Obama returning to Columbia University after presidency

  • metta

    Posts: 39119

    Sep 01, 2015 5:13 AM GMT
    Obama returning to Columbia University after presidency


    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/252372-report-obama-returning-to-columbia-university-after-presidency
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2015 6:45 PM GMT
    He'll fit right in.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2015 8:04 PM GMT
    Indeed he will.

    Eisenhower_0.jpg
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14354

    Sep 01, 2015 9:37 PM GMT
    So what, who caresicon_question.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2015 11:22 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidIndeed he will.

    Eisenhower_0.jpg


    LOL! The Columbia of today bears about as much a resemblance to that of Ike's tenure as contemporary Oxbridge does to the days of Mr. Chips. And, I doubt if the current occupant of the WH will leave us w/ any words of wisdom like Ike did re: the military-industrial complex or any other perceptive social observations besides what he gleaned from Cliff Notes' version of "Rules for Radicals." Where's Nicholas Murray Butler when we need him?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2015 11:23 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidSo what, who caresicon_question.gif


    If I had a kid who was thinking about attending Columbia, I'd care in direct proportion to the amount of tuition I'd be spending.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 02, 2015 1:50 AM GMT
    Yes, he'll fit in:

    Former Weather Underground radical Kathy Boudin — who spent 22 years in prison for an armored-car robbery that killed two cops and a Brinks guard — now holds a prestigious adjunct professorship at Columbia University’s School of Social Work, The Post has learned.

    Boudin, 69, this year won another academic laurel — being named the Sheinberg Scholar-in-Residence at NYU Law School, where last month she gave a lecture on “the politics of parole and re-entry.”

    http://nypost.com/2013/04/02/outrage-101-radical-jailed-in-slay-now-columbia-prof/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 02, 2015 9:13 AM GMT
    MGINSD said
    LOL! The Columbia of today bears about as much a resemblance to that of Ike's tenure as contemporary Oxbridge does to the days of Mr. Chips. And, I doubt if the current occupant of the WH will leave us w/ any words of wisdom like Ike did re: the military-industrial complex or any other perceptive social observations besides what he gleaned from Cliff Notes' version of "Rules for Radicals." Where's Nicholas Murray Butler when we need him?


    Even back then, Ike wasn't generally considered to be a good fit as President of Columbia University, owing to his outside commercial interests and frequent (albeit mostly necessary) absences. Being a career soldier, he also found little in common with the academics there. In some respects (and for the right reasons) Obama probably will fit in better than Eisenhower did.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14354

    Sep 02, 2015 12:49 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    roadbikeRob saidSo what, who caresicon_question.gif


    If I had a kid who was thinking about attending Columbia, I'd care in direct proportion to the amount of tuition I'd be spending.
    It is not the parent's responsibility to pay for their kid's college tuition. That is the responsibility of the student. Attending college is an adult responsibility, not a free handout from mom and dad.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 02, 2015 4:02 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob said
    MGINSD said
    roadbikeRob saidSo what, who caresicon_question.gif


    If I had a kid who was thinking about attending Columbia, I'd care in direct proportion to the amount of tuition I'd be spending.
    It is not the parent's responsibility to pay for their kid's college tuition. That is the responsibility of the student. Attending college is an adult responsibility, not a free handout from mom and dad.


    Agree 100%, rbB; I put myself thru school on a combination of work, scholarships, loans, and the GI Bill. I would expect my kid to do so as well (though not to the point of joining the military; I did so because I had a low draft number), w/ only incrementally higher contributions from me based on achievement, with a gift of paying off part or all of student loans once graduated. My post was directed towards those parents who feel they need to pay for their kids' college educations in full, a belief I do not share at all.
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Sep 02, 2015 8:13 PM GMT
    Excellent. I bet his seminars will be by invitation only (those lucky university students who get a good 'lottery' time and click first), no room for ad hocs and drifters.

    I wonder if he'll teach a large (300+) class like former Labor Secretary Robert Reich. If so, I will sneak into those classes (I'll be wearing a backwards cap and a shirt that says: BEER PONG). They'll never see me coming icon_cool.gif
  • OutdoorAdvent...

    Posts: 361

    Sep 03, 2015 12:23 AM GMT
    I'd prefer to see Obama on the Supreme Court. Can you imagine him and Scalia going at it? Or better, him being appointed to Scalia's or Thomas' seat?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 03, 2015 1:15 AM GMT
    OutdoorAdventurist saidI'd prefer to see him on the Supreme Court. Can you imagine him and Scalia going at it? Or better, him being appointed to Scalia's or Thomas' seat?

