed them to get the truth?

    If Obama is telling the truth about the girlfriends he knew prior to meeting Michelle Obama, then how come we do not have a single photograph linking Obama to one of these women?

    Instead of creating all sorts of elaborate explanations, the simplest answer is that these girlfriends were fabrications designed to hide the truth from the public. The simple and easiest explanation is that Obama is lying about them in Dreams From My Father.

    The media hid FDR’s affairs and JFK’s affairs, it hid what it new about LBJ and William Jefferson Clinton’s affairs. It kept John Edward’s affair secret for months. Why is it so hard for you to see that this same media is covering up for Obama’s lack of girlfriends?

  380. avatar
    Majority Will January 6, 2012 at 12:36 am #

    Far more interesting and actually on topic:

    1980: U.S. secret Mars teleportation program and rudimentary facilities on Mars

    The firsthand, eyewitness testimony of Mr. Basiago and Mr. Stillings as to the existence of a secret U.S. presence on Mars that is made possible by a revolutionary “jump room” technology that has been concealed from the public is congruent with similar accounts given by three other Mars whistle blowers:

    (1) Former U.S. serviceman Michael Relfe, who spent 20 years as a member of the permanent security staff of a U.S. facility on Mars;

    (2) Former Department of Defense (DoD) scientist Arthur Neumann, who has testified publicly that he teleported to a U.S. facility on Mars for DoD project meetings; and

    (3) Laura Magdalene Eisenhower, great-granddaughter of U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who in 2007 refused a covert attempt to recruit her into what was described to her as a secret U.S. colony on Mars.

    Not to burst the Martian bubble but we could probably find a few better uses for teleportation on Earth.

  381. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 12:38 am #

    Look, you are free to ask those very *few* people, (who’ve obviously debated you in the past, and who only seem to be asking about your past because they’ve caught you fibbing and embellishing things) to take up the issue with you somewhere else or offline or via exchanging private emails on the issues.

    This is a public forum on a specific topic, which you’ve just come over to on your own volition and posted on.

    Most of us here have NO INTEREST whatsoever in you or your past. Sorry, we don’t care. Not about you. Not about your dubious and shoddy claims. Not about your opinions or obsessions on Obama.

    You’ve shown nothing of value or interest, relevant to any of the actual topics we cover on this blog. You are seriously just blathering on and on and on about the same stupid and boring stuff that we REALLY DON’T CARE about. It is petty, meaningless and irrelevant. You are nobody, so your random musings and conjecture about things you obviously have little actual knowledge about don’t mean squat and are boring…and are really starting to come across deviantly creepy too. So give it a rest.

    We’ve heard the same creepy obsessive and utterly irrelevant stories from you over and over and over again. You’ve said nothing new. All these posts and all you are is a broken record on the same useless cr@p again and again and again. If that isn’t a sign of mental illness on display, I don’t know what is!

    If you want to post here, contribute something relevant and informed about the specific topics at hand. If you can’t do that, I’m going to publicly request to Dr. C. that he ban you.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I’m just amazed that people at this site are demanding that I turn over my employment records and personal information, and yet display no interest in the possibility that Obama is out and out lying about his life in Dreams From My Father. Imagine what Dreams would have read like if Obama had told the truth? It would be a very different book and I doubt Obama would still be president.

  382. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 12:51 am #

    I have yet to see you tell the truth on ANYTHING here at all.

    You make a lot of wild claims and smears about Obama and his youth. Someone you barely ever met and didn’t know.

    All you have done is gone off the rails on your own bizarre fantasy conjecture obsession. That is NOT truth. That is conjecture. In other words, pure made up dreck and nothing but a product of your own weird imagination.

    It has no place here. We deal in facts and sourced information. Wild musings based off of scant meetings 30 years ago just don’t cut it.

    Further, you keep demanding that we have the same concerns and hold to the same hang-ups that you do on utterly trivial and irrelevant issues that have nothing to do with one’s ability to be President, nor anything to do with the activities of this Administration.

    We DON’T share your concerns. Get that through your limited little thick head. All these posts and you haven’t gotten a clue that NOT A SINGLE PERSON has expressed any interest in ANY of the weird little petty worries that you’re obsessed with. None. Nada. Not one.

    You bring nothing to this blog of value. I don’t care if others asked you about your past or your personal information. You and your “bonafides” aren’t relevant to anything on this blog either. Take those conversations up with those individuals off-line and go elsewhere with them.

    Really, its like a huge flock of pigeons with diarrhea swooped in and cr@pped all over the place. All you’ve provided is to stink up the area with a bunch loose nonsense spewed forth from your @ss.

    I mean seriously, I know you are a very damaged person, but can’t you at least pretend to act like a normal person and contribute something relevant and sourced that is on topic?

    Get a clue – when folks tell you they are not interested or don’t share a concern or think your ideas are “creepy”…that should register with any sane person that they need to drop that failed line of conversation and move on… *sheesh*

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I think it is very odd that you would persecute me when I’m telling the truth about young Obama’s commitment to Marxist socialist thought, but then display no interest in demanding that Obama prove one of the most important claims he makes in Dreams From My Father.

  383. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 6, 2012 at 12:56 am #

    John,

    Have you ever considered how rude you are being to Doc C? (Who is, after all, our host here) Has anything you’ve said been even remotely connected to Mars? Has anyone here said “how interesting John, tell me more…”? What was your intention in posting on this thread? How do you think you appear to people reading this thread?

    Doc,

    Mea culpa–I’ve just come here to poke John with a pointy stick, but you were the one who lured him here by using his claim for your pun. Personally, I think that President Obama’s secret base must be on Venus–why else would they have all of those clouds there?

  384. avatar
    Daniel January 6, 2012 at 12:58 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You can attack me all you want on a personal basis, but it doesn’t change the fact that I’m applying the same common sense that helped me win the William Anderson Award from the APSA.

    Then that particular award was very poorly adjudicated, or it was bought.

    If you don’t want to be rifdiculed on a “personal basis” then don’t employ ridiculous attacks of other people based on their personal life.

  385. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 12:58 am #

    Again.. WHO CARES!

    Nothing he did in college MATTERS or is relevant to his being President now…several decades later!

    Not his experimentation with drugs. Not his dating habits. Not who he did or didn’t party with. NONE OF IT. Zip. Nada.

    Get it through your head. You’ve covered this same ground already. Over and over and over again here.

    We are not interested nor concerned in the least. You are a broken record and beating dead horses. 100% of the responses to you on these issues have all said the same thing – There is NO interest and NO traction here in your same silly claims. Move on.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You strike me as a typical liberal. You really can’t handle the truth. Do you really think for one minute that our drug using president wasn’t having sex from the moment he entered Occidental College to the moment he married Michelle Obama. Please, give me a break.

  386. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 1:02 am #

    G.

    Thank you for signifying that I have won this debate. In my experience, I’m usually expelled from these blogs at the point where my critique of President Obama starts making the greatest possible headway with swing voters. As a young man, I displayed an almost eerie grasp of the truth about political situations – including the relationship between child labor laws and child welfare programs – and stuck to the truth despite massive social pressure to abandon my thesis.

    Over my life, I have been proven right about the importance of child labor laws in predicting the rise of child-oriented welfare programs.

    I was attacked when I said welfare programs harmed people, now those programs have been replaced with work requirements.

    The affirmative action programs I fought against in California are now illegal.

    My take on young Obama’s ideological extremism was dismissed at first – now it is published in at least four books on Obama’s life.

    My questions about why no Obama girlfriends have ever been interviewed by the media represent the same, bold, courageous. original insight.

    I didn’t win the William Anderson Award from the APSA because I was the best researcher, the best math modeler, or the best writer. I won because I courageously created new truth that changed the way we think about the U.S.

    In my experience, liberal claim to appreciate freedom of speech, but – in the end – they are all to eager to silence their opponents. On my blogsite, in contrast, I publish the comments of my detractors and do not censor anyone. I’m grateful that new technology is on the side of those of us who treasure freedom and who are willing to risk their lives to bring about needed changes in our hurting world.

  387. avatar
    JPotter January 6, 2012 at 1:07 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:… that helped me win the William Anderson Award from the APSA …

    Man that must have been one hell of an award!

    Meanwhile, ol’ Karl has garnered his first comment:

    “What the hell is this fuzzy, toilet brush-lookin’ dude doing here?”

    For reference, I have posted this image, printed on a standard letter page on a nice, white wall, all by itself. No distractions, not even a caption. I admit, a very generic experiment, but, since you were unable/unwilling to provide more detail regarding the anecdote at the heart of your obsession, I’m trying to keep it as free from bias as possible. That, and the experiment was deemed not worthy of a budget. If you’d like to contribute to our research in hopes of generating more useful results, please click here.

    We’re all hopin’ Karl gets more action this weekend. Stay tuned!

  388. avatar
    Daniel January 6, 2012 at 1:08 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Thank you for signifying that I have won this debate. In my experience, I’m usually expelled from these blogs at the point where my critique of President Obama starts making the greatest possible headway with swing voters.

    If your performance here is any indication you are expelled from a blog when the level of disgust over your inhumanity rises to the point of biliousness.

    Like most trolls, you come to a forum, be as disruptive, asinine, and disgusting as you can possibly be, and then when you get tossed because of it, you pretend it’s because you were either victorious, or because you’re a martyr.

    So please go ahead and have your delusions of grandeur. You’re a sad, sorry little man, and it is that condition alone which guides your interactions.

    No, we’re not mad at you. If I feel anything at all towrd you, it’s pity, but that is well tempered with the knowledge that you are what you are, because you’ve chosen that road yourself.

    In parting let me offer you this one question.

    How can we miss you if you won’t go away?

  389. avatar
    Daniel January 6, 2012 at 1:10 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: In my experience, liberal

    Good thing I’m not a liberal, and it’s a good thing for us conservatives that you are not taken seriously and thus we are not judged by your delusions.

  390. avatar
    JPotter January 6, 2012 at 1:10 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:I … created new truth …

    !?????

    Thanks for turning it up a notch, Mr. Drew!

  391. avatar
    sfjeff January 6, 2012 at 1:15 am #

    <a href="#comment-. You are always demanding collaboration and evidence from me. Why isn’t it fair for us to demand evidence from Obama that he was as popular with the girls as he and his friends claim him to be? See what I mean?

