http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/terence-p-jeffrey/i-me-my-obama-uses-first-person-singular-199-times-speech-vowing

Obama can use instead of "It is lonely, me just doing stuff,”  let's use “It is lonely, US just doing stuff,”  or how about “I’m just telling the truth now,”  we'll use “WE'RE just telling the truth now,” ...yeah I got it, that works for me....you're a pickey little weenie. You should change your name to "Splitinhairs,the bugFucker"...oh and if you have an awswer, keep it simple,please.

............House Republicans could pass a jobs bill, an immigration bill, a higher minimum wage bill, an infrastructure rebuilding bill right now but King Boner Majority House leader says NO!

and Allah

.........sending them to fight a war based on lies. Don't you think this is a total disrespect to the thousands of families who have lost loved ones in the Iraq war?  

Amen !

then you are lucky you live in a city that requires you to own a gun because your senseless ass is going to get yourself into a situation where you're going to need it.  

You do realize the chief architect of the Iraq war, G.W. Bush, accepted his own WMD commission report that no WMD existed in Iraq.

Backstabber is not a respectable trait no matter where you were born.

But why do you have to be a hard ass, prick?

92 - Abraham Lincoln #1
86 - William Harrison
79 - Martin Van Buren
78 - Millard Fillmore
74 - Chester Arthur
58 - Franklin Pierce
48 - Gerald Ford
47 - Andrew Johnson
47 - George Washington
47 - William Taft
45 - James Polk
42 - John Tyler
37 - James Monroe
37 - William McKinley
35 - Rutherford Hayes
34 - John Quincy Adams
33 - George H. W. Bush
32 - Zachary Taylor
31 - Andrew Jackson
30 - Franklin Roosevelt
30 - John Adams
29 - Thomas Jefferson
29 - Ulysses S. Grant
27 - James Madison
24 - Harry Truman
24 - Herbert Hoover
24 - Ronald Reagan
23 - James Buchanan
23 - Lyndon Johnson
20 - Warren Harding
19 - Benjamin Harrison
19 - Richard Nixon
19 - Theodore Roosevelt
16 - James Garfield
16 - Jimmy Carter
12 - Bill Clinton
11 - George W. Bush
10 - Grover Cleveland
9 - Calvin Coolidge
7 - Dwight Eisenhower
5 - John Kennedy
5 - Woodrow Wilson
4 - Barack Obama #2
3 - Barack Obama #1
1 - Abraham Lincoln #2

the area that feeds our country to save a minnow ? Why do you guys out there pick pros who rat you to the press for saying jungle bunny or give you a lethal dose of heroin ? Why do you vote for an old dried up hag who's clearly detached like Pelosi is ? Why do you continue to cry about SEC football always being ranked high when they pound your teams year after year ?

I don't know about water shut downs over some bird,or power plant not being built but I suspect that's because maybe congress wouldn't help fund it, I dunno about some rat. Some of those issue seem petty. I got no beef with with Pelosi, she knows how to rally her troops and get things done unlike that piece of shit Boehner. Now there's someone who YOU should really bitch about.
But 86, Ga dunit if you're going to tell me that SEC sissy ass football is better then the Pac12 then I wish them good ol boys would travel west of the Mississippi and come play. Shit the Pac12 teams travel everywhere to play anyone. See UCLA's schedule, travel to Texas and at Virgina. But SEC would rather stay home and play Troy, Monroe of Alabama, or the Sister of the Poor. And please don't say your conference is tough and they beat up on each other. You're conference maybe top heavy but the bottom part sucks. Shit, our shit team of Washington St. went to Auburn last year and almost sucker punched them. Georgia always fall flat on their ass at the end in every year

......capability? I think not! I'll take the word of the WMD commission set up by Bush that reported there were no WMD's in Iraq

SEC is still the strongest conference in all of the NCAA, bar none.

I will admit that the PAC 12 has made some steps to narrow the gap a bit, but the SEC is still easily number one.

but thank you for narrowing the field about who 86 actually is, I think I have a pretty good idea who he is now, but far be it for me to "out" an alias.

"straining at gnats while swallowing camels."  

But this year, with all the returning QB's in the Pac12, the conference that will be much better then the SEC. Remember speed kills!!! SEC lost alot of skilled players.
Now back to Politic and religion where we all like to piss ech other off, where the F is 86???