    I can easily see - no need to imagine - Scalia making an even greater fool out of Obama during any verbal joust between the two. As for whatever classes he'll teach at Columbia, he'll soon tire of them and phone in his lectures, just as he did while a lecturer at Chicago Law. Once a fraud, always a fraud.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 03, 2015 5:31 AM GMT
    robbaker saidThe worst president in history !


    The worst president? really? Based on what intelligent evidence?

    If you look at any well researched review of Obama's presidency, he ranks in the top half (at the very least).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States


    If one looks at the facts and what he as accomplished, he's a winner.

    Too many people confuse their dislike of his policies with his intelligence and his accomplishments.

    I believe that as time moves on, history will judge him more fairly and he will be seen as one of our best presidents. The fact that he has accomplished as much as he has while dealing with the kind of insipid, baseless hatred is an accomplishment within itself.

    I disliked Reagan's policies, I didn't think he was very bright in general. However, I never hated him as a person.

    Obama is exceptional in many ways and I don't say this because I like him. I say this based on specific facts. A graduate of Columbia University (one of the best schools in the country). A graduate of Harvard Law and Editor of the Harvard Law review. A professor of constitutional Law at the University of Chicago. These accomplishments are earned and his intelligence is unquestioned by any sane, rational person. These are among the best schools in the world and the fact that he can teach at any of these schools says a lot.

    His list of accomplishments in office is even longer and more impressive. He wins at practically every turn even through both houses are republican controlled. How great is that! One has to be sharp to get anything done when dealing with the least productive congress in history.


    Affordable Care Act
    Marriage Equality
    Lowest Unemployment in 10 years
    Returned the Executive Branch to Fiscal Responsibility
    Prevented a Bush Depression and Improved the Economy
    Wall Street Reforms and Consumer Protections
    Signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
    The Iran Nuclear Deal
    The Cuban Thaw

    There are over 300 accomplishments in all.

    Yes, I believe that intelligent history will be kind to this president.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/obamas-legacy-chait.html


    Guys, let's always look at the facts and leave our negative emotions at the front door.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 03, 2015 5:41 AM GMT
    MGINSD said
    OutdoorAdventurist saidI'd prefer to see him on the Supreme Court. Can you imagine him and Scalia going at it? Or better, him being appointed to Scalia's or Thomas' seat?

    I can easily see - no need to imagine - Scalia making an even greater fool out of Obama during any verbal joust between the two. As for whatever classes he'll teach at Columbia, he'll soon tire of them and phone in his lectures, just as he did while a lecturer at Chicago Law. Once a fraud, always a fraud.


    Facts please. Fraud how? and based on what evidence. I can appreciate any intelligent discourse. But making wild accusations with absolutely no foundation in fact is silly and pointless.

    Columbia Univ grad - fact
    Harvard Law grad - fact
    Harvard Law review president - fact
    Univ of Chicago, taught constitutional law - fact
    Nobel Prize winner - fact


    Obama's a fraud??? - where is the evidence documenting this?

    Again, let's discuss Obama ( or any person or issue for that matter) in terms of the documented facts. Information that we can validate (from credible sources) and discuss intelligently.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 03, 2015 11:59 AM GMT
    blkbodybdr said
    robbaker saidThe worst president in history !


    The worst president? really? Based on what intelligent evidence?

    If you look at any well researched review of Obama's presidency, he ranks in the top half (at the very least).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States


    If one looks at the facts and what he as accomplished, he's a winner.

    Too many people confuse their dislike of his policies with his intelligence and his accomplishments.

    I believe that as time moves on, history will judge him more fairly and he will be seen as one of our best presidents. The fact that he has accomplished as much as he has while dealing with the kind of insipid, baseless hatred is an accomplishment within itself.

    I disliked Reagan's policies, I didn't think he was very bright in general. However, I never hated him as a person.

    Obama is exceptional in many ways and I don't say this because I like him. I say this based on specific facts. A graduate of Columbia University (one of the best schools in the country). A graduate of Harvard Law and Editor of the Harvard Law review. A professor of constitutional Law at the University of Chicago. These accomplishments are earned and his intelligence is unquestioned by any sane, rational person. These are among the best schools in the world and the fact that he can teach at any of these schools says a lot.

