PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues B.O. caught lying again!


***SPRAYER
07-23-2008, 05:16 PM
"Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you don’t have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don’t obtain a nuclear weapon."

But Obama is not a member of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. Obama just made that up so he could count the committee’s action as one of “my deeds.”

***SPRAYER
07-23-2008, 05:18 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rjzb61wfyN0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rjzb61wfyN0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Cannibal
07-23-2008, 05:18 PM
Die in pain and agony. Just die.

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 05:20 PM
"Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you donít have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they donít obtain a nuclear weapon."

But Obama is not a member of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. Obama just made that up so he could count the committeeís action as one of ďmy deeds.Ē


It's just words.

***SPRAYER
07-23-2008, 05:20 PM
Die in pain and agony. Just die.


You poor thing.

:deevee:

***SPRAYER
07-23-2008, 05:21 PM
It's just words.


"My Committee"!! What a friggin' lying sack o' shit!

Direckshun
07-23-2008, 05:22 PM
To be fair, SHTSPRAYER actually has a point. Obama is not on the banking committee, and it should be something he explains or apologizes for in the next day or so for getting wrong.

I don't know how exactly that is worse than McCain misunderstanding the effects of the Surge, the one thing he's running on, but there it is.

Cannibal
07-23-2008, 05:27 PM
I couldn't give a **** less if he "has a point", he needs to die a painful death. I am sick to death of his ilk. The incessant propaganda is getting real tiring. These Right Wing assholes have pretty much driven this Country into the ****in ground.

***SPRAYER
07-23-2008, 05:30 PM
I couldn't give a **** less if he "has a point", he needs to die a painful death. I am sick to death of his ilk. The incessant propaganda is getting real tiring. These Right Wing assholes have pretty much driven this Country into the ****in ground.

Somebody needs a nap.

Direckshun
07-23-2008, 05:31 PM
I couldn't give a **** less if he "has a point", he needs to die a painful death. I am sick to death of his ilk. The incessant propaganda is getting real tiring. These Right Wing assholes have pretty much driven this Country into the ****in ground.
You're not going to get an argument from me.

For what it's worth: Obama's website just issued a clarification, not a correction. The bill that passed out of the committee contained a couple provisions that mirrored legislation he sponsored a year ago or so.

That explains his influence on the bill, but that doesn't explain why he referred to the Banking Committee as "his."

***SPRAYER
07-23-2008, 05:32 PM
To be fair, SHTSPRAYER actually has a point. Obama is not on the banking committee, and it should be something he explains or apologizes for in the next day or so for getting wrong.

I don't know how exactly that is worse than McCain misunderstanding the effects of the Surge, the one thing he's running on, but there it is.

Oh, and while we are on the subject of lying, someone posted on this message board that Obama signed the Veteranís Benefits Enhancement Act.

The Senate passed a bill called the Veteranís Benefits Enhancement Act of 2007. According to the Library of Congress the bill enhances housing and insurance benefits for ďtransitioning service membersĒ.

Barack Obama and John McCain were both absent from the vote.

I just wanted to straighten that out, because there is alot more shit being sprayed on this MB than by me!

SBK
07-23-2008, 05:34 PM
I couldn't give a **** less if he "has a point", he needs to die a painful death. I am sick to death of his ilk. The incessant propaganda is getting real tiring. These Right Wing assholes have pretty much driven this Country into the ****in ground.

From your tolerant and loving friends on the left.

***SPRAYER
07-23-2008, 05:35 PM
For what it's worth: Obama's website just issued a clarification, not a correction.


he does that every 5 friggin' minutes! The guy just lies, his O-bot followers spread his lies, and if anybody catches him on it, oh well, he just clarifies it.

Give me a break already, the guy is an empty suit who spends more time campaigning for another job than he does doing his job.

WTF has this asshole ever done in the US Senate? What!

You O-bots are a wart on the ass of society AND I'M GOING TO RIP THAT WART OFF THAT ASS AND CAST IT INTO HELLFIRE!!!

***SPRAYER
07-23-2008, 05:36 PM
From your tolerant and loving friends on the left.


Oh absolutely.

ROFL

Direckshun
07-23-2008, 05:38 PM
he does that every 5 friggin' minutes! The guy just lies, his O-bot followers spread his lies, and if anybody catches him on it, oh well, he just clarifies it.

Give me a break already, the guy is an empty suit who spends more time campaigning for another job than he does doing his job.

WTF has this asshole ever done in the US Senate? What!

You O-bots are a wart on the ass of society AND I'M GOING TO RIP THAT WART OFF THAT ASS AND CAST IT INTO HELLFIRE!!!
I haven't made any excuses for Obama. I'm calling a spade a spade.

If Obama's going to be this wrong, he's got to issue either a correction or an apology.

SBK
07-23-2008, 05:41 PM
I haven't made any excuses for Obama. I'm calling a spade a spade.

If Obama's going to be this wrong, he's got to issue either a correction or an apology.

Truthfully he doesn't need to. Because his congregation won't require it, and the media won't mention it. It's a great gig. :D

Adept Havelock
07-23-2008, 05:42 PM
Heh. SHTSPRAYER got one right. Gives him a slight leg up on Jake in the credibility Special Olympics, I suppose. :p

I haven't made any excuses for Obama. I'm calling a spade a spade.

Racist! :cuss: :cuss: :cuss:

If Obama's going to be this wrong, he's got to issue either a correction or an apology.

Agreed.

