web
counter
 

The Hangover Part II Review: Hey, A**hole: You Gave Me This Present Last Year; You Can't Change the Gift Wrap and Call It New

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (72)



the-hangover-part-2-p.jpg

Movies can reshape our imagination, bring us to tears, render us lovesick, break our psyches, shock and horrify us, or draw out an emotional catharsis. The great power of film is its ability to inspire, to elicit laughter, to provoke thought, or to enable us to appreciate what we have or what’s been lost. The great power of The Hangover II, on the other hand, is its immense ability to make us feel as though we’ve been robbed, ripped off, stolen from, sold a bill of goods, knocked out, anally violated and left for dead. It’s not even that The Hangover II is a bad film; it’s that it’s a film we’ve already fucking seen. Maybe you remember it. It was called The Hangover.

Sequels suggest continuations of stories; The Hangover II is not a sequel. It’s a remake set in a different goddamn city. It’s the same band singing the same song. All they did was add someone to play the wood block and tickle Brad Cooper’s balls. The lyrics are slightly different, but no one even had the goddamn decency to change the chorus. It’s not a new movie; they just repackaged the old one. It’s like paying to replace your laptop with the exact same one, only the screensaver is an Asian tranny instead of a stripper Mom. It’s like The Next Karade Kid starring Ralph Machio in the Hilary Swank role. You know what that’s called? The Karate Kid.

What I don’t get it, where is the outrage? People paid $13 to see something they’d already seen. Why weren’t there reports from midnight screenings of audience members ripping out their seats, beating up old women, looting Rite Aids, and throwing batteries at movie theater managers? Have we grown so complacent that we will now idly accept a re-gifted movie? We’re just going to shrug? That’s what we’re doing now? “Hey, why are you getting so worked up? Whaddya expect? It’s Hollywood.” You know what: Go fuck yourself. Just because you’re a fucking retard doesn’t give that doucher Todd Phillips the right to treat us all like one.

If you’ve seen the first movie, then you know what’s going to happen in the second film. The chief “difference” here is that it’s Stu (Ed Helms) who is getting married, and the wedding takes place in Thailand instead of Vegas. And you know what they say about Bangkok? “What Happens in Bangkok, shut the fuck up, douche.”

Doug (Justin Bartha) isn’t around anymore than he was in the first film — he took off before Alan (Zach Galifianakis) drugged Phil and Stu. So, instead of losing Doug, they lose Teddy, the little brother of Stu’s bride-to-be. Otherwise, it’s the exact same setup as the original film. In fact, the only way in this review to spoil the movie is to let you know how many of the events of the first Hangover are repeated in the second. SPOILER ALERT: All of them. All of them. ALL OF THEM. They wake up with no memory. Stu has a face tattoo instead of a chipped tooth. There’s a monkey instead of a tiger. The monkey also acts as the film’s baby substitute. Phil has the same phone conversation with Doug’s wife. Chow jumps out of a locked container. Stu sings a song. Stu encounters a stripper. They have no memory of destroying a place. There’s a Mike Tyson cameo. Alan says strange things. They find Teddy in an obvious place. In the end, Stu grows a backbone. There’s a wedding. Someone discovers a camera with all the pictures from their forgotten night. The end. END SPOILERS.

It’s as though Todd Phillips simply took the first script, changed the setting, swapped a few plot devices for comparable ones, and turned it in again. He got paid twice for the same job. There’s nothing new here. There’s not even an earnest attempt to give us the illusion of something new. How stupid does Todd Phillips think we are? Hey, asshole: You gave me the same present two years ago. What? You didn’t think I’d notice because you changed the gift wrapping? You didn’t even change it that much, cuntflap.

But is it funny? Well, yeah: If you laughed at the first film, this one is about as funny as it was, only you’ve seen it already. Jokes tend to lose their power once repeated. You could just rewatch The Hangover on HBO and get the exact same amount of enjoyment out of watching The Hangover Part II, minus the moral outrage at having been ripped off. Add your own lame trans-gendered prostitute jokes to the original, and you’ll never even know the difference.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Kung Fu Panda Review: Go for the Po, Stay for the Peacock | Review: Martin Scorsese's PUBLIC SPEAKING









Comments

Sounds like the suits sure fucked this one. Way to go, suits! Apparently making a good sequel, even with the material just sitting there waiting for you, is really, really, really, really hard. Like math hard and stuff.