    His list of accomplishments in office is even longer and more impressive. He wins at practically every turn even through both houses are republican controlled. How great is that! One has to be sharp to get anything done when dealing with the least productive congress in history.


    Affordable Care Act
    Marriage Equality
    Lowest Unemployment in 10 years
    Returned the Executive Branch to Fiscal Responsibility
    Prevented a Bush Depression and Improved the Economy
    Wall Street Reforms and Consumer Protections
    Signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
    The Iran Nuclear Deal
    The Cuban Thaw

    There are over 300 accomplishments in all.

    Yes, I believe that intelligent history will be kind to this president.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/obamas-legacy-chait.html


    Guys, let's always look at the facts and leave our negative emotions at the front door.




    I wish he could have run for a 3rd term.

    The only thing Republicans hate more than a black President is a SMART black President.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 03, 2015 3:24 PM GMT
    blkbodybdr said
    MGINSD said
    OutdoorAdventurist saidI'd prefer to see him on the Supreme Court. Can you imagine him and Scalia going at it? Or better, him being appointed to Scalia's or Thomas' seat?

    I can easily see - no need to imagine - Scalia making an even greater fool out of Obama during any verbal joust between the two. As for whatever classes he'll teach at Columbia, he'll soon tire of them and phone in his lectures, just as he did while a lecturer at Chicago Law. Once a fraud, always a fraud.


    Facts please. Fraud how? and based on what evidence. I can appreciate any intelligent discourse. But making wild accusations with absolutely no foundation in fact is silly and pointless.

    Columbia Univ grad - fact
    Harvard Law grad - fact
    Harvard Law review president - fact
    Univ of Chicago, taught constitutional law - fact
    Nobel Prize winner - fact


    Obama's a fraud??? - where is the evidence documenting this?

    Again, let's discuss Obama ( or any person or issue for that matter) in terms of the documented facts. Information that we can validate (from credible sources) and discuss intelligently.


    The evidence is in the records of all those noble institutions of higher learning you mentioned, except it's inaccessible, and therefore incapable of being validated, thanks to Obama's intervention and their willing complaisance. It is entirely reasonable to assume that anyone who covers up his record as much as Obama has obviously has something to hide; the law provides as much in jury instructions during trials. Further proof comes in the form of his dismal, embarrassing performance in his presidential debates, the first with Mitt Romney being the sorriest excuse for public discourse that I've seen in my lifetime, and on the world stage, where he makes Neville Chamberlain look like Francisco Franco. (His Nobel remains an unprecedented anomaly, best - if inadequately - explained by more of the white guilt that propelled him into office.) Reasonable minds will differ on the worth of his so-called "accomplishments," i.e., the laws he's enacted, whether by Congress or by his own executive fiat, but each of them is ultimately a hollow piece of pandering no different from the bread and circus policies of late ancient Rome. Those are a few of the facts supporting my opinion of Obama as a fraud.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 03, 2015 3:53 PM GMT
    MGINSD saidThe evidence is in the records of all those noble institutions of higher learning you mentioned, except it's inaccessible, and therefore incapable of being validated, thanks to Obama's intervention and their willing complaisance. It is entirely reasonable to assume that anyone who covers up his record as much as Obama has obviously has something to hide; the law provides as much in jury instructions during trials. Further proof comes in the form of his dismal, embarrassing performance in his presidential debates, the first with Mitt Romney being the sorriest excuse for public discourse that I've seen in my lifetime, and on the world stage, where he makes Neville Chamberlain look like Francisco Franco. (His Nobel remains an unprecedented anomaly, best - if inadequately - explained by more of the white guilt that propelled him into office.) Reasonable minds will differ on the worth of his so-called "accomplishments," i.e., the laws he's enacted, whether by Congress or by his own executive fiat, but each of them is ultimately a hollow piece of pandering no different from the bread and circus policies of late ancient Rome. Those are a few of the facts supporting my opinion of Obama as a fraud.