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 05:44 PM
Obama is a racist, "she's just a typical white woman"

jAZ
07-23-2008, 05:52 PM
Who wants to bet that this topic is *the* topic of raging media debate, and McCain's lie and CBSs coverup gets lost in the shuffle?

CrazyPhuD
07-23-2008, 05:59 PM
Is this really news? I mean it's like the old saying....how do you know a politician is lying? His lips are moving.:shrug:

Chief Henry
07-23-2008, 06:09 PM
"My Committee"!! What a friggin' lying sack o' shit!

Lets see how this gaff plays out in the media. Any bets ?

Chief Henry
07-23-2008, 06:10 PM
I couldn't give a **** less if he "has a point", he needs to die a painful death. I am sick to death of his ilk. The incessant propaganda is getting real tiring. These LEFT Wing assholes have pretty much driven this Country into the ****in ground.

fixed it for ya

alanm
07-23-2008, 06:11 PM
he does that every 5 friggin' minutes! The guy just lies, his O-bot followers spread his lies, and if anybody catches him on it, oh well, he just clarifies it.

Give me a break already, the guy is an empty suit who spends more time campaigning for another job than he does doing his job.

WTF has this asshole ever done in the US Senate? What!

You O-bots are a wart on the ass of society AND I'M GOING TO RIP THAT WART OFF THAT ASS AND CAST IT INTO HELLFIRE!!!
Well, he did show up for a little over a third of a year. :thumb:

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 06:12 PM
fixed it for ya

Thanks for fixing it, now it makes sense.

Chief Henry
07-23-2008, 06:12 PM
I haven't made any excuses for Obama. I'm calling a spade a spade.

If Obama's going to be this wrong, he's got to issue either a correction or an apology.






You can't use that word "spade" when talking about Barry O.

alanm
07-23-2008, 06:14 PM
fixed it for ya
Careful Comrade, The Commissar of the thought police will require you to show up at the rail yard with a shovel for your indiscretion.

jAZ
07-23-2008, 06:16 PM
Lets see how this gaff plays out in the media. Any bets ?

It's made into the equal and offsetting gaffe to the CBS coverup of McCain's lie story.

Which is crazy, but almost certain.

Bill Parcells
07-23-2008, 06:35 PM
I couldn't give a **** less if he "has a point", he needs to die a painful death. I am sick to death of his ilk. The incessant propaganda is getting real tiring. These Right Wing assholes have pretty much driven this Country into the ****in ground.

You need a shot of nyquil. everything will be alright, lil buddy. LMAO

Bill Parcells
07-23-2008, 06:36 PM
From your tolerant and loving friends on the left.

LMFAO! ROFL

Cannibal
07-23-2008, 07:42 PM
Soon, the Democrats will have control of the House and Senate and Barack is going to crush McCain (who I actually like). The # 1 reason for this: The Republicans F()cked themselves and the Country because they got greedy with their agenda.

If they had only been just slightly more moderate (like not starting unecessary wars, illegally tapping peoples phones, toture, illegally outing CIA agents, etc.) they would have controlled the White House and Congress for the next 20-30 years. When Barack wins, it will be proof enough that the majority the people know what I just typed is true.

Bush and the Republicans had a golden opportunity for a Project Apollo of their own regarding getting off of foreign sources of oil. This would have increased our national security a hundred times more than the Iraqi folly. If we had spent the money we have spent on Iraq (what is it up to now 600 billion?) on alternatative energy research and implementation and started in 2001 who knows how far we'd be by now.

Instead they decided they wanted to take over the the Iraqi oil reserves.
1.) An oil man in office.
2.) Invade a foreign country with the 2nd largest reserves in the world.
3.) Oil roughly $25 per barrel and gas roughly around $1 dollar per gallon one month before we go in.
4.) Oil now $125+ per barrel and gas going from around a buck to probably $5 per gallon before the end of the year.
5.) Record profits for oil companies for the last 3 years in a row.

If Bush had chosen the correct course, he would have gone down in history as one of the great Presidents. But instead, he chose the absolute wrong course and did an terrible job at executing it and will now go down as one of the worst Presidents ever.

I'll go back to lurking now...

Good Day

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 07:48 PM
Soon, the Democrats will have control of the House and Senate and Barack is going to crush McCain (who I actually like). The # 1 reason for this: The Republicans F()cked themselves and the Country because they got greedy with their agenda.

If they had only been just slightly more moderate (like not starting unecessary wars, illegally tapping peoples phones, toture, illegally outing CIA agents, etc.) they would have controlled the White House and Congress for the next 20-30 years. When Barack wins, it will be proof enough that the majority the people know what I just typed is true.

Bush and the Republicans had a golden opportunity for a Project Apollo of their own regarding getting off of foreign sources of oil. This would have increased our national security a hundred times more than the Iraqi folly. If we had spent the money we have spent on Iraq (what is it up to now 600 billion?) on alternatative energy research and implementation and started in 2001 who knows how far we'd be by now.

Instead they decided they wanted to take over the the Iraqi oil reserves.
1.) An oil man in office.
2.) Invade a foreign country with the 2nd largest reserves in the world.
3.) Oil roughly $25 per barrel and gas roughly around $1 dollar per gallon one month before we go in.
4.) Oil now $125+ per barrel and gas going from around a buck to probably $5 per gallon before the end of the year.
5.) Record profits for oil companies for the last 3 years in a row.

If Bush had chosen the correct course, he would have gone down in history as one of the great Presidents. But instead, he chose the absolute wrong course and did an terrible job at executing it and will now go down as one of the worst Presidents ever.