    Ummm yes, we are always demanding collaboration and evidence from you. What I wonder is why you are so threatened by something as simple as some collaboration for the rather bold claim you have made?

    None of us are obsessed with Obama’s sex life like you are, none of us are speculating as to what Obama’s sex life is- we see the evidence in front of us every day- a healthy, prosperous husband and wife with two children- without a hint of scandal or adultery.

    I pointed out to you that we have more evidence that President Obama had girlfriends, than we do that you had. Which is odd because much of your claim rests on your claiming that Boss was your girlfriend.

    So again- why has Boss never confirmed she was your girlfriend? If she was your girlfriend, why has she never come out in support of your story? There is not a single girlfriend I had in college who would not back me up today if I asked them to. Why is your ‘ex-girlfriend’

    And why are you so obsessed with Obama’s sex life?

  392. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 1:16 am #

    Are you projecting again and trying to tell us something about yourself here John?

    You are definitely demonstrating strong signs that indicate mental illness. Your commentary pattern here definitely suggests a whole host of pathologies going on.

    Your weird obsessions with irrelevant sexual issues and fixation on gay sex, suggests you are a deviant.

    Your bizarre bitter fixation with your early career and desperate need to convince us you are “important” suggests just the opposite – a bitter has-been and failure. Are you trying to tell us something here about the truth of your own financial and living situation? Because you sure don’t come across as a successful or stable person in the least…nor someone smart enough or with the social skills to keep themselves from screwing up their own life and fortunes over and over and over again…

    All I’ve seen in your behavior since the beginning is obsessions and fixations that seem to really be about what is going on with you. So I can only assume everything you are “wondering” here is really just more of your subconsious projection seeping through…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: If you were a mental patient, then people will see that your line of attack is influenced by your mental illness. If you were developing porn websites, then people will see that your line of attack is influenced by your deviant behavior. If you were on welfare, then people will see your line of attack is influenced by your dependence on government for financial support. If you were living with your parents, then it will verify my take on you as being an immature boy child Democrat.

  393. avatar
    sfjeff January 6, 2012 at 1:33 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: G. Thank you for signifying that I have won this debate. In my experience, I’m usually expelled from these blogs at the point where my critique of President Obama starts making the greatest possible headway with swing voters. P>

    John.

    Do you have any actual collaborating testimony or evidence that:
    a) Barack Obama ever spoke with you?
    b) Barack Obama ever spoke with you about Marxism?
    c) That Barack Obama ever claimed to be a Marxist?

    Post the actual quotes to support your claim- not inference, not speculation- or admit that your story of your discussion with Obama is what it is- your uncollaborated story.

  394. avatar
    sfjeff January 6, 2012 at 1:39 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: G. Thank you for signifying that I have won this debate. In my experience, I’m usually expelled from these blogs at the point .

    Next point:

    John- you have claimed that your analysis reveals that President Obama is a Marxist. You also portray yourself as a having a doctorage in Political Science.

    So here is my challenge to you John- should be simple for someone as educated as yourself.

    List the 3 major principles of Marxism.

    Explain how Barack Obama’s actions in saving Big Banks and GM fit in with those principles.

    Don’t disappoint me John.

  395. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 1:39 am #

    *Sigh* NO John, You don’t get it.

    I don’t know what “case” you are talking about, as the only one trying to make a case and utterly failing here, is you.

    I’ve repeatedly said that I don’t care about what the president did or who he dated in college. That’s not a case. That’s a response to your irresponsible, silly, and quite dysfuntional obsessions.

    I’ve repeatedly said that NONE of that is relevant to his being President. And it simply is not. I’m not alone in expressing that we DO NOT CARE and it IS IRRELEVANT to you either. That pretty much sums up 100% of the reaction you’ve gotten and yet you are still hung up on this bizarre, sick obsession.

    I *have* repeatedly pointed out that the President is married and has 2 well-adjusted children. That is not at “case” John. That is a simple, self-evident fact. Turn on the TV. You’ll see proof and evidence of the First Lady and the Obama children.

    Not all the time mind you, but pay attention and you’ll see pictures and here coverage of them. And you’ll come across proof of them in the media much more than any evidence of stories about your weird Nixon sex fixation either.

    For the last time. Don’t care about Obama’s past. Don’t care about Nixon’s or any other President’s. I am a well-adjusted person, so I have no need to wonder or fixate on their sexual history or have bizarre gay fantasies like you do about them. To me, that is just really sad, creepy and unhealthy that you do.

    Like you, Larry Sinclair is a widely discredited liar. His made up stories went nowhere, because the media started to vet them when he first made those claims and they fell apart. He miserably failed the lie detector tests and he has a dubious past. Like you, he simply lacks any credibility and therefore deservedly is not paid attention to or taken seriously by any serious people. Only other desperate and severely damaged people, like yourself, would lack the social awareness and exhibit the clueless awkwardness to embarassingly link to him as a source in order to make an example. Doing so just further damages what little integrity and credibility you may think you have. Heck, Larry Sinclair is such a uncredible source of fail, that a reference to him is worthy of discreting any poster on that fact alone.

    You would have come across less damaged if you tried to back up and support the wacky Mars story that is the ACTUAL topic of this particular blog post. That is one of the stupidest and laughably insane tall-tales that anyone’s come up with yet about Obama’s past…and yet, Larry Sinclair’s credibility and reputation probably ranks much lower than the Mars Time Travel cranks…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    g.

    LMAOWow!You just don’t get it.If Obama is lying about his youthful heterosexual relationships – as appears to be the case – then he is only living the illusion of a healthy marriage as POTUS.

    Frankly, your case would be much stronger if there was evidence of even one single girlfriend in Obama’s life prior to meeting Michelle Obama.

    Just one…

    People are obsessed with claims that Richard Nixon was gay, why isn’t there the same level of interest in whether or not Obama is gay.

    Right now, the only report we have of anyone messing around with Obama comes from Larry Sinclair.If Sinclair is correct, then Obama was the sort of high risk guy who used drugs and put Michelle’s health and safety at risk through contact with other men.Obama might have killed Michelle with the AIDS virus if Sinclair’s story is correct.

    Obama looks like a very different person if you view his through the lens that reminds you not a single girlfriend has ever been pictured with young Obama or reported dating young Obama.Not a single one…

  396. avatar
    sfjeff January 6, 2012 at 1:47 am #

    Excuse some spelling errors in my last several posts- I wasn’t wearing my glasses when I was typing it in and missed seeing what my clumsy fingers did. But the content is correct.

  397. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 1:48 am #

    Don’t care. Don’t buy any of your BS either. Sorry you and your stories have ZERO relevance and ZERO credibility.

    Nor do I see any real evidence on anything yet, whatsoever at all that has caused me to question the President’s honesty or integrity.

    And NO, I don’t care whether you view him as dishonest or not. Your simple opinion is just that and means nothing to me. I do not value it or give it any weight. Sorry. I think you are a complete crank and nut with a lot of unhealthy issues, that’s all.

    Now again, this blog has been excessively tolerant of your derailing it from the topic at hand. That alone is a clear violation of this blog’s terms.

    Stop bringing up the same meaningless arguments that we’ve already rejected and repeatedly told you we don’t care about at all. If you cannot contribute ANYTHING of value on the actual blog topic at hand and if you are simply too mentally damaged to learn and grasp when to move on, then you deserve to be banned as you are accomplishing ZERO here except looking like a fool and saying the same failed and rejected nonsense over and over and over again.

    Saying the same thing repeatedly isn’t going to make any of us take you any more seriously than the last time. Nor are we any more likely to “change our mind” than we were the first dozen times we told you that you were full of it and we see no interest or value in the sick and sad opinions and meaningless stories you’ve offered.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    g.

    Obama is the one who asserts he dated girls and was involved in heterosexual relationships prior to marrying Michelle Obama.I’m just saying that there is zero proof that those assertions are true.nbc demands that I back up what I write with proof.Why is it so strange to ask Obama to prove what he wrote in Dreams was truthful?

    The issue here is not sex.The issue is honesty and integrity.Based on my experience, I think Obama lied to the public in Dreams and created a false narrative about himself – including his supposed ties to girls and his neglected ties to Marxist socialist extremists.

    Basically, Obama is a liar.He is lying about his sexual history and his intellectual history in Dreams.I think it is important for the media – and for bloggers – to confront Obama on both issues.Remnick confirmed my take on young Obama’s Marxist views but did not interview a single Obama girlfriend.Neither did Christopher Andersen in his book, Barack and Michelle.

    The issue here is Obama’s honesty and integrity.Why should we have a president who is living a lie everyday he is in office?

  398. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 1:55 am #

    Oh John, you are only important in your own mind!

    You’ve shown no actual sense here, common or otherwise. In fact, you’ve displayed a continual lack of it.

    You simply lack any credibility and have an inability to contribute to the topic or grasp that no one is buying your nonsense, nor do they care about any of your claims or opinions.

    You’ve told us repeatedly what you think and what your wild theories are and what your petty little obsession are.

    We’ve heard it. We’ve rejected it. Give it a rest already. There’s nothing you’re saying here that you haven’t already covered. Nothing about you or your claims about yourself matters or is viewed as credible either.

    We don’t share your views NOR your conclusions. We don’t value your opinion. We don’t view you as credible and seriously question both your competence and your sanity.

    Everything you have said so far has been repeatedly and resoundly rejected by EVERY other person posting here. Get a clue.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You can attack me all you want on a personal basis, but it doesn’t change the fact that I’m applying the same common sense that helped me win the William Anderson Award from the APSA. It is the same common sense that makes me a successful business owner today.

  399. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 2:01 am #

    *finally* Thank You Majority Will, for bringing this forum back on topic!

    LOL! Patrick over at BadFiction has some good coverage of the story in his latest recap too. From some of the reporting, I see that the claimants are also tying this into “Remote Viewing experiments…” No surprise there.