Posted by: Laredo at May 26, 2011 1:06 PM

Cool, cant wait to see it because the first one was quite funny.

Posted by: Glyn at May 26, 2011 1:08 PM

but what if one has seen neither? should i watch the new one or the old one.

and i'll accept neither as an answer.

Posted by: hM at May 26, 2011 1:10 PM

"It’s the same band singing the same song. All they did was add someone to play the wood block."
More cowbell, n'est-ce pas?

Posted by: DenG at May 26, 2011 1:16 PM

But isn't that what the masses wanted? Another Hangover? They want the same funny characters and funny jokes/moments (even if they are rehashed). What did you expect? We're not talking Godfather Part II here, right?

Posted by: MisterMJ at May 26, 2011 1:29 PM

Even the trailer was flaccid and warmed-over, eliciting half-hearted, semi-drunken "heh. heh." -type "laughs" from the audience. They could have been burps, though.

Posted by: klingonfree at May 26, 2011 1:29 PM

We all knew this is basically what this looked like it would be. I figured there would at least be SOME attempt at masking the similarities. How hard would it have been to make a decent sequel? It's not called The Day After the Bachelor Party. It's called the Hangover. There's a thousand wacky scenarios you can base around that without making it the exact same thing.

Posted by: Paultera at May 26, 2011 1:33 PM

hM- watch the first one

Posted by: quirk at May 26, 2011 1:43 PM

Cuntflap, new favorite insult. I never watched the Hangover but I kinda assumed from the previews that part 2 was exactly the same.

Posted by: Sarah at May 26, 2011 1:49 PM

It's going to make a zillion dollars.

Posted by: Max at May 26, 2011 1:51 PM

The first one was a bucket of moldy ass and people who liked it have special parking spaces near entrances.

Posted by: Case at May 26, 2011 1:58 PM

Did they still have jokes about Galifinakis not being legally-allowed near children? Oh please, oh please, let there be child molestation humour. If not, could you show me something in a nice gang rape?

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 26, 2011 2:03 PM

Every time someone says "I can't believe this is happening again", take a shot.

Posted by: Paul Southworth at May 26, 2011 2:04 PM

So.......Good??

Also,
Cuntflap ?

Posted by: John G. at May 26, 2011 2:06 PM

I keep checking in for my dose of salvation in the form of PAJIBA LOVE and for the 9th time I'm only greeted with the picture of these 3 assholes.

It's killing me. It's killing me. It's killing me.

Posted by: brian at May 26, 2011 2:07 PM

And you know what they say about Bangkok? "What Happens in Bangkok, shut the fuck up, douche."

I am in love with this review.

Posted by: Mel C. at May 26, 2011 2:08 PM

Sooooo 2 1/2 stars out of 4?

Posted by: logan at May 26, 2011 2:09 PM

Add your own lame trans-gendered prostitute jokes to the original, and you’ll never even know the difference.

I guess I could settle for laughing at prostitutes. They're just horny. Why not make money for it?

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 26, 2011 2:12 PM

Between 1940 and 1952, Bob Hope and Bing Crosby made six...SIX...Road movies. Including Road to Singapore (1940), Road to Zanzibar (1941, Road to Morocco (1942), Road to Utopia (1946), Road to Rio (1947) and Road to Bali (1952).

While this is sad, we all knew it was coming from the trailers, and it is a tried and true Hollywood strategy. Don't we have more original things to get outraged about?

Posted by: TheBoy at May 26, 2011 2:27 PM

So, this is basically Die Hard II: Die Harder? So, I should wait for the third one, where they use the script from the unmade Bridesmaids sequel and just swap out the roles for the male actors?

This is a great "scathing" review, even though it doesn't completely write the movie off, which is fair. My only quibble is that it's somehow bad that Alan (Galifianakis) continues to say weird things -- that's the whole character, of course he's going to utter the inexplicable, no matter what movie he's in. The characters acting like they did in the original is what you want in a sequel, you just want the characters to be the same in a new story. The substitutes for images/gags/etc. from the first movie is the bad part, the Zach Galifianakis playing Alan the same way isn't (or, shouldn't be).