I'll go back to lurking now...

Good Day


I think Obama called it white greed to be exact.

FAX
07-23-2008, 07:54 PM
... I'M GOING TO RIP THAT WART OFF THAT ASS AND CAST IT INTO HELLFIRE!!!

Ouchie.

FAX NO WART

HolmeZz
07-23-2008, 07:55 PM
I think Obama called it white greed to be exact.

You've been in this forum for like 2 hours and already have established yourself as a world-class tool.

If you stopped believing everything you read in e-mails, you'd probably know that 'white greed' quote was Reverend Wright's, not Obama's.

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 08:03 PM
You've been in this forum for like 2 hours and already have established yourself as a world-class tool.

If you stopped believing everything you read in e-mails, you'd probably know that 'white greed' quote was Reverend Wright's, not Obama's.

It is also Obama's quote, Hannity plays it everyday on the radio, I doubt you will hear it on NPR.

I dont think this is a voice over, sounds like Obama to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdLX3aRNaNk

Calcountry
07-23-2008, 08:07 PM
Soon, the Democrats will have control of the House and Senate and Barack is going to crush McCain (who I actually like). The # 1 reason for this: The Republicans F()cked themselves and the Country because they got greedy with their agenda.

If they had only been just slightly more moderate (like not starting unecessary wars, illegally tapping peoples phones, toture, illegally outing CIA agents, etc.) they would have controlled the White House and Congress for the next 20-30 years. When Barack wins, it will be proof enough that the majority the people know what I just typed is true.

Bush and the Republicans had a golden opportunity for a Project Apollo of their own regarding getting off of foreign sources of oil. This would have increased our national security a hundred times more than the Iraqi folly. If we had spent the money we have spent on Iraq (what is it up to now 600 billion?) on alternatative energy research and implementation and started in 2001 who knows how far we'd be by now.

Instead they decided they wanted to take over the the Iraqi oil reserves.
1.) An oil man in office.
2.) Invade a foreign country with the 2nd largest reserves in the world.
3.) Oil roughly $25 per barrel and gas roughly around $1 dollar per gallon one month before we go in.
4.) Oil now $125+ per barrel and gas going from around a buck to probably $5 per gallon before the end of the year.
5.) Record profits for oil companies for the last 3 years in a row.

If Bush had chosen the correct course, he would have gone down in history as one of the great Presidents. But instead, he chose the absolute wrong course and did an terrible job at executing it and will now go down as one of the worst Presidents ever.

I'll go back to lurking now...

Good Day
With respect to #3, we all know that whatever we do today, won't change the price of oil by a "penny" for over 10 years.

HolmeZz
07-23-2008, 08:08 PM
It is also Obama's quote, Hannity plays it everyday on the radio, I doubt you will hear it on NPR.

It is a recording from the audio version of Obama's book, where Obama is quoting something that Wright said.

I'm not surprised Hannity plays it everyday nor am I surprised you would buy into something like that.

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 08:10 PM
With respect to #3, we all know that whatever we do today, won't change the price of oil by a "penny" for over 10 years.

Just the fact of Bush asking for the lift of the offshore drilling ban did something in 3 days.

Direckshun
07-23-2008, 08:10 PM
It is also Obama's quote, Hannity plays it everyday on the radio, I doubt you will hear it on NPR.

I dont think this is a voice over, sounds like Obama to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdLX3aRNaNk
WTF

That is from Dreams from my Father, and he was detailing how many African Americans in the "victim culture" had felt about white people.

You've taken a frank and true statement completely out of context.

Exactly as Hannity wants you to.

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 08:11 PM
It is a recording from the audio version of Obama's book, where Obama is quoting something Wright said.

I'm not surprised Hannity plays it everyday nor am I surprised you would buy into something like that.

I thought he never heard him say anything like this in 20 years, now your telling me that he did and that he is quoting him.

Direckshun
07-23-2008, 08:13 PM
I thought he never heard him say anything like this in 20 years, now your telling me that he did and that he is quoting him.
Again (and I do mean again), he was paraphrasing Wright's and the victim culture's mistrust of white America.

Mistrust is not the same thing as hatred. Obama has claimed ignorance only of Wright's statements of hatred.

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 08:16 PM
Again (and I do mean again), he was paraphrasing Wright's and the victim culture's mistrust of white America.

Mistrust is not the same thing as hatred. Obama has claimed ignorance only of Wright's statements of hatred.

And he is doing so because he also believes in what Mr. Wright says.

Direckshun
07-23-2008, 08:17 PM
And he is doing so because he also believes in what Mr. Wright says.
You are adorable.

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 08:17 PM
You are adorable.

Thanks.

HolmeZz
07-23-2008, 08:20 PM
I thought he never heard him say anything like this in 20 years

Like what? You haven't even heard the sermon. You've heard a clip cut out from Obama's own audiobook, intentionally taken out of context in order to portray Barack as 'hating on whitey'. The actual sermon dealt with the perception of white america by the black community. That's probably too much nuance for you to keep up with though, right? It's easier to just listen to random soundbites out of context.

HolmeZz
07-23-2008, 08:22 PM
And he is doing so because he also believes in what Mr. Wright says.

Heh. This coming from a guy who believes everything Mr. Hannity says.

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 08:24 PM
Like what? You haven't even heard the sermon. You've heard a clip cut out from Obama's own audiobook, intentionally taken out of context in order to portray Barack as 'hating on whitey'. The actual sermon dealt with the perception of white america by the black community. That's probably too much nuance for you to keep up with though, right? It's easier to just listen to random soundbites out of context.

