Hammers Get The Nod
By Mitch Berg
Frank Fleming asks “who’d be a better president – Obama or a sack of hammers?”, and reaches a conclusion…
Overall
Taking all these areas into consideration, it’s pretty easy to see that a sack of hammers would be a much better president than Obama. This isn’t to say that Obama is dumber than a sack of hammers — a ridiculous assertion — it’s just to say that he’s much worse at being a president than one.
…that would surprise nobody that is really paying attention.
Of course, this is all hypothetical, as you’ll never find a sack of hammers with the fire in the belly necessary to both run for president and win. Perhaps that’s a problem in our system of democracy that someone like a sack of hammers, who would be an above average to great president, could never be elected.
Check out the reasoning that led to the conclusion.
August 30th, 2011 at 6:20 am
Jack Cashill critiques one of the few examples we have of Obama’s writing when he was president of Harvard Law Review:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/08/early_obama_letter_confirms_inability_to_write.html
Bad grammar and confused syntax. Lawyers make their living by writing.
Obama isn’t an evil genius, intent on turning this country into a socialist nation. He just ain’t that bright.
Try to figure out what tense Obama is using in this passage:
If you think Cashill is misrepresenting Obama’s written words, the above paragraph can be found on the HLR’s website: http://www.hlrecord.org/2.4475/record-retrospective-obama-on-affirmative-action-1.577511?pagereq=2
August 30th, 2011 at 6:54 am
People in powerful positions would do well to employ a sack of hammers as an advisor when they are tempted to make decisions that will have far reaching effects and unintended consequences. That is not to claim inaction is always the best course, but as a mentor of mine once put it: “Once the worms get out of the can, it’s hard to get them back in.”
August 30th, 2011 at 8:46 am
As I recall, the GOP ran Sack of Hammers against Obama. He lost.
August 30th, 2011 at 8:54 am
I thought sack-of-hammers was Obama’s running mate.
August 30th, 2011 at 9:31 am
No, dumber than a hammer is Obama’s VP. It’s his life insurance.
I’ve said in the past that my dog would be a better President than Obama since he’d spend four years curled up on the couch sleeping. Seems like Frank agrees.
August 30th, 2011 at 9:45 am
Obama’s running mate was Sack of Rocks. With hair plugs. Cha cha cha Chia!
August 30th, 2011 at 9:59 am
Nerdbert, you should check this out:
http://www.hlrecord.org/2.4475/record-retrospective-obama-on-affirmative-action-1.577511?pagereq=1
An entire letter Obama wrote to Harvard Law Review Record back in 1990, while he was President of HLR.
It’s a train wreck, written as though it was meant to sound like a high-falutin’ lawyer should sound with unnecessary adjectives, odd phrasing, and some uncertainty, when the clauses get complicated, whether a word is used in its noun sense or in its verb sense.
Plus, bonus! An admission that his academic success was based not on the content of his character, but the color of his skin:
August 30th, 2011 at 11:34 am
If the sack of hammers comes from Mexico, it could get elected. I mean, think about it. The sack of hammers would be the first Mexican-American President. Or was BIll Clintonista the first Mexican-American President?
August 30th, 2011 at 11:35 am
Because above and beyond all considerations, it is all about Obama. Everything is about Obama. Do not question the Center of the Universe.
August 30th, 2011 at 11:36 am
No, Clinton was the first black President. Jebus, how many times do we have to rewrite the history books?
August 30th, 2011 at 11:39 am
Terry, if Obama didn’t have a dark hue to his skin, Hillary Clinton would be president right now. You know, if she would have ditched Bill, I could actually live with her being president. I just couldn’t stand smug Bill on TV almost every day.
September 1st, 2011 at 4:53 pm
The big advantage the Bag Of Hammers have is that they don’t subscribe to the “Facepalmian” economic theory:
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/09/01/robert-reich-government-must-spend-more-to-get-out-of-debt/