    Majority Will:
    Far more interesting and actually on topic:

    1980: U.S. secret Mars teleportation program and rudimentary facilities on Mars

    The firsthand, eyewitness testimony of Mr. Basiago and Mr. Stillings as to the existence of a secret U.S. presence on Mars that is made possible by a revolutionary “jump room” technology that has been concealed from the public is congruent with similar accounts given by three other Mars whistle blowers:

    (1) Former U.S. serviceman Michael Relfe, who spent 20 years as a member of the permanent security staff of a U.S. facility on Mars;

    (2) Former Department of Defense (DoD) scientist Arthur Neumann, who has testified publicly that he teleported to a U.S. facility on Mars for DoD project meetings; and

    (3) Laura Magdalene Eisenhower, great-granddaughter of U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who in 2007 refused a covert attempt to recruit her into what was described to her as a secret U.S. colony on Mars.

    Not to burst the Martian bubble but we could probably find a few better uses for teleportation on Earth.

  400. avatar
    richCares January 6, 2012 at 2:09 am #

    fun stuff on John C. Drew at fogbow: http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=6983&start=300#p322881

  401. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 2:16 am #

    ;)

    Slartibartfast: Personally, I think that President Obama’s secret base must be on Venus–why else would they have all of those clouds there?

  402. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 2:21 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: G. Again, thank you for signifying that I have won this debate. In my experience, I’m usually expelled from these blogs at the point where my critique of President Obama starts making the greatest possible headway with swing voters. As a young man, I displayed an almost eerie grasp of the truth about political situations – including the relationship between child labor laws and child welfare programs – and stuck to the truth despite massive social pressure to abandon my thesis. Over my life, I have been proven right about the importance of child labor laws in predicting the rise of child-oriented welfare programs. I was attacked when I said welfare programs harmed people, now those programs have been replaced with work requirements. The affirmative action programs I fought against in California are now illegal. My take on young Obama’s ideological extremism was dismissed at first – now it is published in at least four books on Obama’s life. My questions about why no Obama girlfriends have ever been interviewed by the media represent the same, bold, courageous. original insight.I didn’t win the William Anderson Award from the APSA because I was the best researcher, the best math modeler, or the best writer. I won because I courageously created new knowledge that changed the way we think about welfare programs in the U.S. In my experience, liberals claim to value freedom of speech, but – like you – they are all too eager to silence their opponents. On my blogsite, in contrast, I publish the comments of my detractors and do not censor anyone. I’m grateful that new technology is on the side of those of us who treasure freedom and who are willing to risk their lives to bring about needed changes in our hurting world.

  403. avatar
    Somerset January 6, 2012 at 2:25 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:

    I didn’t win the William Anderson Award from the APSA because I was the best researcher, the best math modeler, or the best writer.I won because I courageously created new truth that changed the way we think about the U.S.

    Dude, it was a student award, not a freaking Nobel Prize. And that new truth you keep going on about has been cited a total of 7 times in 30 years.

  404. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 2:37 am #

    Oh get over yourself, John! You are a seriously insecure and delusional nobody.

    You’ve won nothing. It is quite obvious that you never do. But you are such an obvious repeat failure and loser in life that you have to constatnly lie to yourself to keep going.

    Whatever. Tell yourself you are the king of the world all you want John. Pretend you’ve accomplished all these “amazing” things. Give your self a few Nobels while you’re at it and pretend you own your own island. Heck, why don’t you just pretend to yourself that you are really the President! Go for it John. Tell yourself whatever you need that keeps you from crying in your sleep every night. Most importantly, tell yourself whatever you need to to just go away.

    The truth is you’ve come here and done nothing but discredit yourself repeatedly. All negative reactions you’ve garnished are due to your own poor behaviors and wild whoppers.

    You’ve not only made nary a single post that has anything to do with the actual topic of this blog article, but you’ve utterly failed to convince a single person here to believe you or agree with any position you’ve held. Not one. You’ve wasted your time and this blogs time and you’ve proven incapable of carrying an actual conversation that goes anywhere. You just keep rambling about the same petty and irrelevant nonsense over and over and over again. So keep pretending you’ve made any “headway” in your own fantasy mind. But in reality, you haven’t, except in getting a lot of people who didn’t know you to find you utterly contemptible and unworthy of respect or credibility.

    For someone who keeps touting his PhD, you only demonstrate how utterly inept you are with any of the political claims or concepts you try to use. Free speech, as enshrined in our Constitution is a specific protection of the government not inhibiting said rights.

    Obviously, this is a private blog and not a government site. Nor are we agents of the govnernment. This blog has clear rules and terms for conduct and specifically for keeping the conversation primarily focused on the topics at hand. You’ve been repeatedly reminded and warned about that and yet you’ve continued to violate the terms of this site…and have only gotten more flagrant in doing so.

    You’ll end up being banned because you can’t follow the rules or handle an adult conversation appropriately, that’s all. If getting banned was your goal all along and you consider that a “win”, then chalk one up for you. *woo hoo* That makes you nothing but a Troll and again, not a serious person. So hey, when your accomplishments in life are nothing but a string of getting kicked out of places…that only says something about you – and none of it is positive.

    But hey, utter rejection is “winning” in your world, so go with that and go “win” somewhere else…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: G.
    Thank you for signifying that I have won this debate. In my experience, I’m usually expelled from these blogs at the point where my critique of President Obama starts making the greatest possible headway with swing voters. As a young man, I displayed an almost eerie grasp of the truth about political situations – including the relationship between child labor laws and child welfare programs – and stuck to the truth despite massive social pressure to abandon my thesis.

  405. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 2:41 am #

    Hi Somerset:

    Wow! You are welcome relief. This G. fellow is already seeking to get me banned here. We may not have much time. :-)

    My doctoral dissertation was actually more influential than you might imagine. Because I focused on what caused the first welfare programs I ended up being a significant footnote in books written by the most famous scholars of the American welfare state including Theda Skocpol. I was the first person, for example, to identify the earliest origins of the original, state-level mother’s pension programs that later became AFDC programs during the New Deal.

    I’ve been rereading some of the letters I wrote around the time I “discovered” the connection between child labor and child welfare programs and I was startled to remember the disbelief and astonishment that occurred at Cornell University when I first “unveiled” my new theory.

    Young people starting their academic careers might be startled to realize how resistant people are to intellectual changes, particularly paradigm shifts.

    At a certain point, we need a paradigm shift in the way the public sees Barack Obama. There is a big gap between the real Barack Obama and the image of Barack Obama. I’m glad I have played a small role in helping people figure out that more accurate, fact-based view of Obama.

  406. avatar
    red-diaper baby 1942 January 6, 2012 at 2:44 am #

    Dear Dr. C — I’m afraid I was the one who first brought Dr. Drew onto the blog, by referring to him, a bit humorously, in an early post. For that I apologize, both to you and to my fellow-bloggers.. I now most urgently suggest that we simply stop responding to his posts. I for one am tired of reading his repetitious, obsessive and self-serving rants.

  407. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 2:49 am #

    Nope. Just standard procedure for expecting folks to obey the rules here and a loss of patience with someone obviously intent on breaking them.

    Face it John, you’ve failed to be interesting and don’t seem to have anything new to say. Saying the same nonsense over and over again is just clutter and becomes quickly tiresome.

    You added nothing here and you won’t be missed. You’ve merely cluttered the blog and derailed a topic. I certainly don’t care what you have to say about your life story or your bizarre claims, so I certainly could care less about what you think about me or what you think of this blog.

    You can’t follow the rules here and you have nothing to say of value or merit, so you deserve to be banished. Simple as that.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You are such a wuss. Running to Dr. Conspiracy to shut down my comments. How completely pathetic.

  408. avatar
    red-diaper baby 1942 January 6, 2012 at 2:52 am #

    We don’t have to ban him, but I do most urgently suggest we stop responding to him. Dr. C, I’m afraid I was the one who inadvertently brought John Drew onto this blog, by referring to him (with humorous intent) in an early post. For that I humbly apologize, both to you and to my fellow-bloggers. But if we stop responding to him, he’ll soon stop posting. I for one am tired of reading his obsessional and self-serving posts.
    If we stop responding, he’ll go on believing he’s “won” the debate. But since he’ll believe that anyway, does it really matter, and do we care?

  409. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 2:52 am #

    G.

    Obviously, I’m not aiming to change your views. I’m anxious to communicate credible information to swing voters who happen to land on this thread.

    Many of these swing voters are not aware of Remnick’s book The Bridge of how Remnick illustrates the way young Obama and his friends thought by telling the story of how the members of the Democrat Socialist Alliance at Oxy hung a big banner of Karl Marx in the Oxy quad.

    These swing voters may not realized that Obama claimed to have a lot of heterosexual relationships in Dreams, but that no one has ever interviewed any of these girls. No interviews at all.

    Swing voters, in fact, may not even be aware of my take on young Obama’s ideological extremism or my status as an award-winning political scientist, the sort of person well-trained to accurately identify young Obama’s exact ideological beliefs.

    Finally, swing voters may not realized that affirmative action programs are aimed making their lives worse, their incomes less, and their opportunities more limited. Whenever I hear Democrats talk about helping the middle class, I always think about how my career as a young man was harmed by affirmative action programs. I learned at a young age that Democrats did not care whether or not I made it into the middle class. In fact, they were actively hostile to me and my career.

    Over a long time, I may change your views. I’m an ex-Marxist, ex-socialist, ex-Democrat myself. I know that change is possible for those who have the courage to confront the truth.

  410. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 2:54 am #

    Ah yes, poor John. Somehow, your entire life’s constant problems are always everyone else’s fault, aren’t they? So, you admit that you get banned frequently…yet you can’t seem to grasp what that pattern really says about you, can you?

    Poor John. You’ll never get it and you’ll just keep making problems for yourself everywhere you go. Good luck with that. Obviously its worked out sooo well for you…

    Keep that fail train rolling along, O’ Brave Sir Robin…

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Without fail, I have found these attackers to be paper tigers who run at the first sign of trouble, who seek to ban me from even posting

  411. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 6, 2012 at 2:59 am #

    Ouch! That’s got to hurt, John.

    G,

    Thanks for everything you said–one thing, though, my last name is spelled “KessEler”. While it’s up to Doc C whether or not what Johnny has said about me is appropriate for this blog, it doesn’t bother me at all–in fact, I find it hilarious. Besides, he must know all about me–he’s scanned my thesis! ;-) **Don’t worry, I think at least 30 of the 80 pages are figures and some of them are very pretty (aren’t they, John?).** Anyway, I’m sure someone of the stature of Dr. John Drew, award-winning PhD understands exactly what I was saying in my thesis. I’m sure that he, with mathematical skills which include both linear regression analysis and high-school calculus (no, really, I’m not kidding–he said so himself!) easily understood my results and their significance–even given the very poor quality of the writing. He does have a PhD, after all… and his special insight which allowed him to win a major award! ;-)

    Somerset: Dude, it was a student award, not a freaking Nobel Prize. And that new truth you keep going on about has been cited a total of 7 times in 30 years.