Oh, forgot, did you notice that the SEC is sorta like the GOP? Some of the coaches from the SEC, Alabama and Arkansas want to slow the game down to where there's 10 seconds between plays. I think they have one eye towards Texas AM, Auburn, Wahington St.,Oregon, Arizona, UCLA and most teams from the west coast...almost like voter suppression and gerrymandering...hummm. Had to inflict alittle political commentary here to make it on this board.......lol

and I will admit, you guys are getting closer, but you aren't quite there yet. The closest anyone has come to reaching parity with the SEC was the Big Twelve, and the minute they started gaining credibility Nebraska broke ranks and the conference imploded with two of it's  best defecting to the SEC.

It's funny, I expected both Texas A&M and Missou to get pummeled in the SEC, but they both performed respectably, and the conference is even stronger because of them.

But then again, I'm sure you most likely never even took the time to read my post in response to ND. You're far too biased.

"WE" were wrong"

I have no quarrel over your analysis, though you just missed the camels again!

In this case the camels are "why bother," and "who cares?"

Unless you want us to believe responding to not just eds initial post but also his response to you is "sifting the camel".

From your posts, it appears that things are bouncing off the walls at a high rate of speed, in all directions!    

So what you are telling us is the only post here that is more useless than mine, is yours.

Yep! I have an opinion about the significance and importance of your analysis. I think it has neither! Yet, I never told you to "keep quiet." I guess in your omnipotence you believe I will do so.    

My post invoked you to make a value judgement based on whether or not you should spend time doing the same (analysis) regarding Obama or Bush. This is clear evidence you never even read my post as I first claimed.

Curious reply coming from the Bible Thumper who tells others how they should behave...

And, I did see you included in your analysis other president's, however I assumed your interest in the exercise was initiated by pinheads linked article which was focused, as was pinhead's target, on Obama. It's that simple. My assumption, however, could have been in error. I'm truly humble enough to admit it, if it is indeed true. So, I'm wondering if you are humble enough to admit the error of your assumption?  

I have behaved as such?

I truly appreciate your candor. Unfortunately I did not base my statements on assumptions. I based them on what you actually wrote. When I see evidence that I was wrong I will gladly admit it. You can't uno history. You do have a long history of being exceptionally dodgy, favoring to create illegitimate wriggle room with word games. I've done it myself. I can't recall you making posts such as the above, in such an irrelevant way,critical of someone's personal life, but now I suspect it was really just another diversion after you realized you had made a bad assumption but weren't ready to admit it. I can promise you one thing. If don't see the behavior again I won't be bringing it up anymore.

"Proof you never actually examined my post."

BTW, my OP was actually focused on Obama's demeanor in the video rather than the Terry Jefferies commentary. I just could'nt find that video by itself.

I should have used evidence not proof but my assertion that you had not read it was based upon things you said, not who you were or who you associated with (which are the things you relied upon).

Yes! I am making fun of your straining at gnats while swallowing camels, not the impact it has on your personal life.  

I assumed nothing. Everything I stated was based on immediate analysis of your words. I only admitted using the less proper word in declaring the certainty (evidence vs. proof).

You still can't do it can you! Admit you made an assumption about me not reading your post, which was wrong.  

You are clearly not using any standard definition for assumption. I can't admit what didn't happen. Keep spinning.

I applaud your patience.

You may not choose to admit that was an assumption, but it quite obviously is!  You've gone down this rabbit hole further than I choose to follow, so good luck on your continued venture!    

say that you had read it but then admit that you ignored it, thus giving the clear impression that you had not examined same. Would that have been too hard?

Now, wouldn't that have been futile???

If I had told you I had read it, given our previous conversation, I would anticipate you telling me I hadn't!    

You're the one in a rabbit hole, trying to figure out how to escape and have the last word.

I'm not aware of calling you a liar! Humorless bore, yes!

My analysis of your post, and pinheads was the reference to "straining at gnats, while swallowing a camel." I can't be held accountable for your incorrect assumption that I would give such an analysis without reading and/or ignoring your analysis!  

I find it quite entertaining!  

You're correct that you didn't call me a liar. You only implied it.

or interpretations.  

Well, there you have it, your purpose, intent, goals and modus operandi all summed up quite nicely.