PDA

View Full Version : Obama Obama Lies


redsurfer11
03-20-2009, 02:52 PM
Feel free to add to the list.

#1 There will be NO EARMARKS in any Bill I sign. Obama

Amnorix
03-20-2009, 02:55 PM
He said that? Proof?

Brock
03-20-2009, 03:07 PM
"new higher standard of accountability, transparency and oversight. We are going to ban all earmarks, the process by which individual members insert projects without review."

Amnorix
03-20-2009, 03:13 PM
First, he was an idiot to promise what obviously he could not control the delivery of.

Even still, his quote doesn't go QUITE as far as the OP. It's a thin distinction though.

Given the 9,000 or whatever earmarks in the stimulus bill, it's obviously he lost control over that sitaution completely (and unfortunately).

Chief Henry
03-20-2009, 03:23 PM
I will let the kids get a dog when we are in the White House - or something like that.

Has he let his munchins get a puppy yet ?

mlyonsd
03-20-2009, 03:49 PM
First, he was an idiot to promise what obviously he could not control the delivery of.

Even still, his quote doesn't go QUITE as far as the OP. It's a thin distinction though.

Given the 9,000 or whatever earmarks in the stimulus bill, it's obviously he lost control over that sitaution completely (and unfortunately).

This was a perfect time to control it. There might not ever come another chance like the one that just passed.

With his approval rating, the scare in the economy, and being the leader of the party in charge he could have forced the issue and the public would have done the rest. There is no way Pelosi and Reid could have beat him on earmarks if he would have pushed it.

What this tells me is he's like every other politician. There is nothing special about him.

Makes me think Emmanuel is really running the show and Obama is just working on his bowling score.

Saul Good
03-20-2009, 06:40 PM
The guy breaks one little promise thousands of times over, and he gets accused of not keeping his word? Get a life people.

wild1
03-20-2009, 06:45 PM
the one about the bills being up on the internet in full for people to read before he signs them. what was it supposed to be, a week?

wazu
03-20-2009, 09:02 PM
First, he was an idiot to promise what obviously he could not control the delivery of.

He doesn't control which bills he signs and which bills he vetoes?

alanm
03-20-2009, 09:11 PM
He doesn't control which bills he signs and which bills he vetoes?I'm not convinced he even comprehends what he signing. Other than a good photo op.

ROYC75
03-20-2009, 10:34 PM
Obama and lies ? Come on man, that common for a Chicago politician.

2bikemike
03-20-2009, 11:04 PM
How about the "I was shocked" to learn of the AIG Bonuses.

jAZ
03-21-2009, 08:44 AM
Feel free to add to the list.

#1 There will be NO EARMARKS in any Bill I sign. Obama

Holy Hell, you couldn't have picked a better way to begin this thread than with a whopper of a lie of your own!

Kudos x 100!!

KC Jones
03-21-2009, 08:50 AM
I'm not convinced he even comprehends what he signing. Other than a good photo op.

:spock:

You must be caught in some kind of weird time warp. The empty suit left the white house on January 20th.

orange
03-21-2009, 09:08 AM
"new higher standard of accountability, transparency and oversight. We are going to ban all earmarks, the process by which individual members insert projects without review."

Like O'Reilly, Hannity misrepresented Obama remark to falsely claim he made a "campaign promise" to allow "no earmarks"

Summary: On his Fox News program, Sean Hannity falsely claimed that President Obama made a "campaign promise" to allow "no earmarks." Hannity then aired a clip of Obama stating his desire to "ban all earmarks" from the economic recovery package, falsely suggesting that Obama was referring to banning all earmarks in general.
On the March 6 edition of his Fox News program, Sean Hannity falsely claimed that President Obama made a "campaign promise" to allow "no earmarks." As purported evidence, Hannity aired several clips of Obama referring to earmarks, including a January 6 clip of Obama stating his desire to "ban all earmarks" from the economic recovery package, which Hannity, like Fox News colleague Bill O'Reilly, misrepresented to claim Obama was breaking his word by signing the omnibus appropriations bill.

After purporting to "go to the videotape" and "show the audience at home" Obama's "campaign promise" of "no earmarks," Hannity aired a number of clips from the 2008 presidential campaign in order to claim that Obama was breaking his promise of "no earmarks," when, in fact, in three of the clips, Obama was referring to reforming the earmark process, and in a fourth, he was asserting that an opponent was being hypocritical for taking earmarks and then advocating against them. In the fifth clip, which was actually taken from a January 6 media availability -- not during the presidential campaign as Hannity suggested -- Obama stated: "We are gonna ban all earmarks -- the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review." However, Obama was referring to his desire to "ban all earmarks" from his "recovery and reinvestment plan," which he specifically distinguished from "the overall budget process."

During his January 6 media availability, Obama stated:

OBAMA: But we're not going to be able to expect the American people to support this critical effort unless we take extraordinary steps to ensure that the investments are made wisely and managed well. And that's why my recovery and reinvestment plan will have -- will set a new higher standard of accountability, transparency, and oversight.

We are going to ban all earmarks, the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review. We will create an economic recovery oversight board made up of key administration officials and independent advisers to identify problems early and make sure we're doing all that we can to solve it. We will put information about where money is being spent online so that the American people know exactly where their precious tax dollars are going and whether we are hitting our marks.

But we're not going to be able to stop there. We're going to have to bring significant reform not just to our recovery and reinvestment plan, but to the overall budget process, to address both the deficit of dollars and the deficit of trust. We'll have to make tough choices, and we're going to have to break old habits. We're going to have to eliminate outmoded programs and make the ones that we do need work better.