  412. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 6, 2012 at 3:07 am #

    He thinks I’m a paper tiger and he’s a scientist! You cannot make this stuff up–can you see why I find him hysterical? Plus, if things get tough, we can eat his minstrels… (and there will be much rejoicing!)

    G:
    Ah yes, poor John.Somehow, your entire life’s constant problems are always everyone else’s fault, aren’t they?So, you admit that you get banned frequently…yet you can’t seem to grasp what that pattern really says about you, can you?

    Poor John.You’ll never get it and you’ll just keep making problems for yourself everywhere you go.Good luck with that.Obviously its worked out sooo well for you…

    Keep that fail train rolling along, O’ Brave Sir Robin…

  413. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 3:20 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: You can attack me all you want on a personal basis, but it doesn’t change the fact that I’m applying the same common sense that helped me win the William Anderson Award from the APSA. It is the same common sense that makes me a successful business owner today.If Obama is telling the truth about the girlfriends he knew prior to meeting Michelle Obama, then how come no one has ever interviewed those women and debriefed them to get the truth? If Obama is telling the truth about the girlfriends he knew prior to meeting Michelle Obama, then how come we do not have a single photograph linking Obama to one of these women? Instead of creating all sorts of elaborate explanations, the simplest answer is that these girlfriends were fabrications designed to hide the truth from the public. The simple and easiest explanation is that Obama is lying about them in Dreams From My Father. The media hid FDR’s affairs and JFK’s affairs, it hid what it new about LBJ and William Jefferson Clinton’s affairs. It kept John Edward’s affair secret for months. Why is it so hard for you to see that this same media is covering up for Obama’s lack of girlfriends?

    This is fun. This post indicates the exact comment that got G. all hot and heavy demanding that I be banned from this site. It is interesting to read what was apparently the straw that broke the G.’s back.

  414. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 3:24 am #

    Nope. You are a delusional nut. I don’t value the claims of crackpots.

    If that is your whole goal (the one thing I might actually take you serious on), than whatever. Good luck with that.

    We’ve already had this discussion – the one area I’ll say was a legitimate area of simple difference of opinion and where I don’t mind simply agreeing to disagree.

    As you know, I see your true agenda to be a futile quest. You’ve basically just openly admitted that you are not about truth at all and are just shamelessly here to try to peddle unfounded smears in the desperate hopes to “sway” (translation “trick”) gullible “swing voters” to fall for your lies and doubts you think you can sow.

    One, I have no respect for silly games or propagnda. A lie is a lie is a lie and I do not value dishonest people. I see it as a sign of utter weakness. If you can’t hack it in the world or make a point with the truth and real solid evidence, then your point never had merit in the first place.

    I realize that emotions are a part of the human condition, but I also view as a sign of fragile weakness those that are not mature or intelligent enough to think for themselves or be able to get control of their emotions and not let them consume them or lead them to make preventable mistakes…or at least when we all fall and do, to be able to own up to one’s own failings, pick themselves up without having to rely on a crutch of excuses and grow from the experience.

    Those that can’t are weak. Sorry, but that’s how I view it.

    As I said, I think you are tilting at windmills in your propaganda con game plan anyways. It definitely is a futile endeavor here, that’s for sure. The rest of the internet is, as I said, a vast fragmented mess where too many people naively think they are more important or “swaying” opinion than they are.

    There are assuredly places where you can reach your marks – the gullible and susceptible. But you keep assuming that they are part of the “swing middle”. Any folks that would be susceptible to “swing” on the cr@p that you are peddling already have ODS and therefore, you’re really only able to preach to the choir.

    In the current and very partisan environment we currently live in, there is plenty of anti-Obama rhetoric across all forms of media that has been blaring at a constant pace for the past 3 years. Even the “low information” voter hears a lot of it. So, if it was a message that could appeal to them or their voting decision, it is already factored in.

    Those that are truly going to be “swing” voters in this year’s dynamic remain “swing” voters, because their indecision is based on other factors and not a bunch of stupid ODS-related nonsense. If that had any appeal to their motives, they’d have been infected already.

    So yes, I think you are on a fool’s errand. Nor do I have any fear or care where else you go to spread your little message, as I discount it and it threatens me not.

    It simply has NO place on here AND is a clear violation of the commenting terms here. (Read the Visitor’s Guide listed at the top.)

    So yes, for the mere and simple reason that this blog is a specific-purpose blog, I will continue to call for your ban if you deviate from those rules.

    Same as I would call from removal of people talking Astrology on an Astronomy-specific blog or endlessly trying to talk about their favorite rap stars on a NASCAR-specific forum.

    Folks that intentionally derail a specific topic blog forum and can’t follow the rules deserve a reminder or two. If they continue after that, YES they should be banned.

    Your stated purpose still has no value or purpose on this blog. Therefore, take your propaganda game elsewhere. You have a chance to leave here on your own terms instead of under the shame of a ban.

    If you offer up that you would like to participate here under the specific rules of this forum, then you need to adhere to only do that. However, I have little faith that you have either the interest or the capability in following the rules or grasping them.

    So yes, based on your repeated actions after numerous clear warnings and especially your way-over-the-line unjustified sick attacks on the unsolicited personal life of another poster (one of the most severe violations of this site’s terms – worthy of a permanent ban), my recommendation to Dr. C. to ban you still stands.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Over a long time, I may change your views. I’m an ex-Marxist, ex-socialist, ex-Democrat myself. I know that change is possible for those who have the courage to confront the truth.

  415. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 6, 2012 at 3:28 am #

    Um… Doc C referred to Johnny in the post. Just sayin’…

    red-diaper baby 1942: Dr. C, I’m afraid I was the one who inadvertently brought John Drew onto this blog

  416. avatar
    sfjeff January 6, 2012 at 3:33 am #

    Speaking of pathetic- bragging how you are doing damage to another poster- bragging that you believe you are possibly hurting another posters ability to make a living?

    [This comment has been edited. Doc]

  417. avatar
    Lupin January 6, 2012 at 3:41 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: It would be pretty clear to objective observers that socialism has always lead to economic failure, unhappiness and oppression.

    Complete and utter rubbish, possibly delusional.

    Most European countries have at one point or another been under socialist regimes and enjoy great quality of life and good economies — in some cases (Germany) unarguably stronger than the US.

  418. avatar
    sfjeff January 6, 2012 at 3:41 am #

    John,

    I see a lot of you bragging about yourself, I see lots of posts where you keep attacking another poster….and no responses to my challenges….

    You know about real stuff.

    Like showing us your corroborating evidence or testimony.

    Like explaining Marxism and how Obama is demonstrating his supposed Marxism?

    Come on John…..

  419. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 3:53 am #

    You have to admire Slartibartfest for pointing out that I’m mentioned by name in the original post. How often do the people mentioned in the post participate in the subsequent debate?

    G. One of the things I like about debating on these sites is how they teach me about the values and fears of the hardcore Obama supporters. Your reaction to my simple suggestions regarding public scrutiny of Obama’s old girlfriends ignited a firestorm in you. You reacted intensely and began demanding I be banned. To me, this is a classic sign that you don’t want your own team to consider this issue.

    I’m guessing this must be a big wedge issue in the Democrat party community. I’ve been reading some of the work that Jack Cashill did on this issue and it maybe that I have underestimated the extent to which their is hostility againsts gays in black community. I was startled, for example, here in CA when gay marriage was rejected by the same California voters who elected Barack Obama p0resident.

    Apparently, asking sincere questions about Obama’s sexuality is such a divisive issue that people like you do not want it even discussed among your fellow liberals. I’m also guessing I hit a nerve with you by pointing out that it is the same basic common sense I’m applying to understanding Obama’s sexual preferences that guided my early academic work and later business career.

    The combination of my reminding you of this national award and discussing the absolute lack of Obama girlfriend interviews set you off like a rocket. Am I right to see this as a sensitive issue that drives wedges among Democrats?

  420. avatar
    Lupin January 6, 2012 at 3:53 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: ou still don’t believe that Obama and his friends were Marxists? What’s wrong with you? Read Stanley Kurtz’s book, Radical-In-Chief and you’ll see even more details regarding Obama’s ties to this dangerous extremist ideology.

    Are you purposefully dense or simply ignorant?

    There is a huge difference between Marxism as in “what Marx said & believed” and Marxism as in “what some his followers said & believed”.

    For the former, rather than quoting and paraphrasing, I refer you to a the well-balanced entry on Marx’s legacy on wiki:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx#Legacy

    As for the later, why, the fact that Jesus inspired Torquemada does not make Christianity a “dangerous extremist ideology”.

    You, sir, are a poseur and a quack.

  421. avatar
    Lupin January 6, 2012 at 3:59 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: I’m terrified that Obama doesn’t not understand or respect our capitalist economic system.

    Oh yeah he sure doesn’t…

    lists of top donors for Obama from the last election in 2008.

    Goldman Sachs ($1,013,091)
    JPMorgan Chase & Co ($808,799)
    Citigroup Inc ($736,771)
    WilmerHale LLP ($550,668)
    Skadden, Arps et al ($543,539)
    UBS AG ($532,674), and…
    Morgan Stanley ($512,232).

  422. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 4:02 am #

    Lupin:

    Please. Per capital GDP in Germany is $35,700 (2010 est.)

    Per capita GDP in the U.S. is $47,200 (2010 est.)

    Check out the CIA World Fact Book at https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html

    Tons of liberals think Europe is doing better than us…it’s just not true.

    Regards, John

  423. avatar
    Lupin January 6, 2012 at 4:04 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Unfortunately, the history of socialized medicine shows that the elderly are at great risk under socialized medicine. In England, for example, many older people were left to die rather than allow them to run up steep medical bills. I can’t imagine anything more frightening than knowing that the same government bureaucracy that harmed me with affirmative action will be deciding whether or not I get medical help.

    This is simply A LIE which has been thoroughly debunked by THE GUARDIAN.

    See the link I provided above.

