/lit/ - Literature

Obama is a better writer than most politicians, though that isn't saying much.

>>4785444
stop kidding yourself, we all know obama didn't write a single book.
Has anyone actually read it though? You clearly haven't

>tfw the title is better written than any conservative book

*slow clap*

>>4785464
it is 50% buzzwords

I have a copy. I read it back in 2009 I think. It's a pretty interesting read.

He also says "bitch nigger" in it.

>>4785474
omg. now i have to read it.

Obama general?
Obama general.

>I also think my party can be smug, detached, and dogmatic at times. I believe in the free market, competition, and entrepreneurship, and think no small number of government programs don’t work as advertised. I wish the country had fewer lawyers and more engineers. I think America has more often been a force for good than for ill in the world; I carry few illusions about our enemies, and revere the courage and competence of our military. I reject a politics that is based solely on racial identity, gender identity, sexual orientation, or victimhood generally.

>Nevertheless, by promising to side with those who worked hard, obeyed the law, cared for their families, and loved their country, Reagan offered Americans a sense of a common purpose that liberals seemed no longer able to muster. And the more his critics carped, the more those critics played into the role he’d written for them—a band of out-of-touch, tax-and-spend, blame-America-first, politically correct elites.

I read Dreams of My Father, it was surprisingly well written.

>>4785505
>>4785517

Yeah, now I'm more convinced than ever that Obama's books are ghostwritten.

>>4785524
>tfw people express surprise when a black person is articulate

>>4785555
>implying a black person wrote the books
pls

>>4785555
"Oh, he's so well-spoken!"

>It should come as no surprise, then, that we have a tendency to take our free-market system as a given, to assume that it flows naturally from the laws of supply and demand and Adam Smith’s invisible hand. And from this assumption, it’s not much of a leap to assume that any government intrusion into the magical workings of the market—whether through taxation, regulation, lawsuits, tariffs, labor protections, or spending on entitlements—necessarily undermines private enterprise and inhibits economic growth. The bankruptcy of communism and socialism as alternative means of economic organization has only reinforced this assumption. In our standard economics textbooks and in our modern political debates, laissez-faire is the default rule; anyone who would challenge it swims against the prevailing tide.

>>4785558
Then what's the surprise about it being well-written? C'mon. Let's hear your well-written response.

>>4785565
maybe it's just very well written

>>4785551
Many bits probably are. But I'm more convinced that people who voted for him and are now very disappointed really only have themselves to blame
>ugh! wasn't this obama guy supposed to be a liberal? he's just like bush! both parties are the same, maaaan

>>4785568
oh, then the original post in this convo was meaningless. fun.

>>4785572
I'm not disappointed at all and any problems pointed out do not affect me personally.

>>4785559
Remember when liberals were sharing his letter about T.S. Eliot everywhere

>>4785579
that wasn't my post

>>4785589
I don't really follow politics.

>>4785593
plen

>>4785592
wow. that's fun, too.

>>4785597
this is just a fun place isn't it :^)

>>4785595
no, that would be /pol/

>>4785598
not with people like you

>>4785603
that wasn't my post

>>4785611
oh.

>>4785592
>>4785593
>>4785595
>>4785597
>>4785598
>>4785601
>>4785603
>>4785611
Guys please show some respect here

This is the president we're talking about

>>4785613
>you had the audacity to be hopeful

>>4785611
yes it was

>>4785619
now it's fun

>I haven’t read “The Waste Land” for a year, and I never did bother to check all the footnotes. But I will hazard these statements—Eliot contains the same ecstatic vision which runs from Münzer to Yeats. However, he retains a grounding in the social reality/order of his time. Facing what he perceives as a choice between ecstatic chaos and lifeless mechanistic order, he accedes to maintaining a separation of asexual purity and brutal sexual reality. And he wears a stoical face before this. Read his essay on Tradition and the Individual Talent, as well as Four Quartets, when he’s less concerned with depicting moribund Europe, to catch a sense of what I speak. Remember how I said there’s a certain kind of conservatism which I respect more than bourgeois liberalism—Eliot is of this type. Of course, the dichotomy he maintains is reactionary, but it’s due to a deep fatalism, not ignorance. (Counter him with Yeats or Pound, who, arising from the same milieu, opted to support Hitler and Mussolini.) And this fatalism is born out of the relation between fertility and death, which I touched on in my last letter—life feeds on itself. A fatalism I share with the western tradition at times. You seem surprised at Eliot’s irreconcilable ambivalence; don’t you share this ambivalence yourself, Alex?

Why aren't you as smart as the president when he was 21, /lit/?

>>4785635
that's not intelligence. That's called being pretentious.

>>4785635
>tfw i will never be obama's bro in college, exchanging philosophical letters

>>4785639
Thought isn't necessarily everyone's thing. Feels may be more your bag.

>>4783983

>>4785643
damn that's cold

>>4785635
>You seem surprised at Eliot’s irreconcilable ambivalence; don’t you share this ambivalence yourself, Alex?

weird, I read this last line in Obama's voice perfectly like he was asking Trebek a question

>>4785646
Rush is actually a fun clown--like an evolved John Wayne Gacy.

>>4785635
That's...surprisingly insightful.

I hope he wasn't parroting some professor with that. If he actually wrote that at 21, I'm impressed (well, more impressed since it's already pretty damn impressive that the dude was the head of the Harvard Law Review and Prez).

>>4785643
>>4785646
right ok. I'm actually a STEM person so I'll just go back to 'feeling' my mathematics equations. Have fun arguing over inconsequential interpretations of literature though. Be sure to keep using as many obscure terms and namedropping until you've convinced yourself that you must be 'smart'.

>tfw obama will never look into my soul and smile

>>4785655
>tfw people express surprise when a black person is intelligent

>>4785665
Dude
>>>/sci/

>>4785665
dude.

>>4785668
It has nothing to do with him being black.

I'm just saying that I didn't expect Obama to be capable of explicating a poem. I didn't figure that was something he ever wanted or had to do.

>>4785668
>but he's so well-spoken omg so proud

Why do people assume that the half-black would be stronger than his half-white?

If racists were smart (which they're not) wouldn't they assume that his white half was automatically superior to his black half?

hf w/ ur autism m80

>>4785679
That's the problem: racists don't know if he's black or white.

>>4785685
>hurrr what's the one drop rule

>>4785665
Yeah, you seem like the humorless STEM type.

Go grow a soul faggot.

>>4785692
that's why I'm here actually :)

>>4785704

>>4785505
>>4785517
It's basically a motivational letter for a presidency application.

>>4785915
>How does his brain put together thoughts when he's black.
>I thought all they heard was bass thuds.

>>4785918
Are you trying to tell me something?

http://www.hark.com/clips/cqgcclrsmf-you-know-that-guy-aint-shit-sorry-ass-motherfucker-aint-got-nothing-on-me-right-nothin

>>4785943
Damn that's a clever post.

>>4785987
What?

>>4785988
>tfw i wish anons weren't lazy

>>4785994
Are you having a stroke or something?