As Media Matters for America documented, on the March 4 edition of his Fox News show, O'Reilly aired the same January 6 clip, which he falsely characterized as "President Obama pledging last January to end earmarks in federal spending." Later in the show, referring to earmarks included in the omnibus appropriations bill, O'Reilly stated, "But Obama's on record -- we just played the clip -- that he's going to do away with this. And then he takes 9,000 of them and signs it?" Numerous media figures have similarly misrepresented Obama's statements regarding earmarks to accuse Obama of breaking his promise. As PolitiFact.com and Media Matters have noted, during his presidential campaign, Obama actually promised to reform the earmark process and cut wasteful spending, not eliminate earmarks altogether.

From the March 6 edition of Fox News' Hannity:

HANNITY: People are getting very worried, nervous, concerned. And I'll tell you one other thing that's emerging, Governor, is anger. Eight point one percent unemployment, all the earmarks galore, massive spending, 8 percent increase in this budget. People are getting angry. I don't blame them -- because, you know what? They're watching half their retirement go away, and they seem like they're helpless at this point. Do you see anything that they can do to maybe get Barack Obama to, you know, live up to his promise of no earmarks?

HUCKABEE: They've got to melt this phone lines at the Senate and the House. They have to let their representatives know that this is gonna be an intolerable situation, and they need to let the president know that his credibility is on the line. He was adamant that he would not sign a larded-up pork bill, and he's about to put his signature on it if we're not careful. He --

HANNITY: Let's go to the videotape, and let's show our audience at home -- now, maybe it's just a campaign promise -- no lobbyists in his administration -- no earmarks.

[begin video clip]

OBAMA [8/28/08]: I will also go through the federal budget line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work.

OBAMA [9/06/08]: When you've been taking all these earmarks when it's convenient, and then suddenly, you're the champion anti-earmark person, that's not change. Come on.

OBAMA [9/22/08]: The truth is, our earmark system -- what's called pork-barrel spending -- in Washington is fraught with abuse. It badly needs reform.

OBAMA [9/26/08]: Absolutely, we need earmark reform, and when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.

OBAMA [1/06/09]: We are gonna ban all earmarks -- the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review.

[end video clip]

HANNITY: Why does he get --

HUCKABEE: It's the tale of the tape.

HANNITY: No one's -- no outrage.

HUCKABEE: You have to say that if Barack Obama doesn't veto this bill -- and it is a bill that has 8,500 earmarks -- then he has a lot of 'splaining to do to the American people. And a campaign promise ought to be something that you fulfill, or else you start giving away your political capital. It's early in his administration, and I think it would be a huge mistake. This is not his bill. This is Nancy Pelosi's bill, and he's got to stand up to her. Otherwise, we might as well be talking about President Pelosi.

—M.G.

http://mediamatters.org/discuss/item_html?doc_id=200903080002&height=500&width=450

BigRedChief
03-21-2009, 09:11 AM
an unbiased webite that tracks political promises and truths:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

Brock
03-21-2009, 09:13 AM
You can spin it any way you want to, but we aren't seeing a "new higher standard of accountability" here. The process is as corrupt as ever, and it isn't going to change.

orange
03-21-2009, 09:21 AM
an unbiased webite that tracks political promises and truths:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

Interesting site. Well worth a bookmark. Thanks.

BucEyedPea
03-21-2009, 09:31 AM
The earmark grandstanding is a NeoCon trick!

RINGLEADER
03-21-2009, 09:56 AM
Holy Hell, you couldn't have picked a better way to begin this thread than with a whopper of a lie of your own!

Kudos x 100!!

You're right. He said it about the stimulus bill that granted AIG the right to pass out $165 million in bonuses.

I guess he forgot to go line-by-line.

RINGLEADER
03-21-2009, 09:58 AM
I'm not convinced he even comprehends what he signing. Other than a good photo op.

Gotta keep those poll numbers up.

RINGLEADER
03-21-2009, 10:02 AM
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/512/go-line-line-over-earmarks-make-sure-money-being-s/

DeezNutz
03-21-2009, 10:03 AM
Reading the back and forth in this thread makes me feel like I'm officiating a Special Olympics event.

Oh, wait...

Sorry. Let's talk more about DeezNutzetology.

alanm
03-21-2009, 01:50 PM
:spock:

You must be caught in some kind of weird time warp. The empty suit left the white house on January 20th.The song remains the same. :)

patteeu
03-21-2009, 03:04 PM
#2 "Nobody reached out to the Canadians to try to assure them of anything." (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-03-04-canada-obama_N.htm)

Ultra Peanut
03-22-2009, 09:52 AM
So we have "signed some bills" and "started a war with Canada."

Truly a damning thread, this.

I'm not convinced he even comprehends what he signing. Other than a good photo op.Ah, yes. The college professor and Harvard Law Review editor is a dummy. Well played, Republicans.

patteeu
03-22-2009, 03:02 PM
So we have "signed some bills" and "started a war with Canada."

Truly a damning thread, this.

Ah, yes. The college professor and Harvard Law Review editor is a dummy. Well played, Republicans.

Not even Harvard Law Review editors understand that which they don't bother to read.

stevieray
03-22-2009, 03:06 PM
Not even Harvard Law Review editors understand that which they don't bother to read.

...it's fiitting since we can't read anything he's ever written in that position.