    Repeating your lies doesn’t make them true.

    You’re a fraud.

    PS: People who use and abuse the word “unAmerican” as you do should be arrested & sent to Gitmo promptly. There’s nothing more “unAmerican” than the word “unAmerican”.

  424. avatar
    Lupin January 6, 2012 at 4:06 am #

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Can this person confirm you were dating her and that you did not in fact paste a photo of her head onto one of your blowup dolls and drive in the carpool lane?

    DING! DING! A WINNER!!!

  425. avatar
    Daniel January 6, 2012 at 4:07 am #

    Is it just me or are birthers getting even crazier the last while?

  426. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 4:09 am #

    Lupin:

    Karl Marx’s philosophy inspired some of the most horrific mass murders of the 20th century including the violence of Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. I don’t think we are doing anyone any favors by mimizing the violence and slaughter associated with Marxist philosophy. It makes no sense to separate Marxism from the results produced by Marxism since Marxism is based on the idea that class conflict – even violent class conflict – is normal and to be expected by us.

    The fact that Obama’s friends in the DSA hung a banner celebrating Karl Marx should be a chilling warning to everyone who studies President Obama. I don’t think the American people in 2008 fully understood his ties to Bill Ayers or to radical Marxist socialist thought. Luckily, in 2012, they will have a lot more resources at their disposal to study and understand the real Barack Obama.

    For a chilling look at the violence in Weatherman Underground movement led by Bill Ayers, please check out this frightening YouTube video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWMIwziGrAQ

  427. avatar
    Lupin January 6, 2012 at 4:34 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Lupin:

    Please. Per capital GDP in Germany is $35,700 (2010 est.)

    Per capita GDP in the U.S. is $47,200 (2010 est.)

    Check out the CIA World Fact Book at https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html

    Tons of liberals think Europe is doing better than us…it’s just not true.

    Regards, John

    You handpicked the ONLY statistic that might help your case. The main reason the US is richer is, first of all, because a higher proportion of Americans are in employment and, secondly, because they work about 20% more hours per year than Europeans. When we adjust for both these factors and look at GDP per person per hour worked, there is virtually no difference between Germany, France and the US.

    Economists speak of this as revealing different American and European social preferences for work and leisure. In truth, both the employment rate and how long the average person works are explained mainly by political history. Until the late 1970s total hours worked were falling both in Europe and in the USA; since then, total hours worked have continued to fall in the EU, but have risen again in the US.

    Equally, if we look at employment data by age group, Americans join the work force earlier and leave it far later than Europeans. The key to understanding why this has happened is the change in US income distribution over the past 30 years. Since 1979, the bottom 40% of income earners in the US has been treading water, while the bottom 20% has become poorer. US workers have needed to put in more years and longer hours simply to maintain their real income position.

    I could make nasty comments here about the decreasing quality of life in the US and your race towards becoming a third world country, but I won’t. The truth is that, expressed on a per capita basis, GDP growth rates in the US and the EU are virtually the same over the past decade. The same is true of labour productivity growth.

    As for unemployment, if we compare employment rates in 2005 of the 25-55 age group, there is again virtually no difference; e.g., the employment rates are 86 and 88 percent for the EU-15 and the US respectively — ignoring differences in how the data are recorded because in reality we should use the U6 figures for the US, not the U3 as quoted in the press, in which case the EU wins hands down.

    Finally, US growth is funded by a dangerously high mountain of foreign debt (cough China cough), driven by the US financial bubble, enabling US consumers to spend more than they earn. How much of your GDP is real wealth and not “casino chips”? No one can say for certain. My guess: about 25% of your GDP is worthless monopoly money.

    In conclusion: you’re full of fecal matter. Personally I don’t care when American right-wing ideologues like yourself lie about your President, his sex life, the posters he hung in his student pad, etc. It’s your business.

    But I DO care when you lie about Europe, and use these lies to try to convince weak-minded people in your own country that you are somehow correct when you’re not.

  428. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 4:37 am #

    Wow. Just wow. If *that* the takeaway conclusion you came from that, then you are truly beyond hopelessly delusional. You are just plain stupid.

    No fear whatsoever at all on the “issue” you obsess on.

    It is meaningless. It simply crossed over into “ban” territory for clear reasons:

    1. It was pretty much the same theme post over and over again from you, without anything new to add and no regard for the responses or feedback you got the first, second…or xth time you said the same darn thing. Simple proof – look at the vast history of this blog site and see where other posters have been called out and eventually banned for that same thing. This simply is not a forum to be cluttered with a broken record that contributes nothing.

    2. The one “slight” correction, to be accurate, is that when I say added nothing, it added nothing of value or meaning to any issue of consequence. There was some “variation” of your weird obsession – but that was only to go further into the creepy factor of a bizarre sexual obsessive nature. So your whole concept was what didn’t change, but you became more depraved in your pushing it, despite being told that no one cared. You started adding weird Larry Sinclair and even weirder Richard Nixon garbage. It just became a weird sexual deviant fantasy on display from you. Quite sick and creepy and your personal sexual fantasies are definitely out of bounds or taste for the topic rules of this blog.

    This is not some slash/fic S&M site for you to stroke off to. There *are* places on the internet for that sort of thing. Go there if you are going to have those kinds of moments. Your hangups are simply innappropriate for this blog.

    3. Your vile unsolicited attack and going after the personal and private rights of another poster on this site is one of the most serious violations of this sites rules and ethics that can be committed. That behavior is grounds for immediate and permanent banning.

    It simply comes down to that. If you’ve actually learned anything of “values”, the take away should be expectations that rules of behavior and conduct are followed and that lies and unsupported accusations are not. Evidence is valued over speculation. That pretty much covers it.

    If you are really dumb enough to think there is any fear of your crazy and sick sex worries, than I encourage you wholeheartedly to do some real work and petition every GOP candidate you can to make it an issue. Please do try! Call into every radio and TV show you can and scream your unhealthy little obsessions as loudly as you can! See how well that goes over. I’d love for you to get some GOP office holder to take up your claims loudly and publicly – the ensuing ridicule and revulsion they will receive will be the same you have and it would kill their credibilty, just as it does yours.

    There is a reason such muck and nonsense has gone nowhere. It is not for lack of sad sacks like you trying. It is because no one cares and more importantly, anyone who pushes such bizarre and meaningless issues like you is instantly a non credible and creepy person.

    So call up WND or Orly Taitz or any of the other ODS sufferers that are most susceptible to run with any crazy thing they here, simply because they hate Obama at all costs. Please get them to start shouting your “theories” as well. As if they weren’t utter laughingstocks and failures already, I’d get a huge kick out of seeing them take up your cause and just damage themselves further.

    So yeah, please do. Just do it somewhere else. This is NOT the forum for such dreck.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: G. One of the things I like about debating on these sites is how they teach me about the values and fears of the hardcore Obama supporters. Your reaction to my simple suggestions regarding public scrutiny of Obama’s old girlfriends ignited a firestorm in you. You reacted intensely and began demanding I be banned. To me, this is a classic sign that you don’t want your own team to consider this issue.
    I’m guessing this must be a big wedge issue in the Democrat party community. I’ve been reading some of the work that Jack Cashill did on this issue and it maybe that I have underestimated the extent to which their is hostility againsts gays in black community. I was startled, for example, here in CA when gay marriage was rejected by the same California voters who elected Barack Obama p0resident.
    Apparently, asking sincere questions about Obama’s sexuality is such a divisive issue that people like you do not want it even discussed among your fellow liberals. I’m also guessing I hit a nerve with you by pointing out that it is the same basic common sense I’m applying to understanding Obama’s sexual preferences that guided my early academic work and later business career.

  429. avatar
    Lupin January 6, 2012 at 4:44 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: Karl Marx’s philosophy inspired some of the most horrific mass murders of the 20th century including the violence of Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. I don’t think we are doing anyone any favors by mimizing the violence and slaughter associated with Marxist philosophy. It makes no sense to separate Marxism from the results produced by Marxism since Marxism is based on the idea that class conflict – even violent class conflict – is normal and to be expected by us.

    That is correct but as I said Jesus Christ inspired Torquemada.

    If it makes no sense to separate Christianity from the results produced by the Inquisition, then the Pope should be treated like Pol Pot and all Christians in the US should be immediately rounded up and locked up.

    Marx is an important and respected philosopher and the first political scientist just as much as Kant, Locke, Weber, etc, etc.

    Rousseau and Voltaire inspired the French and the American revolution but the bloody excesses of the Reign of Terror do not cause any serious person to hurl accusations of “Rousseauism” at any one.

    Only in Americas is there that unfounded, ignorant, and frankly appalling use if “Marxism” as a scarecrow. You don’t find it in Eastern Europe — and they would have plenty more reasons than you to be afraid Marx. The difference, of course, is they’re intelligent and educated — and you’re not (despite your claims).

    As for Obama, considering that he’s been Wall Street’s Best Friend as illustrated in Ron Suskind magnificent book ‘Confidence Men’, calling him a “Marxist” (if only it were true!) is utterly ridiculous. You come across as mentally deranged.

  430. avatar
    G January 6, 2012 at 4:48 am #

    Oh, the American people understood. They heard these rumours and false association claims all throughout the last election cycle and still decided to vote for him in overwhelming numbers.

    There are NO real meaningful ties to Ayers. Nor is Obama a Marxist.

    Again, this is the same violation of the site’s terms as the others. You’ve repeatedly made this line of claims over and over and over again without providing any evidence to substantiate it.

    You don’t seem to learn, do you? This is NOT a site for simply endlessly repeating unfounded propoganda.

    If you can not back up and support your claims and just resort to thinking you can say the same lies over and over again after repeatedly being called out on it, that you simply are a brick wall and beyond reasoning with.

    What you are doing is mindless trolling and not sincere dialogue or debate. The rules are the rules.

    Again, you’ve just done the same thing for which you’ve been repeatedly been warned about.

    Futher, you have still FAILED to post ANYTHING in regards to the actual topic of the blog, despite repeat reminders of the rules. You are simply persisting in intentionally derailing the thread of conversation

    Again, I call on Dr. C. to ban the hopeless Troll. So many of your rules have been repeatedly violated here that there is no justification for further tolerance.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: The fact that Obama’s friends in the DSA hung a banner celebrating Karl Marx should be a chilling warning to everyone who studies President Obama. I don’t think the American people in 2008 fully understood his ties to Bill Ayers or to radical Marxist socialist thought. Luckily, in 2012, they will have a lot more resources at their disposal to study and understand the real Barack Obama.