So why is Obama quoting Mr. Wright's message? can you please explain that to me.

HolmeZz
07-23-2008, 08:26 PM
So why is Obama quoting Mr. Wright's message? can you please explain that to me.

Because in that book he discussed issues, resentments, and misconceptions between the races.

Direckshun
07-23-2008, 08:27 PM
So why is Obama quoting Mr. Wright's message? can you please explain that to me.
Because it's an entire book detailing his upbringing, and a large part of his life involves race relations.

A large part of the race relations deals with attending Rev. Wright's church and being exposed to the victimhood that has permeated (and in some ways crippled) the black community.

All of which Obama explained expertly in his own damn book.

Calcountry
07-23-2008, 08:27 PM
Just the fact of Bush asking for the lift of the offshore drilling ban did something in 3 days.Do you think those GREEDY oil companies could look at a "projected growth in worldwide demand chart" back in 1995, when they wanted to drill in Anwar, knowing then, that if the trends at the time continued, there would be supply issues arround 2006, ceteris paribus?

Sure they did, that is why they wanted to bring Anwar online back in 1995, so they would have 1mbpd production capacity available NOW people, BUT NOOOOOOOOO, we had to preserve that pristine wild life preserve. Now, those of you who have been fortunate to visit that place in the last 13 years, I hope you enjoy it when you are filling up your SUV's.

Now it is 2008 and Chucky "It's a wonderful Life" Schumer is saying the same shit, but a different decade: "won't affect the price by a penny for 10 years". We should believe this asshole, when he causes runs on banking institutions. What an ass. If you agree to impeach him simultaneous to Bush, I might compromise.

Dave Lane
07-23-2008, 08:30 PM
Do you think those GREEDY oil companies could look at a "projected growth in worldwide demand chart" back in 1995, when they wanted to drill in Anwar, knowing then, that if the trends at the time continued, there would be supply issues arround 2006, ceteris paribus?

Sure they did, that is why they wanted to bring Anwar online back in 1995, so they would have 1mbpd production capacity available NOW people, BUT NOOOOOOOOO, we had to preserve that pristine wild life preserve. Now, those of you who have been fortunate to visit that place in the last 13 years, I hope you enjoy it when you are filling up your SUV's.

Now it is 2008 and Chucky "It's a wonderful Life" Schumer is saying the same shit, but a different decade: "won't affect the price by a penny for 10 years". We should believe this asshole, when he causes runs on banking institutions. What an ass. If you agree to impeach him simultaneous to Bush, I might compromise.

Bush and McCain agreed with him so :shrug:

Dave

NCarlsCorner2
07-23-2008, 08:30 PM
Because in that book he discussed issues, resentments, and misconceptions between the races.

So he used second hand information in his book, because according to him he wasnt even there to hear Mr. Wright say any of this in the 20 years that he attended the church.

Calcountry
07-23-2008, 08:32 PM
Bush and McCain agreed with him so :shrug:

Dave
That doesn't change the fact that Schumer is a smug asshole that needs needs a political punch in the nose.

HolmeZz
07-23-2008, 08:33 PM
So he used second hand information in his book, because according to him he wasnt even there to hear Mr. Wright say any of this in the 20 years that he attended the church.

Any of what? That wasn't an inflammatory sermon. It's already been explained what the sermon was about.

Hydrae
07-23-2008, 08:39 PM
Careful Comrade, The Commissar of the thought police will require you to show up at the rail yard with a shovel for your indiscretion.

I am glad you called that implement a "shovel" and not a "spade" or there would have been trouble!

Direckshun
07-23-2008, 08:39 PM
Any of what? That wasn't an inflammatory sermon. It's already been explained what the sermon was about.
IN THE BOOK.

Fish
07-23-2008, 11:32 PM
he does that every 5 friggin' minutes! The guy just lies, his O-bot followers spread his lies, and if anybody catches him on it, oh well, he just clarifies it.

Give me a break already, the guy is an empty suit who spends more time campaigning for another job than he does doing his job.

WTF has this asshole ever done in the US Senate? What!

You O-bots are a wart on the ass of society AND I'M GOING TO RIP THAT WART OFF THAT ASS AND CAST IT INTO HELLFIRE!!!

You're extra funny when you let the hate get to you to the point of "casting into hellfire".

Calling a pres cand an asshole? He really riles you up doesn't he?

markk
07-23-2008, 11:37 PM
Do you think those GREEDY oil companies could look at a "projected growth in worldwide demand chart" back in 1995, when they wanted to drill in Anwar, knowing then, that if the trends at the time continued, there would be supply issues arround 2006, ceteris paribus?

Sure they did, that is why they wanted to bring Anwar online back in 1995, so they would have 1mbpd production capacity available NOW people, BUT NOOOOOOOOO, we had to preserve that pristine wild life preserve. Now, those of you who have been fortunate to visit that place in the last 13 years, I hope you enjoy it when you are filling up your SUV's.

Now it is 2008 and Chucky "It's a wonderful Life" Schumer is saying the same shit, but a different decade: "won't affect the price by a penny for 10 years". We should believe this asshole, when he causes runs on banking institutions. What an ass. If you agree to impeach him simultaneous to Bush, I might compromise.

"Don't bother saving for retirement folks, you won't even get to touch that money until you're in your 60s."