But, man, I understand your anger and frustration, because even though it isn't The Godfather series, a complete re-hash is just lazy and shouldn't be rewarded. I've a feeling it will have a great opening weekend and then completely fall off. The first one had word-of-mouth, this one probably (hopefully) won't. At least not to the extent of the first. I'll still see it, though. On Netflix.

@Paultera: There are, of course, loads of scenarios where people can get smashed and then wake up the next morning with no idea what happened the night before, yes. But that, to me, is already what this sequel did, just even lazier than they needed to be. The problem is that the whole comic set-up is exactly the same, so it makes sense that the comic beats would also be similar, or the same. They should have tried to find a new narrative angle, other than the mystery, regardless of how/why/where they got drunk.

Posted by: RobP at May 26, 2011 2:39 PM

When they announced Part II I hoped that the one thing they wouldn't do is copy The Hangover beat for beat.

Guess that was too hard.

And let's be honest here: Todd Phillips has made 2 "good" movies (Old School, The Hangover) amidst a sea of dross. This was foreseeable.

Posted by: Fredo at May 26, 2011 2:43 PM

I think being repeatedly enraged about something unoriginal is in keeping with the spirit of the complaint, no?

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 26, 2011 2:46 PM

If there is one more minute of Ken Jeong than in the first one it'll be worth my time. If you want everything to smell fresh and new then rub new baby scented Bounce sheets all over your junk, Dustin.

Bitches love that new baby smell.

Posted by: admin at May 26, 2011 2:49 PM

Couldn't they have found the pictures first and worked backwards this time? Anything to be different?

Posted by: Scarecrow Boat at May 26, 2011 2:50 PM

Dustin hates comedy the review Part II.

Posted by: Blank at May 26, 2011 2:55 PM

"The first one was a bucket of moldy ass and people who liked it have special parking spaces near entrances."

The only sensible comment thus far

Posted by: Matt at May 26, 2011 2:58 PM

There's no way I'm watching that.

But I bet it's gonna be a hit and they're going the American Pie route doing a bunch of direct-for-video sequels with an obscure cast member, so we'll get stuff like The Hangover: Tijuana, The Hangover: some other shitty place where americans go to drink, but only nearby places because there ain't no money to buy stock footage of anywhere too far.

Posted by: zito at May 26, 2011 3:23 PM

Just like a real hangover, when you say, "I'll never do that again"... eventually you do...

Posted by: MRod at May 26, 2011 3:32 PM

TheBoy, the Road movies were so far above this dreck.

Give me Dorothy Lamour any day.

Posted by: The Wanderer at May 26, 2011 3:33 PM

Cuntflap, new favorite insult.
Posted by: Sarah at May 26, 2011 1:49 PM


I concur.

Posted by: latvianluck at May 26, 2011 3:37 PM

Considering the backstory on how the original was written, it shouldn't be a big surprise that they didn't come up with anything original for the sequel.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at May 26, 2011 4:52 PM

What did you expect dillweed? Thanks for contributing 13 bucks to the cause, asshole.

Posted by: dagnabbit at May 26, 2011 4:58 PM

And The Road to Utopia was the best one, so everybody should probably just wait to see The Hangover IIII.

Posted by: Three-nineteen at May 26, 2011 5:01 PM

When I first heard they were making a sequel, I thought 'well, it'll probably be really similar, but at least Justin Bartha will get to actually be in the movie this time because there's no way their gonna lose him again'. Then I saw the trailer and realized it's LITERALLY the same movie in a different city. Like, I barely know Justin Bartha's work and I swear I don't have a fanpage for him or anything, but I'm kind of offended on his behalf - why couldn't he be part of the shenanigans this time around? He's not the one everyone is looking for, so why couldn't he hang with the rest of the wolfpack this time? Is he a dick or something? What's the deal? Am I the only one who gives a shit? Don't answer that.

Zach G. was so great in 'It's Kind of a Funny Story' - I really hope he gets to do more serious work in the future. I think he's hilarious, but he's so much more than Alan. SO much more.

On a happier note, thank you for 'cuntflap'. I've never heard that one before, but will remedy that shortly (about to do the evening commute, so I'm sure I'll have occasion to use it within the next ten minutes or so).