  431. avatar
    Whatever4 January 6, 2012 at 5:52 am #

    Don’t we have any women here? Most of the folks poking pointed sticks into this cage seem to be males. (Well, nbc might count himself with the women now.)

    Educated women with families and careers don’t generally come out of the woodwork saying that they have slept with famous men in the past, unless it’s to show what a hypocrite the cheating slime is. Look what happens when they do. Whatever the circumstances, the women get labeled as “loose”.

    Where has any woman claimed publicly to have dated pretty much any former candidate while they were in college? Some of those men certainly got around, but since they weren’t married at the time and there wasn’t a scandal involved, why would anyone be interested? Unnamed allegations look like cheap shots, named allegations have no positive outcome for the woman. Women don’t tell, friends don’t name names, and reporters don’t report unless there’s a story. Dating single people when you are single isn’t a story.

  432. avatar
    misha January 6, 2012 at 7:06 am #

    Daniel:
    Is it just me or are birthers getting even crazier the last while?

    It’s not you.

  433. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny January 6, 2012 at 7:19 am #

    G:
    LOL!A GigaTaitz… priceless!

    I understand that these things need to be systematic, but in Taitz’ case I’d make an exception and talk about Miga-Taitz (Russian migalka i the alarm device normally used on a police car, but some politicians like Zhirinovski have them too) and Gaga-Taitz (the Lady I cannot now see a video of withouth thinking of Taitz). Tera-Taitz is OK, because teryat’ in Russian means to lose (though it is pronounced “tirya”in Russian and Tira would preserve Orly’s connection to Tiraspol).

  434. avatar
    Majority Will January 6, 2012 at 7:34 am #

    red-diaper baby 1942:
    We don’t have to ban him, but I do most urgently suggest we stop responding to him. Dr. C, I’m afraid I was the one who inadvertently brought John Drew onto this blog, by referring to him (with humorous intent) in an early post. For that I humbly apologize,both to you and to my fellow-bloggers. But if we stop responding to him, he’ll soon stop posting. I for one am tired of reading his obsessional and self-serving posts.
    If we stop responding, he’ll go on believing he’s “won” the debate. But since he’ll believe that anyway, does it really matter, and do we care?

    Excellent suggestion.

    He’s nothing more than a bully and a self-obsessed troll who staggers into a privately run blog, proudly craps on the rug and then cackles like a maniac into the face of the host and insults every guest.

    It’s time to ignore the troll.

  435. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny January 6, 2012 at 7:49 am #

    G: This is clearly a line of unwarranted attack on another poster that is a clear violation of the terms of this blog. Dr. C – Please take action and ban this poster ASAP. Thanks.

    +1.

    That was disgusting.

  436. avatar
    Majority Will January 6, 2012 at 8:11 am #

    Whatever4:
    Don’t we have any women here? Most of the folks poking pointed sticks into this cage seem to be males. (Well, nbc might count himself with the women now.)

    Educated women with families and careers don’t generally come out of the woodwork saying that they have slept with famous men in the past, unless it’s to show what a hypocrite the cheating slime is. Look what happens when they do. Whatever the circumstances, the women get labeled as “loose”.

    Where has any woman claimed publicly to have dated pretty much any former candidate while they were in college? Some of those men certainly got around, but since they weren’t married at the time and there wasn’t a scandal involved, why would anyone be interested? Unnamed allegations look like cheap shots, named allegations have no positive outcome for the woman. Women don’t tell, friends don’t name names, and reporters don’t report unless there’s a story. Dating single people when you are single isn’t a story.

    Dating single people when you are single isn’t a story . . . unless you’re a self-absorbed crank with a political agenda desperate enough to lie, nitpick and spin meaningless history to anyone who will listen.

  437. avatar
    red-diaper baby 1942 January 6, 2012 at 8:18 am #

    Whatever and Will: I’m a woman, though I don’t quite see the relevance of the gender of a blog poster. I’m also almost seventy (as you can tell from my user name), old enough to be able to ignore the antics of someone like John, who’s apparently about the same age as the President. Adolescent tantrums carrying over into middle age … President Obama, in contrast, always seems like the most mature man in the room, as well as the most intelligent.

  438. avatar
    misha January 6, 2012 at 8:36 am #

    sfjeff: List the 3 major principles of Marxism.

    - Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog it’s too dark to read.
    - Politics doesn’t make strange bedfellows – marriage does.
    - Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

  439. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 6, 2012 at 8:41 am #

    I actually mentioned him (and deliberately) in the main article. What I thought Dr. Drew really doesn’t understand is that there are modern folks so biased and hanging off the right side of the political discussion that they think Barack Obama is a Marxist based on what he says and does today. How much more easy for someone to apply those same biases to 30-year-old-memories. Looking at Dr. Drew’s comments he certainly seems pretty far to the right. There is no reason to think that Drew’s recollections and the reporting of them are objective, nor, if accurate, that they mean anything.

    What I came to see from his writing here is that his soul is dark, not just biased.

    red-diaper baby 1942: Dear Dr. C — I’m afraid I was the one who first brought Dr. Drew onto the blog, by referring to him, a bit humorously, in an early post. For that I apologize, both to you and to my fellow-bloggers.. I now most urgently suggest that we simply stop responding to his posts. I for one am tired of reading his repetitious, obsessive and self-serving rants.

  440. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 6, 2012 at 8:47 am #

    sfjeff: List the 3 major principles of Marxism.

    I ask this kind of question repeatedly of people who claim Obama is a marxist. “What are the major tenets of marxism and how do they apply to Obama”, everytime I get back crickets.

  441. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 6, 2012 at 9:36 am #

    Chill out. You’re hyperventilating.

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.: The fact that Obama’s friends in the DSA hung a banner celebrating Karl Marx should be a chilling warning …

    For a chilling look at the violence in Weatherman Underground movement led by Bill Ayers

  442. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 6, 2012 at 10:10 am #

    My apologies to the community and to Slartibartfast for not catching the abusive comments from John. Drew. While It’s not reasonable for every visitor to this site to read and become familiar with the Visitor’s Guide and Editorial Policy, I think that it is reasonable to expect a modicum of decency from everyone. Specifically the Editorial Policy states (in the most bold faced of terms): “Posting personal information about private individuals is prohibited.” Drew violated the hell out of that.

    It becomes clear why he is a defender of Jack Cashill: they are both users of smear tactics. As readers may know, I have a deep moral to the use of smear attacks and believe that it is evidence of deep moral corruption on the part of those who use them.

    In any case, Drew has been placed in moderation, meaning that all of this comments will be screened for editorial policy violations before they are allowed to appear. However, being in moderation is a little more than that. Dealing with moderated comments is tiresome and irritating and I’m not beyond just deleting stuff I don’t like.

    In this instance, I have removed 17 comments by Drew or in reply to Drew that contain his prohibited personal attack.

    Majority Will: He’s nothing more than a bully and a self-obsessed troll who staggers into a privately run blog, proudly craps on the rug and then cackles like a maniac into the face of the host and insults every guest.

  443. avatar
    Obsolete January 6, 2012 at 10:15 am #

    I give John C. Drew, Ph.D about six months before he changes his story again and starts claiming that he, himself had a homosexual affair with Obama when they were students.
    I believe he hates Obama more than he hates the thought of being known as gay.

  444. avatar
    Suranis January 6, 2012 at 10:23 am #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:
    Daniel

    You aren’t keeping up with the news.Don Fulsom has gotten a ton of media attention for supposedly outing Richard Nixon. See, http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=35516

    In the book Nixon’s Darkest Secrets: The Inside Story of America’s Most Troubled President, Fulsom says Nixon had an affair with Charles “Bebe” Rebozo.

    If people are digging up dirt on Richard Nixon, then why aren’t we seeing a similar effort to identify Barack Obama’s old girlfriends?

    First that guy has gotten precisely no media attention for that book, just like a guy recently published a book claiming Rick Perry was gay and no-one really gave a toss and he got little or no media exposure. And what the hell are you doing trawling through gay and lesbian websites anyway?

    Second the only thing I care about the private life of Nixon can be surmised by one sentence on page 8 of Worse than Watergate, by John W. Dean (another white guy more successful than you)

    “Through sheer determination, [Nixon] made himself smart.”

    That’s all that matters in a President. And by the way I actually admire Nixon’s presidency in a lot of ways. Not a popular opinion and he was personally an odious man to be sure, but he was a pretty decent president who, unlike you, worked very hard at his job.

  445. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 6, 2012 at 10:36 am #

    This is pretty weird. How is someone pointing out a resume gap (and a small one in a time of high unemployment) on an obscure blog on the Internet going to harm their ability to get a job, and what kind of evil person gets happiness causing trouble for others?

    As someone who has hired a number of professionals over the years and who has read hundreds of resumes, I don’t need a third party to point out gaps. It’s one of many things one notes and asks about. It is not in and of itself important, particularly these days!

    However, if I were a prospective employer and John C. Drew came for an interview, and I did an Internet search and found his comments on this blog, not only would I not hire him, I would have security escort him from the building.

    sfjeff: Speaking of pathetic- bragging how you are doing damage to another poster- bragging that you believe you are possibly hurting another posters ability to make a living?

  446. avatar
    Reality Check January 6, 2012 at 10:39 am #

    Where is the thumbs up smiley around here?

    Dr. Conspiracy: However, if I were a prospective employer and John C. Drew came for an interview, and I did an Internet search and found his comments on this blog, not only would I not hire him, I would have security escort him from the building.

  447. avatar
    J. Potter January 6, 2012 at 10:39 am #

    Obsolete: I give John C. Drew, Ph.D about six months before he changes his story again and starts claiming that he, himself had a homosexual affair with Obama when they were students.I believe he hates Obama more than he hates the thought of being known as gay.

    No doubt, Obsolete, he does appear to be headed in that direction! The best part is how behind the times such accusations are. Amongst his own, sexual allegations may have traction. To me, it’s crickets. I hear this Elightenment thing is catching on.

  448. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 6, 2012 at 11:03 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    My apologies to the community and to Slartibartfast for not catching the abusive comments from John.