    Because the records have been hidden, although foreign intelligence services likely have them (implicit blackmail possible?), there is the possibility that affirmative action played some role in him getting into the universities. Note the following that I copied from the Harvard Law Review website a few years ago indicating affirmative action could have played a role there as well. Getting elected President of the HLR is a popularity contest, and he could have talked his way to that, using a prepared speech of course. We know what happens when teleprompters fail. LOL

    Membership in the Harvard Law Review is limited to second- and third-year law students who are selected on the basis of their performance on an annual writing competition. Harvard Law School students who are interested in joining the Review must write the competition at the end of their 1L year, even if they plan to take time off during law school or are pursuing a joint degree and plan to spend a year at another Harvard graduate school. In recent years, the number of students completing the competition has ranged from 215 to 265. 44 students are invited to join the Review each year. Fourteen editors (two from each 1L section) are selected based on a combination of their first-year grades and their competition scores. Twenty editors are selected based solely on their competition scores. The remaining editors are selected on a discretionary basis. Some of these discretionary slots may be used to implement the Review’s affirmative action policy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 03, 2015 5:38 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    blkbodybdr said
    MGINSD said
    OutdoorAdventurist saidI'd prefer to see him on the Supreme Court. Can you imagine him and Scalia going at it? Or better, him being appointed to Scalia's or Thomas' seat?

    I can easily see - no need to imagine - Scalia making an even greater fool out of Obama during any verbal joust between the two. As for whatever classes he'll teach at Columbia, he'll soon tire of them and phone in his lectures, just as he did while a lecturer at Chicago Law. Once a fraud, always a fraud.


    Facts please. Fraud how? and based on what evidence. I can appreciate any intelligent discourse. But making wild accusations with absolutely no foundation in fact is silly and pointless.

    Columbia Univ grad - fact
    Harvard Law grad - fact
    Harvard Law review president - fact
    Univ of Chicago, taught constitutional law - fact
    Nobel Prize winner - fact


    Obama's a fraud??? - where is the evidence documenting this?

    Again, let's discuss Obama ( or any person or issue for that matter) in terms of the documented facts. Information that we can validate (from credible sources) and discuss intelligently.


    The evidence is in the records of all those noble institutions of higher learning you mentioned, except it's inaccessible, and therefore incapable of being validated, thanks to Obama's intervention and their willing complaisance. It is entirely reasonable to assume that anyone who covers up his record as much as Obama has obviously has something to hide; the law provides as much in jury instructions during trials. Further proof comes in the form of his dismal, embarrassing performance in his presidential debates, the first with Mitt Romney being the sorriest excuse for public discourse that I've seen in my lifetime, and on the world stage, where he makes Neville Chamberlain look like Francisco Franco. (His Nobel remains an unprecedented anomaly, best - if inadequately - explained by more of the white guilt that propelled him into office.) Reasonable minds will differ on the worth of his so-called "accomplishments," i.e., the laws he's enacted, whether by Congress or by his own executive fiat, but each of them is ultimately a hollow piece of pandering no different from the bread and circus policies of late ancient Rome. Those are a few of the facts supporting my opinion of Obama as a fraud.


    And I still think that it's due to Obama himself claiming that he wasn't born in the United States to avail himself of additional affirmative action benefits available to foreign born students.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 03, 2015 5:59 PM GMT
    robbaker saidCan't wait for donald trump to become the next president of the united states of America. And fuck jorge ramos build the wall now!!


    Even 5 one-liners in a row didn't make a cohesive thought.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Sep 03, 2015 10:02 PM GMT
    robbaker saidThe worst president in history !


    please McKinley was much much worse than Obama

    McKinley was a true corrupt dirt bag
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14354

    Sep 03, 2015 11:48 PM GMT
    tj85016 said
    robbaker saidThe worst president in history !


    please McKinley was much much worse than Obama

    McKinley was a true corrupt dirt bag
    So was Richard Nixon.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14354

    Sep 03, 2015 11:49 PM GMT
    robbaker saidSEND JORGE RAMOS BACK TO MEXICO ALONG WITH HIS ILLEGAL CRIME MUREROUS RAPISTS BUDDIESicon_evil.gif
    You need to be committed to a psychiatric ward.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Sep 03, 2015 11:52 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob said
    tj85016 said
    robbaker saidThe worst president in history !


    please McKinley was much much worse than Obama

    McKinley was a true corrupt dirt bag
    So was Richard Nixon.


    not even close, McKinley was a real scum bag

    it's a damn good thing that guy shot him (Rockefeller cried that day, as his "boy" was dead)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 04, 2015 12:18 AM GMT
    NO COMMENT!!

    WHO GIVES A FUCK!!

    There something sweet for^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^