Posted by: Nicole at May 26, 2011 5:04 PM

I'm with you, Nicole. I've liked Justin Bartha well enough since that prematurely canceled Teachers show he did, and he was one of the non-cringe-inducing elements of the National Treasure movies. So, I, too, was hoping he'd have more to do -- it's not like they couldn't use a real straight man. Bradley Cooper's poop eating grin doesn't really do it.

Oh, and if you like dramatic Galifianakis, check out The Visioneers. I believe it's on Netflix Instant, if you have that. Not a ground breaking film or anything, but it's pretty unique, interesting, and he's stellar. (In a similar vein, Patton Oswalt in Big Fan is also excellent.)

Posted by: RobP at May 26, 2011 5:28 PM

I'm glad someone agrees RobP! I have not seen The Visioneers, but I will check it out. I have Canadian Netflix, and we don't always have the same movies/shows, but I'll check.

Just checked - nope. But I will get my hands on it because it looks really great and I also love Judy Greer. I LOVED Big Fan - Oswalt was epically great in that movie. Oscar-worthy.

Posted by: Nicole at May 26, 2011 5:36 PM

So this is the equivalent of Nickelback song? If you like any song they made then you like them all? Isn't all comedy sequel cash grabs like this? Austin Powers comes to mind

Posted by: EB III at May 26, 2011 5:59 PM

I swear Rowles, once upon a time you had the eye of the tiger. But now you review movies like some man hatin’ broad. First you fall in love with “Bridesmaids” like you’re some scorned overweight chick that caught her boyfriend doing her best friend. And now you come here today bad-mouthin’ H2 all because of the crude jokes. I want the old Rowles back, not the kinder gentler Rowles. Either go back to your old ways or go review movies for Harper’s Bazaar.

Posted by: Pookie at May 26, 2011 6:05 PM

Yay Pookie! Your pointlessly argumentative post gives me the opportunity to say:

Go see Bridesmaids instead of this boring mess! It is so funny that you will shit in the streets.

Really? you thought this group of women was going to finish that cookie?

Posted by: becks at May 26, 2011 6:22 PM

The original gave me a few chuckles, but the first time I watched the trailers for this I thought "SATC2 for Fratboys". I'll pass

Posted by: Dave Shepherd at May 26, 2011 7:33 PM

“Hey, why are you getting so worked up? Whaddya expect? It’s Hollywood.” Sounds completely reasonable to me.

Posted by: James S at May 26, 2011 8:15 PM

What I find more interesting is that what passes for comedy these days could at best be politely called brainless, dazed, deficient, dense, dim, doltish, dopey, dull, dumb, dummy*, foolish, futile, gullible, half-baked, half-witted, idiotic, ill-advised, imbecilic, inane, indiscreet, insensate, irrelevant, laughable, loser*, ludicrous, meaningless, mindless, moronic, naive, nonsensical, obtuse, out to lunch, pointless, puerile, rash, senseless, shortsighted, simple, simpleminded, slow, sluggish, stolid, stupefied, thick, thick-headed, trivial, unintelligent, unthinking, witless asinine, batty, birdbrained, crazy, daffy, daft, dull, dumb, fatuous, foolhardy, foolish, harebrained, imbecile, imbecilic, inane, insane, lunatic, moronic, senseless, silly, squirrelly, thick-witted, and unintelligent. I do apologize for the double posting of certain words, it was easier to cut and past from an online thesaurus than to type all of the words. To put it less politely. What passes for comedy these days isn't fucking funny.

Posted by: clancys_daddy at May 26, 2011 9:20 PM

meh....not a surprise.

Pass.

Tree of Life please.

Posted by: james at May 26, 2011 9:28 PM

Go see Bridesmaids, it's way funnier!

Posted by: meatman1p at May 27, 2011 12:05 AM

What you've never watched the same movie twice in the theatre before?

Posted by: James at May 27, 2011 1:56 AM

I haven't gotten around to watching the first one yet, so aparently I can just watch this one and be done with the whole thing? Fine by me!

Posted by: Beej at May 27, 2011 2:21 AM

"Did they still have jokes about Galifinakis not being legally-allowed near children? Oh please, oh please, let there be child molestation humour. If not, could you show me something in a nice gang rape?"

That's funny.

Which makes it molestation/rape humour.

Do you feel bad now?

Posted by: Ender at May 27, 2011 5:11 AM

Another vote for 'cuntflap'.