    No problem, it kinda all blew up overnight. Besides, if you hadn’t seen his prior interactions with me (which only the 3 readers of his blog are privy to… ;-)), there was no way to know the direction that he would inevitably go when I joined the discussion. Contrary to his belief, I don’t believe that I was harmed by the incident–I never quite understood why I should fear information that I had posted about myself mixed with baseless speculation, but it seems like Johnny thought it was a devastating attack in his delusional world.

    It becomes clear why he is a defender of Jack Cashill: they are both users of smear tactics. As readers may know, I have a deep moral to the use of smear attacks and believe that it is evidence of deep moral corruption on the part of those who use them.

    I agree.

    In any case, Drew has been placed in moderation, meaning that all of this comments will be screened for editorial policy violations before they are allowed to appear. However, being in moderation is a little more than that. Dealing with moderated comments is tiresome and irritating and I’m not beyond just deleting stuff I don’t like.

    I’m glad you put him in moderation rather than banning him–I’m convinced he wants nothing more than to say that he was run off by the “ebil libruls” to try and build his conservative street cred. I’m sorry you have to deal with moderating the clown, but, quite frankly, I believe he lacks the character to even understand what he did wrong, so I’m guessing that he couldn’t be prevented from fouling your blog one way or another otherwise.

    In this instance, I have removed 17 comments by Drew or in reply to Drew that contain his prohibited personal attack.

    Thank you. And thank you to everyone who defended me (or just pwned Mr. Drew for their own entertainment ;-)), as I noted above, in addition to trying to smear me with unsupported speculation and facts that I willingly revealed, he has also taken to repeating lies made up by KBOA in her attacks on members of the Fogbow verbatim–which is the kind of thing I think we all should take seriously.

    Anyway, it’s been fun stopping by here–I’ll have to do it again sometime soon…

  449. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 6, 2012 at 11:05 am #

    J. Potter,

    How is your Marxist experiment going? ;-)

  450. avatar
    Majority Will January 6, 2012 at 11:09 am #

    Slartibartfast: Anyway, it’s been fun stopping by here–I’ll have to do it again sometime soon…

    Good to hear from you, Slarti. Do come back soon.

  451. avatar
    Rickey January 6, 2012 at 11:15 am #

    Drew’s constant references to his award-winning thesis are reminiscent of the former high school football star who never made it in college but keeps bringing up the touchdown he scored in the big game.

    As for Fulsom’s book “outing” Nixon, it hasn’t been published yet but it can be previewed at Amazon. From what I can see, there is nothing new in it about Nixon’s sexual preferences. Most of what Fulsom reports is covered in Anthony Summers’ 2000 book, “The Arrogance of Power: The Secret World of Richard Nixon.” I would think that a prominent political scientist such as Drew would know about Summers’ book.

    Finally, Drew has not responded to my question about whether he made advances to Obama at Occidental which were rebuffed. Drew has repeatedly demonstrated that he equates silence with assent, so it would seem that we are left to draw our own conclusions.

  452. avatar
    J. Potter January 6, 2012 at 11:25 am #

    Slartibartfast: J. Potter,How is your Marxist experiment going?

    Well, Papa Marx has been proudly on display for 3 hours now, in a position of honor in my humble cubicle of capitalism. To set the stage, please understand that I am deep in Deep Red territory here: blue collar environment in a very red state. A hard-drinking, hard-working, hard-parying, casino-hopping crowd. Thanks to class confusion, no love for socialism here.

    So far …. no one has noticed. My office pool picks for the bowl games seem to be hogging the limelight. If still no response, I’ll post Karl over the picks to reduce his competition.

    I also random emailed the same image to several personal contacts, w/o comment. Again, no response. To be fair, email is all but dead, and the recipients probably assumed it was spam. An image w/o text probablhy went straight to spam boxes anyway. I have utterly failed my socialist comrades on the digital front.

    So far the conclusion is that Karl might attract vitriol from an audience conditioned to object to him (say, when a gaggle of frightened wingers gather for their two minutes hate), but amongst the GP …. nobody cares. Do they even recognize him?

  453. avatar
    James M January 6, 2012 at 11:28 am #

    Rickey:

    As for Fulsom’s book “outing” Nixon, it hasn’t been published yet but it can be previewed at Amazon. From what I can see, there is nothing new in it about Nixon’s sexual preferences. Most of what Fulsom reports is covered in Anthony Summers’ 2000 book, “The Arrogance of Power: The Secret World of Richard Nixon.” I would think that a prominent political scientist such as Drew would know about Summers’ book.

    Richard M. Nixon was one of the most intelligent men to ever hold public office. On the other hand, it would not surprise me at all to find that he was somewhere on the spectrum of autism, or that he had any number of eccentricities in his personality that are typically associated with high intellect. It strikes me profoundly to know just how excellent a musician Nixon was. Probably he and Condaleezza Rice share the distinction of being the most skilled pianists to ever hold public office. Nixon gets an edge over Rice, because he was mostly self-taught, where she had formal training and Fine Arts degrees and so on.

  454. avatar
    James M January 6, 2012 at 11:32 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: While It’s not reasonable for every visitor to this site to read and become familiar with the Visitor’s Guide and Editorial Policy

    I disagree. It is perfectly reasonable and not a tall order by any means.

  455. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) January 6, 2012 at 11:39 am #

    J. Potter: Well, Papa Marx has been proudly on display for 3 hours now, in a position of honor in my humble cubicle of capitalism. To set the stage, please understand that I am deep in Deep Red territory here: blue collar environment in a very red state. A hard-drinking, hard-working, hard-parying, casino-hopping crowd. Thanks to class confusion, no love for socialism here.So far …. no one has noticed. My office pool picks for the bowl games seem to be hogging the limelight. If still no response, I’ll post Karl over the picks to reduce his competition.I also random emailed the same image to several personal contacts, w/o comment. Again, no response. To be fair, email is all but dead, and the recipients probably assumed it was spam. An image w/o text probablhy went straight to spam boxes anyway. I have utterly failed my socialist comrades on the digital front.So far the conclusion is that Karl might attract vitriol from an audience conditioned to object to him (say, when a gaggle of frightened wingers gather for their two minutes hate), but amongst the GP …. nobody cares. Do they even recognize him?

    Well that’s the big question do they even know its Karl Marx and not some random trucker? You might want to add his name below the image.

  456. avatar
    Majority Will January 6, 2012 at 11:39 am #

    J. Potter: Well, Papa Marx has been proudly on display for 3 hours now, in a position of honor in my humble cubicle of capitalism. To set the stage, please understand that I am deep in Deep Red territory here:blue collar environment in a very red state. A hard-drinking, hard-working, hard-parying, casino-hopping crowd. Thanks to class confusion, no love for socialism here.

    So far …. no one has noticed. Myoffice pool picks for the bowl games seem to be hogging the limelight. If still no response, I’ll post Karl over the picks to reduce his competition.

    I also random emailed the same image to several personal contacts, w/o comment. Again, no response. To be fair, email is all but dead, and the recipients probably assumed it was spam. An image w/o text probablhy went straight to spam boxes anyway. I have utterly failed my socialist comrades on the digital front.

    So far the conclusion is that Karl might attract vitriol from an audience conditioned to object to him (say, when a gaggle of frightened wingers gather for their two minutes hate), but amongst the GP …. nobody cares. Do they even recognize him?

    The stylized visage of Ernesto “Che” Guevara might garner more recognition.

    And they would be probably confuse Friedrich Engels for Alexander Graham Bell.

  457. avatar
    James M January 6, 2012 at 11:47 am #

    sfjeff:

    List the 3 major principles of Marxism.

    If you get them to do anything of the sort, that is, nailing down a hot buzzword to a definition, they would lose control of the buzzword and be forced to map to their definition of it. Even the ones who could make a reasonable stab at explaining “marxism” or “socialism” won’t do it. They need these words to be vague, and applicable to anything they choose.

    By the way, the whole “rule of three” here seems to derive from Lenin’s written analysis of Marx, and not really from Marx (most of whose work was in the analysis of *capitalism* and the identification of universal issues that affect all economic systems.) It’s unfortunate that most of his analysis is more directly applicable to the issues of nineteenth century society, with different labor dynamics especially in agriculture, but that doesn’t mean his observations aren’t universal.

    Few people who accuse a politician of being a “Marxist” really understand the things Marx actually wrote about. I’ve never seen a person making this sort of accusation against an American politician follow through with specific citations from Marx’s opus that explain what they are referring to, or even explain their objection in terms of some specific policy.

  458. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 6, 2012 at 11:48 am #

    Power to the people, J! And Will, I’d be happy if they could recognizeAlexander Graham Bell (even if they they were wrong…).

    J. Potter: Well, Papa Marx has been proudly on display for 3 hours now, in a position of honor in my humble cubicle of capitalism…

  459. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny January 6, 2012 at 11:49 am #

    J. Potter: Slartibartfast: J. Potter,How is your Marxist experiment going?

    Well, Papa Marx has been proudly on display for 3 hours now, in a position of honor in my humble cubicle of capitalism.

    Actually, Marx would probably have abhorred it himself. He once wrote to a French socialist that he was not a Marxist.

    Now who was it that said “From the first day to this, sheer greed was the driving spirit of civilization “? One hint: it was not Adam Smith. Though, of course, it might as well have been.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations#United_States

  460. avatar
    James M January 6, 2012 at 11:54 am #

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross):

    I ask this kind of question repeatedly of people who claim Obama is a marxist. “What are the major tenets of marxism and how do they apply to Obama”, everytime I get back crickets.

    Inside the echo chamber, accusing a Democrat of being a Marxist makes that politician untouchable. It’s not important among them to know what the word means. It’s nothing more than a label that is universally understood to be so damning that it cannot even be discussed. Few if any who use the label, intended to stop dialogue more than anything, could actually offer a summary of topics on which Marx wrote. They would not do this even if they could, because offering a definition weakens the value of the label. Instead, they let the label carry a reality assumption that Marxist philosophy leads directly and inevitably to specific kinds of totalitarian government. They have a point, but, it’s also the case that *any* set of universal observations on labor and capital can be used to persuade people toward a totalitarian state “for the greater good.”