Guru
07-23-2008, 11:47 PM
Is this really news? I mean it's like the old saying....how do you know a politician is lying? His lips are moving.:shrug:

WOW!!! A dose of sanity on the boards.:thumb:

alanm
07-24-2008, 12:01 AM
Soon, the Democrats will have control of the House and Senate and Barack is going to crush McCain (who I actually like). The # 1 reason for this: The Republicans F()cked themselves and the Country because they got greedy with their agenda.

If they had only been just slightly more moderate (like not starting unecessary wars, illegally tapping peoples phones, toture, illegally outing CIA agents, etc.) they would have controlled the White House and Congress for the next 20-30 years. When Barack wins, it will be proof enough that the majority the people know what I just typed is true.

Bush and the Republicans had a golden opportunity for a Project Apollo of their own regarding getting off of foreign sources of oil. This would have increased our national security a hundred times more than the Iraqi folly. If we had spent the money we have spent on Iraq (what is it up to now 600 billion?) on alternatative energy research and implementation and started in 2001 who knows how far we'd be by now.

Instead they decided they wanted to take over the the Iraqi oil reserves.
1.) An oil man in office.
2.) Invade a foreign country with the 2nd largest reserves in the world.
3.) Oil roughly $25 per barrel and gas roughly around $1 dollar per gallon one month before we go in.
4.) Oil now $125+ per barrel and gas going from around a buck to probably $5 per gallon before the end of the year.
5.) Record profits for oil companies for the last 3 years in a row.

If Bush had chosen the correct course, he would have gone down in history as one of the great Presidents. But instead, he chose the absolute wrong course and did an terrible job at executing it and will now go down as one of the worst Presidents ever.

I'll go back to lurking now...

Good Day
And I'll wager that the progressive liberals will f*ck it all up in 2 short yrs. and be tossed out like 94 all over again.

markk
07-24-2008, 12:05 AM
And I'll wager that the progressive liberals will f*ck it all up in 2 short yrs. and be tossed out like 94 all over again.

well if the next 2 are like the last 2 since they took over, their approval ratings may fall into "friends and family only" territory.

alanm
07-24-2008, 12:09 AM
well if the next 2 are like the last 2 since they took over, their approval ratings may fall into "friends and family only" territory.
I did give them a 2 yr grace period. Do they actually chart the numbers if they fall into the negative? ROFL

Guru
07-24-2008, 12:19 AM
well if the next 2 are like the last 2 since they took over, their approval ratings may fall into "friends and family only" territory.Nah, just family.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 01:19 PM
I got this from coldfury.com:

The little weasel not only wasn’t on the committee that passed the bill he claims to have helped shepherd through, he not only didn’t vote at all on the thing — he actually opposed it at the time.

During the run-up to the primaries, Senator Obama did not appear in the Senate to vote on the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment calling on the government to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist entity and thus suffer the imposition of sanctions. On the day of the vote on the amendment, however, Obama issued a statement announcing that he would have voted against it. In the statement, the closest he came to addressing the merits of the amendment was his assertion that “he does not think that now is the time for saber-rattling towards Iran.”

So in light of this astoundingly brazen dishonesty, how stupid must the Hollow Messiah’s flock be?
A: pretty damned stupid.

B:Staggeringly, mouth-breathingly, can’t-even-feed-themselves, in need of a full-time zoo-keeper stupid♦

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 01:24 PM
Obama supported another amendment that declared the Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization and allowed the United States to freeze their assets. What his amendment didn't do, and what the Kyl-Lieberman did, is include language that opened the door for a US invasion of Iran. That was the real goal of the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, and any congressman that did not want a repeat of the Iraq Invasion should not have voted for it.

Messier
07-27-2008, 01:26 PM
I've notices the rwers on the board have really started to name call with Obama, sleazeball, weasel, stuff like that. Why so angry with him? Is he really getting under your skin?

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 01:27 PM
:LOL:

B:Staggeringly, mouth-breathingly, canít-even-feed-themselves, in need of a full-time zoo-keeper stupid♦

:)

Messier
07-27-2008, 01:30 PM
:LOL:

B:Staggeringly, mouth-breathingly, canít-even-feed-themselves, in need of a full-time zoo-keeper stupid♦

:)




Ah, so he is under your skin.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 01:30 PM
:LOL:

B:Staggeringly, mouth-breathingly, canít-even-feed-themselves, in need of a full-time zoo-keeper stupid♦

:)

When your arguments consist of lies and name-calling then you have lost. With you way you carry yourself, I don't know if you could ever win an argument.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/soft_on_iran.html

John McCain is attacking Barack Obama's opposition to the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which (among other things) called for labeling Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization. McCain claims that Obama's opposition means that he also opposed calling the IRGC terrorists. We find otherwise.

* Obama cosponsored an earlier bill that also called for designating the IRGC as a terrorist organization.

* The Kyl-Lieberman amendment did more than just label the IRGC terrorists. Obama stated at the time that he opposed the bill on the grounds that it constituted "saber-rattling."

* McCain claims that Obama must oppose calling the IRGC a terrorist group because Obama's Web site doesn't say anything about the IRGC. McCain's argument is a glaring example of the logical fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantiam.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 01:34 PM
"Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you donít have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they donít obtain a nuclear weapon."

ROFL

Messier
07-27-2008, 01:36 PM
"We have a lot of work to do. It's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border."

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 01:43 PM
When your arguments consist of lies and name-calling then you have lost. With you way you carry yourself, I don't know if you could ever win an argument.