Also, Dustin, you must compile all of your reviews into book form. Paper is making a comeback.

Posted by: OldSchool60 at May 27, 2011 11:22 AM

Maybe they're being meta.

Posted by: SaBrina at May 27, 2011 11:23 AM

All this way and not one person has made mention of Malibu Stacy's New Hat?

Posted by: Shane at May 27, 2011 6:40 PM

F*ck all of you! this movie was freaking hysterical. Well worth the 13 bucks. I laughed the whole time. Oh wait...so did the rest of the theater. So what? Same formula, blah, blah, blah. I don't go to movies to analyze. I go to movies to be entertained, and this was definitely entertaining. Suck it haters. Go write, produce and direct a movie, then come back and talk. A-hole!

Posted by: curly at May 28, 2011 9:52 AM

curly, you say you "don't go to movies to analyze," which makes me slightly confussd (yes, confussd) as to why you would be on a "scathing" review site for "bitchy people" (or whatever the phrase is anymore).

Try Googling review sites that have "happy," "lollipopsunshine" or simply, "reviews for people with their heads firmly lodged in Hollywood's anus" in the title and leave the snark to the ones who have the balls for it.


Posted by: beet salad at May 28, 2011 1:50 PM

Trolls must not be fed, but sometimes they need a pop in the mouth

You liked it? Great. Start your own review site if you can't handle the opinion of others. Oh, and if by haters you mean people who start their comments with "F*ck all of you!" then yes, f*ck off hater.

Posted by: Protoguy at May 28, 2011 1:55 PM

Justin Bartha ruins eveything for me. If acting were the Special Olympics, Justin Bartha would win the Spirit Award.

Posted by: Kris at May 28, 2011 3:25 PM

A perhaps obvious question: did Todd Phillips stretch himself too thin?

Summer 2009 - The Hangover
Fall 2010 - Due Date
Summer 2011 - The Hangover Part II

Even if you got multiple writing teams and production unit heads to keep QA/QC levels high, how can someone churn out this much "product" without it suffering from poor quality issues?

Posted by: Fredo at May 28, 2011 7:22 PM

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred.

-- Superchicken

Posted by: , at May 28, 2011 8:16 PM

I saw this and it was terrible. Basically a half-assed and reheated version of the first movie. Most of the people in the theater seemed to be laughing because they wanted to find the movie funny, not because it actually was funny.

Posted by: Dingles at May 29, 2011 8:34 PM

OKAY ITS A FUCKING COMEDY SEQUEL. ITS SUPPOSED TO BE THE HANGOVER PART II. THE SAME SHIT HAPPENS BECAUSE ITS PART II OF THE HANGOVER. LIKE STOP ANALYZING THE FUCKING MOVIE AND JUST LAUGH YOUR ASS OFF. IT WAS FUCKING FUNNY

Posted by: Eric Robinson at May 30, 2011 3:39 PM

I wish I could be like curly. Seriously, I could listen to the radio and shit.

Posted by: pissant at May 30, 2011 3:44 PM

I thought it was terrible. Predictable. Same format, situation, just a different setting. In all honesty, Fast and the Furious 5 was far better. I love Zach Galifianakis but this just sucked.

Posted by: hov at May 30, 2011 4:08 PM

No Eric it was not funny. Unless of course you have the IQ of a lobotomized gerbil. Then its fucking hysterical.

Posted by: clancys_daddy at May 30, 2011 4:38 PM

I'm still waiting for this site full of (supposedly) creative, original, cutting-edge folk to come up with (and appreciate) novel insults that do not relate to my genitalia.

Posted by: Anon at May 30, 2011 8:01 PM

I'm still waiting for this site full of (supposedly) creative, original, cutting-edge folk to come up with (and appreciate) novel insults that do not relate to my genitalia.

Posted by: Anon at May 30, 2011 8:01 PM

Your face. Bam! That just happened.

Posted by: Vee at May 31, 2011 12:11 AM

Pretty much everyone and their grandma has made a point to say that the Hangover number two (hee-haw, scat humor-funnies!) follows the same formula as the previous movie (down to Emu Cooper himself). The thing is that I genuinely remember the first film having humor in it.