    But this kind of dialogue is not possible to have among people for whom the simple act of *reading the literature* is a taboo. It’s worse than a taboo. There is a belief that reading the literature will poison your thinking and brainwash you.

  461. avatar
    J. Potter January 6, 2012 at 12:00 pm #

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Well that’s the big question do they even know its Karl Marx and not some random trucker? You might want to add his name below the image.

    I agree, but, as explained above, the story was that a picture of Marx was publicly displayed. No other detail given. I don’t want to influence the non-existent response by hitting viewers over the head, much less by adding an epithet like: “Enemy of the State, Karl Marx” “Our inspiration, Karl Marx” “Rot in Hell, Karl Marx” or “My hero, Karl Marx” … much less “Barack Hussein Obama, 44th President of the United States”.

    Simply trying to replicate Drew’s story, as sparsely as it was presented. I do concede he would probably be more recognized on a college campus. But I also counter that this is (stereotypically speaking) where he would be expected to draw a negative response, when recognized.

  462. avatar
    James M January 6, 2012 at 12:00 pm #

    John C. Drew, Ph.D.:

    I spent a year living in England and I saw the results of socialized medicine. It creates bad teeth.

    You’re just jealous because they have teeth.

  463. avatar
    sfjeff January 6, 2012 at 12:01 pm #

    James M: Richard M. Nixon was one of the most intelligent men to ever hold public office. On the other hand, it would not surprise me at all to find that he was somewhere on the spectrum of autism, or that he had any number of eccentricities in his personality that are typically associated with high intellect. It strikes me profoundly to know just how excellent a musician Nixon was. Probably he and Condaleezza Rice share the distinction of being the most skilled pianists to ever hold public office. Nixon gets an edge over Rice, because he was mostly self-taught, where she had formal training and Fine Arts degrees and so on.

    I am going to have to revisit Nixon.

    I think it is proper to revile him for the damage that his actions and lies did to our political system- I think much of what is happening today is a direct descendent of Nixon’s actions. And subsequently, the private conversations of his have revealed how petty and racists he was.

    But he was brave enough and smart enough to reach out to China. Can you imagine a Republican today doing something like that? It would be as if Bush had unilaterally ended the embargo with Cuba and established formal relations with Cuba. i can’t remember all of his domestic accomplishments, but I do remember that many of them would be considered radical socialist marxist proposals in todays environment.

    I don’t think you could look at a single President without finding some actions that you would condemn(Trail of Tears/suspension of habeas corpus, etc) and find some actions you would applaud. Its good to try to keep things in perspective.

  464. avatar
    NBC January 6, 2012 at 12:02 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: What I came to see from his writing here is that his soul is dark, not just biased.

    Well said…

  465. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny January 6, 2012 at 12:07 pm #

    Have you googled the answer?

    This is what I wanted you all to find:
    http://www.cs.utsa.edu/~bylander/cs3343/chapter9handout.pdf

  466. avatar
    sfjeff January 6, 2012 at 12:08 pm #

    James M: If you get them to do anything of the sort, that is, nailing down a hot buzzword to a definition, they would lose control of the buzzword and be forced to map to their definition of it. Even the ones who could make a reasonable stab at explaining “marxism” or “socialism” won’t do it. They need these words to be vague, and applicable to anything they choose.By the way, the whole “rule of three” here seems to derive from Lenin’s written analysis of Marx, and not really from Marx (most of whose work was in the analysis of *capitalism* and the identification of universal issues that affect all economic systems.) It’s unfortunate that most of his analysis is more directly applicable to the issues of nineteenth century society, with different labor dynamics especially in agriculture, but that doesn’t mean his observations aren’t universal. Few people who accuse a politician of being a “Marxist” really understand the things Marx actually wrote about. I’ve never seen a person making this sort of accusation against an American politician follow through with specific citations from Marx’s opus that explain what they are referring to, or even explain their objection in terms of some specific policy.

    Oh I loved just saying ‘name the three principles of Marxism’ because I suspected that John would refuse to actually respond to substance.

    I have no concrete idea of what the ideals of Marxism are- though I know promoting private enterprise is not one of them. Which is pretty funny, since Marx was supported by Engels, who was ripping of his family’s big business to support him.

    But I would expect that a Doctor in Political Science, who speaks so much about Marxism, should be able to respond without even bothering to look it up on Wikipedia.

    And Doc- thanks for putting him in moderation- I don’t want John banned either. He will likely declare victory and claim he was banned by being put in moderation but I would prefer he keep coming and we keep challenging him on his actual claims.

  467. avatar
    sfjeff January 6, 2012 at 12:12 pm #

    May I make one more suggestion to G and others?

    If John ventures back- don’t respond to his own personal story, don’t get bogged down in fights about his claims to victory on Fogbow but relentlessly focus on challenging him to produce facts to support his claims about Obama.

    I despised John’s personal attacks, but at points there became a fine line to me, that the only substantive difference between the attacks John made against Slart and the ‘attacks’ on John’s personal story is that John has chosen to make himself a public figure. But John’s personal story is in the end irrelevant to this website.

  468. avatar
    NBC January 6, 2012 at 12:21 pm #

    sfjeff: If John ventures back- don’t respond to his own personal story, don’t get bogged down in fights about his claims to victory on Fogbow but relentlessly focus on challenging him to produce facts to support his claims about Obama.

    John has never really managed to provide any substantive evidence of his claims about Obama or the discrimination he believes he faced when he was informed that he had failed to impress them with his academic progress and was not granted a path towards tenure. Drew’s publication record supports such a decision, there may have been other reasons but as usual, Drew insists on assertion rather than logic, reason and evidence to make his claims.

    Drew is a bitter person, easily upset by the success of others, and thus feeling the need to inflate his own accomplishments.
    Sad really

  469. avatar
    Scientist January 6, 2012 at 12:31 pm #

    sfjeff: i can’t remember all of his domestic accomplishments, but I do remember that many of them would be considered radical socialist marxist proposals in todays environment.

    Nixon supported the Clean AIr Act and founded the EPA to enforce it and other environmental laws.
    Nixon proposed comprehensive health insurance, including an employer mandate. Ted Kennedy worked with him and it would likely have passed if not for Watergate.
    Nixon proposed a Negative Income Tax, which would have given low income families direct cash payments based on their income. This idea came from conservative economiist Milton Friedman and was later used by Reagan in modified form as the Earned Income Tax Credit.

    It’s amazing to see how people like Niixon, Reagan and Friedman would be drummed out of today’s Republican/Tea Party

  470. avatar
    Majority Will January 6, 2012 at 12:35 pm #

    “My story helps explain why Obama went on to hang out with people like Rev. Wright, Alice Palmer and Bill Ayers.”

    Jack Cashill has referred to Bill Ayers as the President’s mentor (http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/how_obama_lost_his_postmodern_groove.html).

    mentor
    noun
    1 his political mentors: adviser, guide, guru, counselor, consultant; confidant(e).
    2 regular meetings between mentor and trainee: trainer, teacher, tutor, instructor.

    Why would an alleged journalist like Cashill make such a claim without any credible evidence whatsoever?

  471. avatar
    J. Potter January 6, 2012 at 12:47 pm #

    Scientist: It’s amazing to see how people like Niixon, Reagan and Friedman would be drummed out of today’s Republican/Tea Party

    It’s the legacy of a tradition of saying 1 thing and doing another. The current crowd was raised on rhetoric and have swallowed it whole. If something is repeated enough and the audience wants to believe, to them it becomes true, no evidence needed. “When legend becomes fact, print the legend” is played out every day in our media, most notably (to me) on the right, where it finds its ultimate expression in the Cult of Reagan.

    And once a legendary truth is accepted as truthiness, more new “truths” can be constructed out of them! See it over and over again coming from these ODS prophets.

    When a “conclusions first” proponent tries to sell their shaky “truths” to an “evidence first” audience, they may as well be speaking an alien tongue. Complete clash of values.

    The best is when they ultimately blame the crowd for not “getting” the truthiness of their truthy “truths”. Can’t you see? It’s so obvious! Just suspend disbelief, unplug, and go sailing on the seas of fantasy with me. Oh, and never mind that hand in your pocket ;)

    Not sure how to reverse all the damage. How do you unspool decades of spin?

  472. avatar
    Scientist January 6, 2012 at 12:47 pm #

    Just a note on former Marxists in power. The current President of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff was a Marxist in the 1960s. Not conjecture, but fact. She led an armed guerilla group and was jailed and tortured by the military regime. In effect, she didn’t just know Bill Ayers, she WAS Bill Ayers.

    Today, her approval rating is 72%. Brazil’s economy, though slowing, is probably in among the best shape of any country’s. Under her mentor, Lula da Silva, a leftist, though likely never a Marxist, 25 million people were lifted out of poverty and into the middle class. He left office with 80% approval.

  473. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 6, 2012 at 1:19 pm #

    I never do it myself before commenting on other sites. But then, I try to be civil most of the time and take my lead from other comments.

    James M: I disagree. It is perfectly reasonable and not a tall order by any means.

  474. avatar
    Obsolete January 6, 2012 at 1:41 pm #

    Besides devouring all the usual classics on Watergate, two other books helped round out my understanding of Nixon- “Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail 1972″ by Hunter S. Thompson, and the more recent “Nixonland”, by Rick Perlstein.
    I also found Oliver Stone’s film “Nixon” to be engrossing. Although it contains some conjecture and fiction, all together it produces a greater truth (sort of like H.S. Thompson’s gonzo journalism). After all, it is how Stone experienced and perceived Nixon, not necessarily how the rest of the world did.

  475. avatar
    Rickey January 6, 2012 at 1:52 pm #

    Obsolete:
    Besides devouring all the usual classics on Watergate, two other books helped round out my understanding of Nixon- “Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail 1972‘ by Hunter S. Thompson, and the more recent “Nixonland”, by Rick Perlstein.
    I also found Oliver Stone’s film “Nixon” to be engrossing. Although it contains some conjecture and fiction, all together it produces a greater truth (sort of like H.S. Thompson’s gonzo journalism). After all, it is how Stone experienced and perceived Nixon, not necessarily how the rest of the world did.

    Another engrossing but less well-known film about Nixon is Robert Altman’s “Secret Honor” (1984).

  476. avatar
    John C. Drew, Ph.D. January 6, 2012 at 1:58 pm #

    In a world where people are reading up on wheth