Why does B.O. lie about being on a committee, that passed legislation that he would have opposed (if he had the integrity to vote on it)?

Riddle me this.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 01:46 PM
This was a gaffe. Anyone that would take 30 seconds on google would know that he just misspoke:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/23/obama-incorrectly-claims-membership-of-senate-committee/

An Obama spokesman tells CNN “it was his bill, not his committee,” referring to the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act that the Illinois senator sponsored and introduced in May 2007. The measure was then referred to the Banking Committee, and passed a vote of 19-2 on July 17.

What Obama did say:

Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you don’t have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don’t obtain a nuclear weapon."

What Obama meant to say, IE why this is a gaffe:

Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you don’t have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my bill, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don’t obtain a nuclear weapon."

I would like to thank shiteater for bringing more attention to this bill which Obama introduced into the Senate.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 01:47 PM
Why does B.O. lie about being on a committee, that passed legislation that he would have opposed (if he had the integrity to vote on it)?

Riddle me this.

I already explained both. If you ventured out of RW blogs into the world of fact, you might not need someone to hold your hand on all of this.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 01:49 PM
Also, as long as we are talking about missing votes, McCain hasn't voted in the Senate since the beginning of April. He has missed the most votes this session of any Senator.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 02:04 PM
"If you come to Ohio and you go give speeches that are very critical of NAFTA... and then we find out that your chief economic adviser has gone to a foreign government and basically done the old wink-wink Ė 'Donít pay any attention, this is just political rhetoric' -- I think that raises serious questions."

-Hillary Clinton

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 02:04 PM
"If you come to Ohio and you go give speeches that are very critical of NAFTA... and then we find out that your chief economic adviser has gone to a foreign government and basically done the old wink-wink Ė 'Donít pay any attention, this is just political rhetoric' -- I think that raises serious questions."

-Hillary Clinton

That was debunked months ago. You are an aptly named poster.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 02:09 PM
That was debunked months ago. You are an aptly named poster.

Are you going to provide a link to one of your own posts, like Swish did?

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 02:11 PM
Are you going to provide a link to one of your own posts, like Swish did?

Are you going to keep posting lies, and then when they are proved to be piles of shit just continue to post more and more lies without ever acknowledging that everything you are posting is untrue?

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 02:12 PM
Are you going to keep posting lies, and then when they are proved to be piles of shit just continue to post more and more lies without ever acknowledging that everything you are posting is untrue?

Is B.O. pro-Nafta or not? Make up my mind.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 02:15 PM
Is B.O. pro-Nafta or not? Make up my mind.

Why don't you search it since that has already been discussed ad nauseum?

Why don't we discuss the thread topic you started? You don't seem to want to talk about that anymore.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 02:17 PM
Why don't we discuss the thread topic you started? You don't seem to want to talk about that anymore.

Sure I do.

B.O. lied about being on the U.S. Senate Banking Committee.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 02:19 PM
Sure I do.

B.O. lied about being on the U.S. Senate Banking Committee.

Shiteater, what do you think would have been more favorable to Obama: "lying" and saying he was on the committee that passed this bill, or just telling the simple truth and saying he was the guy that SPONSORED AND INTRODUCED the bill into the Senate?

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 02:21 PM
Also, here is the explanation for what happened. Notice, this is for people that are actually interested in the truth, not shiteaters:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ate-committee/

An Obama spokesman tells CNN ďit was his bill, not his committee,Ē referring to the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act that the Illinois senator sponsored and introduced in May 2007. The measure was then referred to the Banking Committee, and passed a vote of 19-2 on July 17.

What Obama did say:

Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you donít have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they donít obtain a nuclear weapon."

What Obama meant to say, IE why this is a gaffe:

Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you donít have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my bill, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they donít obtain a nuclear weapon."

I would like to thank shiteater for bringing more attention to this bill which Obama introduced into the Senate.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 02:23 PM
Also, here is the explanation for what happened. Notice, this is for people that are actually interested in the truth, not shiteaters:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ate-committee/

An Obama spokesman tells CNN ďit was his bill, not his committee,Ē referring to the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act that the Illinois senator sponsored and introduced in May 2007. The measure was then referred to the Banking Committee, and passed a vote of 19-2 on July 17.

What Obama did say:

Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you donít have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they donít obtain a nuclear weapon."

What Obama meant to say, IE why this is a gaffe:

Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you donít have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my bill, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they donít obtain a nuclear weapon."

I would like to thank shiteater for bringing more attention to this bill which Obama introduced into the Senate.

The link to the moonbat blog doesn't work.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 02:24 PM
The link to the moonbat blog doesn't work.

CNN is a moonbat blog?

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 02:28 PM
So what is more favorable when speaking to an audience that is favorable to a piece of legislation: being one of 19 people that voted in favor of the bill or being the person that sponsored and introduced the bill?

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 02:31 PM
So what is more favorable when speaking to an audience that is favorable to a piece of legislation: being one of 19 people that voted in favor of the bill or being the person that sponsored and introduced the bill?

Link?

:)

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 02:32 PM
CNN is a moonbat blog?

I can't see it, because your link doesn't work. But if CNN blogs are anything like the one's on B.O.'s official site, then yeah, it's a moonbat blog.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 02:40 PM
Let's see if this one works:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/23/obama-incorrectly-claims-membership-of-senate-committee/

It looks like it does.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 02:55 PM
Let's see if this one works:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/23/obama-incorrectly-claims-membership-of-senate-committee/

It looks like it does.