I just came from seeing this disappointing array of poop-ribbons (I know, I know, against better judgment), and I have to say I was shocked at how dark and unfunny it was. For one thing, I don't recall Galifianakis' character being quite so insufferably assholeoeo-ish in the first one. Additionally, there was considerably more light humor, if you will, that eased the tension when things got a scooch too heavy. I think it's fair to say that we can only take so much of fing sing bullshit before we flip the fuck out and sya MRWEAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! NO. MORE.

There was nothing mildly entertaining about this film. At. Fucking. All.

SPOILERALERT!!!!

You will never fucking convince me that someone who has lost A MOTHERFUCKING FINGER and then been trapped in a skank-ass elevator for two days IN MOTHERFUCKING THAILAND is going to be sunshine and lollipops when he's finally recovered (and has somehow managed to not die of sepsis).

You just can't.

Goddamn this motherfuckingassholecoozefaced movie to hell, where it can rot like the crap it is

Posted by: beet salad at May 31, 2011 4:51 AM

I listened to my kid tell me how funny The Hangover was for weeks. After seeing the trailer several times and hearing about the plot...even the first one was old and tired by the time I saw it. I was glad I only watched it on Netflix.

I won't even bother with this one on Netflix.

Posted by: Wednesday at May 31, 2011 8:16 AM

Anon at May 30, 2011 8:01 PM to relate an insult to your genitalia is an insult to insults as no one wants to relate to your genitalia.

Posted by: clancys_daddy at May 31, 2011 9:29 PM

Absolutely agree with the review here - totally spot on! A reheated version of the original it totally was. Dingles Said people were laughing because they wanted it to be funny - I can second that as that's exactly what I was doing.

The two main flaws in the film for me were the huge exaggeration of Zach's character and the fact that a celloist soon to be surgeon lost a finger and nobody seemed to give a shit!!! I mean WTF!

Posted by: DannyWilson at June 7, 2011 7:32 AM

Aw, come on, people - I thought this was great because I took it as being a parody of the concept of a sequel. Something like this hasn't been done since the '70s and the '80s. I remember when I was watching Back To The Future Part II, and shivers were going up my spine as they took source material and original footage from Part I and reimagined it to fit into the Part II story, although I realize that's not the same thing as what's going on with The Hangover movies. Ken Jeong's role is different here, and he's hilarious. Hey, it looks like his character approaches his job the same way Todd Phillips approached the making of this movie! (And that's a good thing, dude.)

Posted by: Beau Hajavitch at June 9, 2011 10:59 PM

Cuntflap...such an obvious combo; should have seen it. Pissflap, cuntbox, but never cuntflap. Dammit.

Cuntflap. Aye.

Posted by: Tre at June 12, 2011 1:17 PM

It allows the operator to measure the torque applied to the fastener so it can be matched to the specifications for a particular application.

Posted by: torque wrench at June 16, 2011 3:16 AM

Royal Ascot has brought out its usual gaudy crew of mad hatters this year together with thrills but thankfully no spills (that I know of) unless you count failing favourites, of course! It takes our mind off more sober concerns, that's the real strength of the occasion. Looking at the economic storm clouds gathering on the horizon, we could probably benefit from more...

Posted by: Toastmasters at June 16, 2011 9:03 PM

The people of this Country need to wake up. We are being led by a party of Marxist Socialists: Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc. with Obama being the Dictator. Never in the histoy of this United States have we had a leader where we have not had full background disclosure. His arrogance, his attitude on 60-minutes, etc., are warnings of what is yet to come. He is laughing in the face of our Constitution with the goal of completely replacing it with his own Mein Kemp! We are living in a very scary time. If the American People do not stand up and wage war against this administration, we are doomed. Obamas distributon of wealth will be in placeAmerica will never again be as it has been for over 200 yearsFREEwith freedom of expression rightsfreedom of worship rights, etc Obama is Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and Castro all in one body and his appeal is to the uneducated, lower class and elderly who believed his campaign promises of paying their bills, their mortages, distribution of wealth, FREE healthcare, etc. His Cabnet is filled with criminalshis association with other less desirable charactersReverend Wright, ACORN, etc gives a great deal of insight to his characterhe has NONE! Granted, the office of the Presidency is a very difficult job, and for the first time in my voting life, I do not respect or support the current president.

Posted by: Chantel Laabs at June 30, 2011 7:01 AM