UPDATE: An Obama spokesman tells CNN “it was his bill, not his committee,” referring to the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act that the Illinois senator sponsored and introduced in May 2007.

He sponsored and introduced the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act in May 2007? Why, because an Obama spokesman says so?

This link says B.O. and Sam Brownback had introduced a similar bill, but it's not the same bill. He's still lying (and come to think of it, so are you):

http://aipac.org/Publications/AIPACAnalysesBillSummaries/Bill_Summary_-_Iran_Sanctions_Enabling_Act_--_HR_2347.pdf


In a meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu Wednesday, Obama told the former Israeli Prime Minister, “I could fall asleep now standing up,” after Netanyahu asked him how his whirlwind trip to the Middle East and Europe is going.

ROFL

The ol' "I'm tired" routine again.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 03:00 PM
UPDATE: An Obama spokesman tells CNN ďit was his bill, not his committee,Ē referring to the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act that the Illinois senator sponsored and introduced in May 2007.

He sponsored and introduced the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act in May 2007? Why, because an Obama spokesman says so?

This link says B.O. and Sam Brownback had introduced a similar bill, but it's not the same bill. He's still lying (and come to think of it, so are you):

http://aipac.org/Publications/AIPACAnalysesBillSummaries/Bill_Summary_-_Iran_Sanctions_Enabling_Act_--_HR_2347.pdf


In a meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu Wednesday, Obama told the former Israeli Prime Minister, ďI could fall asleep now standing up,Ē after Netanyahu asked him how his whirlwind trip to the Middle East and Europe is going.

ROFL

The ol' "I'm tired" routine again.

Your posting in this forum is McCain's campaign's strategy in a microcosm.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 03:01 PM
Your posting in this forum is McCain's campaign's strategy in a microcosm.

:deevee:

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 03:05 PM
:deevee:

That poorly researched smear turned out to be demonstratively false. On to the next one!

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 03:06 PM
That poorly researched smear turned out to be demonstratively false. On to the next one!

Prove it, Moonbat!

:)

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 03:07 PM
Prove it, Moonbat!

:)

You need to start pulling your own weight. I am doing all the legwork.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 03:10 PM
You need to start pulling your own weight. I am doing all the legwork.


The only thing you are doing is damage control by posting links to moonbat blogs doing damage control.

:whackit:

jAZ
07-27-2008, 03:19 PM
http://obama.senate.gov/press/080717-senate_banking/

Senate Banking Committee Passes Obama Provisions on Divestment in Iran Sanctions Bill
Thursday, July 17, 2008

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Barack Obama today applauded the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee's passage of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act of 2008, which includes provisions Obama offered last year in the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act of 2007 (S. 1430). The Obama provisions clarify that state and local governments can divest from companies that invest $20 million or more in Iran's energy sector and provide safe harbor for private fund managers who divest from such companies. The Committee approved the measure by a vote of 19 to 2.

"Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons is a vital national security priority. In addition to an aggressive, direct, and principled diplomatic effort, we must continue to increase economic pressure on Iran to convince its government to halt its nuclear program, support for terrorist activity, and threats toward Israel.

"This important bipartisan legislation will allow state and local governments and private fund managers to divest from companies that support Iran's energy sector, reducing the revenue Iran uses to expand its nuclear program and sponsor terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas.

"I commend Chairman Dodd for his leadership on this important issue, and I call on the Senate to quickly pass this legislation."

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 03:24 PM
UPDATE: An Obama spokesman tells CNN “it was his bill, not his committee,” referring to the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act that the Illinois senator sponsored and introduced in May 2007.

He sponsored and introduced the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act in May 2007? Why, because an Obama spokesman says so?

This link says B.O. and Sam Brownback had introduced a similar bill, but it's not the same bill. He's still lying (and come to think of it, so are you):

http://aipac.org/Publications/AIPACAnalysesBillSummaries/Bill_Summary_-_Iran_Sanctions_Enabling_Act_--_HR_2347.pdf


In a meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu Wednesday, Obama told the former Israeli Prime Minister, “I could fall asleep now standing up,” after Netanyahu asked him how his whirlwind trip to the Middle East and Europe is going.

ROFL

The ol' "I'm tired" routine again.

This is the first paragraph from the website you linked:

As Iran continues to make rapid advancements in its illicit nuclear weapons program, Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Christopher Shays (R-CT) have introduced the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act of 2007 (H.R. 2347). The bill authorizes state and local governments to divest from companies investing in Iran’s petroleum and natural gas sector and protects fund managers who divest from such companies from potential lawsuits. Companies invested in Iran’s oil and natural gas sector, which accounts for 80 percent of the country’s hard currency, provide the economic wherewithal needed by Iran to fund its nuclear weapons pursuit and support for terrorism. A similar bill was introduced in the Senate (S. 1430) by Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Sam Brownback (R-KS).

Again, I am doing your work for you. Maybe your problem is a lack of understand on how our government works. You see Barney Franks and Christopher Shays are members of the House of Representatives. They introduced a bill into the House of Representatives. They cannot introduce bills into the Senate.

Barack Obama and Sam Brownback are senators, and they introduced the bill this thread is about into the Senate. That bill was then passed 19-2 in U.S. Senate Banking Committee. Notice that this is a SENATE committee, only bills that come out of the SENATE are discussed and voted on by this committee.

So again, you do not understand how our congress works. Obama and Brownback introduced a bill into the Senate, and it was passed 19-2 by the U.S. Senate Banking Committee. A similar bill was introduced in the House of Representatives by Franks and Shays.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 03:26 PM
http://obama.senate.gov/press/080717-senate_banking/

Senate Banking Committee Passes Obama Provisions on Divestment in Iran Sanctions Bill
Thursday, July 17, 2008

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Barack Obama today applauded the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee's passage of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act of 2008, which includes provisions Obama offered last year in the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act of 2007 (S. 1430). The Obama provisions clarify that state and local governments can divest from companies that invest $20 million or more in Iran's energy sector and provide safe harbor for private fund managers who divest from such companies. The Committee approved the measure by a vote of 19 to 2.

"Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons is a vital national security priority. In addition to an aggressive, direct, and principled diplomatic effort, we must continue to increase economic pressure on Iran to convince its government to halt its nuclear program, support for terrorist activity, and threats toward Israel.

"This important bipartisan legislation will allow state and local governments and private fund managers to divest from companies that support Iran's energy sector, reducing the revenue Iran uses to expand its nuclear program and sponsor terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas.

"I commend Chairman Dodd for his leadership on this important issue, and I call on the Senate to quickly pass this legislation."

THAT'S NOT THE SAME BILL, YOU LYING SACK O' SHIT!

The Bill that B.O. took credit for in Israel was introduced May 2007. Nice try, though.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 03:28 PM
THAT'S NOT THE SAME BILL, YOU LYING SACK O' SHIT!

The Bill that B.O. took credit for in Israel was introduced May 2007. Nice try, though.

It is the same bill. You don't understand how congress works. Your ignorance is making you look stupid.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 03:31 PM
It is the same bill. You don't understand how congress works. Your ignorance is making you look stupid.

When did this bill pass the senate, jackass?

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 03:34 PM
When did this bill pass the senate, jackass?

The bill hasn't been passed by the Senate. It just got out of committee.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 03:36 PM
The bill hasn't been passed by the Senate. It just got out of committee.


So not only did B.O. lie in Israel about being on that committee, he's also taking credit for THE MEAT of the bill, not just his provisions.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 03:37 PM
You should clarify your argument shiteater. I am having trouble understanding the substantive argument you are making.

Smed1065
07-27-2008, 03:39 PM
It is the same bill. You don't understand how congress works. Your ignorance is making you look stupid.

No, it is not looking.

Guess you cant dig up much if you have a slim website.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 03:40 PM
You should clarify your argument shiteater. I am having trouble understanding the substantive argument you are making.

Of course you are because you are so busy caught up in your own BS doing damage control over the fact that the guy lied on two counts.

And your last link qualified it by suggesting he was tired.

He's always tired when he gets caught in a lie.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 04:56 PM
No, it is not looking.

Guess you cant dig up much if you have a slim website.


"Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you donít have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they donít obtain a nuclear weapon."

-Body Odor

Bowser
07-27-2008, 05:00 PM
Obama is going to be president. Just accept it and move on.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 05:00 PM
This is the first paragraph from the website you linked:

As Iran continues to make rapid advancements in its illicit nuclear weapons program, Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Christopher Shays (R-CT) have introduced the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act of 2007 (H.R. 2347). The bill authorizes state and local governments to divest from companies investing in Iranís petroleum and natural gas sector and protects fund managers who divest from such companies from potential lawsuits. Companies invested in Iranís oil and natural gas sector, which accounts for 80 percent of the countryís hard currency, provide the economic wherewithal needed by Iran to fund its nuclear weapons pursuit and support for terrorism. A similar bill was introduced in the Senate (S. 1430) by Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Sam Brownback (R-KS).

Again, I am doing your work for you. Maybe your problem is a lack of understand on how our government works. You see Barney Franks and Christopher Shays are members of the House of Representatives. They introduced a bill into the House of Representatives. They cannot introduce bills into the Senate.

Barack Obama and Sam Brownback are senators, and they introduced the bill this thread is about into the Senate. That bill was then passed 19-2 in U.S. Senate Banking Committee. Notice that this is a SENATE committee, only bills that come out of the SENATE are discussed and voted on by this committee.

So again, you do not understand how our congress works. Obama and Brownback introduced a bill into the Senate, and it was passed 19-2 by the U.S. Senate Banking Committee. A similar bill was introduced in the House of Representatives by Franks and Shays.

Thanks for the civics lesson, professor.

I can hardly wait to see how Body Odor votes on this bill, or if he even bothers to show up.

kcfanintitanhell
07-27-2008, 05:18 PM
God, it's amazing how much the intelligence level on the DC forum rose when I put that ignorant m*******cker on ignore.
Carry on. Shiteater, that is.
Now carry on.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 06:33 PM
God, it's amazing how much the intelligence level on the DC forum rose when I put that ignorant m*******cker on ignore.
Carry on. Shiteater, that is.
Now carry on.

GODSPEED!

jAZ
07-27-2008, 11:44 PM
THAT'S NOT THE SAME BILL, YOU LYING SACK O' SHIT!

The Bill that B.O. took credit for in Israel was introduced May 2007. Nice try, though.

Am I missing something? This is clearly what he was referencing when he spoke. Right?

HonestChieffan
07-28-2008, 07:37 AM
I think we need to give Obama a break on this one. He has not been to the senate enough days to really know what committees he is on. Rookie mistake.

Bowser
07-28-2008, 08:44 AM
I think we need to give Obama a break on this one. He has not been to the senate enough days to really know what committees he is on. Rookie mistake.

Hell, he's just lucky he remembers not to drop to his knees and pray three times daily to the east in front of all the cameras.