BotoxAgent
Member
Thunder Monkey said:
Obama has been completely truthful, as far as I know ;-)
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF Interim Thread of Tears/Lapel Pins (ScratchingHisCheek-Gate)
- Thread starter Rur0ni
- Start date
- Status
Obama has been completely truthful, as far as I know ;-)
Mandark said:
how are they dishonest? Hillarys plan makes you buy insurance, if you dont you pay a fine. In Mass where a nearly identical plan exists there are people without insurance who are being fined... so they dont have insurance and they have less money. His critique is based on fact.
Compare that to her flyer with 5 people standing there with the question "which of these people dont deserve insurance Sen Obama?"
when the only people without insurance are those that choose not to get it. his plan doesnt force anyone out of coverage like her flyer suggests.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
syllogism said:
-70% of people say that they liked the Obama speech
-70% of people say that Obama did a great job explaining his relationship with Wright.
-Over 60% of people say that they agree with Obama about race in his speech.
TALK ABOUT THAT MEDIAS!!!!
StoOgE said:
By repeating, ad nauseum, that Hillary's plan would make people buy insurance "even if you can't afford it" while leaving out the part where the government subsidizes coverage for those people.
It's basically a lie by omission.
I'm not arguing that Obama's campaign has been equally dirty as Clinton's or anything like that. He's been quite honest for a politician. But in this particular case, the line of attack was disingenuous. Period.
speculawyer
Member
Very sad . . . but hopefully it is something that will change. The problems out there today are far too complex for the simplistic language we've heard in the last 7 years. Good v. Evil-doers just can't come close to properly discussing multi-faction islamic militantancy, globalization, healthcare economics, etc.StoOgE said:
I just want to say this about the who Jeremy Wright affair . . . it sure happened at a good time. With no primaries are caucauses in the near future, this was probably the best time for this "issue" to get hashed out.
JCreasy
Member
Wow, this really is a good Friday . . .
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/from-the-fact-c.html
From the Fact Check Desk: The Clinton Campaign Misrepresents Clinton NAFTA Meeting
March 21, 2008 5:03 PM
I have now talked to three former Clinton Administration officials whom I trust who tell me that then-First Lady Hillary Clinton opposed the idea of introducing NAFTA before health care, but expressed no reservations in public or private about the substance of NAFTA.
Yet the Clinton campaign continues to propagate this myth that she fought NAFTA tooth and nail because she opposed the substance of the bill.
On a conference call today, as Ben Smith from Politico details, Clinton campaign spokesman Jay Carson claimed that in four of the five meetings about NAFTA on then-First Lady Hillary Clinton's schedule, Sen. Clinton was pushing back.
Carson says the fifth meeting was the November 10, 1993 pro-NAFTA meeting for businesswomen that we reported on earlier this week, where Clinton was something of the keynote speaker. He says that was just a "drop by."
And the Clinton campaign will not concede that she was advocating for NAFTA in the meeting.
"That's ludicrous," said Laura E. Jones, executive director of the United States Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel, who was there. "There was no question that everyone who spoke including the First Lady was for NAFTA, it was a rally on behalf of NAFTA to help it get passed. It's unquestionable. And there are many people out there who were there who remember the incident who work in this industry."
Julia K. Hughes, senior vice president of the same organization is likewise incredulous of the Clinton campaign's claims.
"This is such a non issue to us, because obviously it was a pro-NAFTA group and a pro-NAFTA event," says Hughes. "It was a 100 percent pro-NAFTA event. No one suggested any inklings of doubt since part of the agenda was to promote enthusiasm for passage of NAFTA."
Did that include then-First Lady Clinton?
"Absolutely. She was the highlight of the event. She was absolutely the capper to the event. It was a positive rally. I assure you if there had even been a hint of waffling from her -- because we were in the last days before NAFTA passed and it was a pretty hectic time -- we would have freaked out."
It is entirely possible that Clinton opposed NAFTA personally and was just being a good soldier. But that doesn't change the fact that she helped NAFTA pass, and that at this meeting she was pushing for it.
-- jpt
UPDATE: I originally had thought Carson was saying this November 10, 1993, meeting was one of the four in which she was pushing back -- my mistake. But the campaign will not concede that this was a meeting where she clearly advocated for NAFTA, so the point is the same, since the two attendees say she very clearly was.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/from-the-fact-c.html
From the Fact Check Desk: The Clinton Campaign Misrepresents Clinton NAFTA Meeting
March 21, 2008 5:03 PM
I have now talked to three former Clinton Administration officials whom I trust who tell me that then-First Lady Hillary Clinton opposed the idea of introducing NAFTA before health care, but expressed no reservations in public or private about the substance of NAFTA.
Yet the Clinton campaign continues to propagate this myth that she fought NAFTA tooth and nail because she opposed the substance of the bill.
On a conference call today, as Ben Smith from Politico details, Clinton campaign spokesman Jay Carson claimed that in four of the five meetings about NAFTA on then-First Lady Hillary Clinton's schedule, Sen. Clinton was pushing back.
Carson says the fifth meeting was the November 10, 1993 pro-NAFTA meeting for businesswomen that we reported on earlier this week, where Clinton was something of the keynote speaker. He says that was just a "drop by."
And the Clinton campaign will not concede that she was advocating for NAFTA in the meeting.
"That's ludicrous," said Laura E. Jones, executive director of the United States Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel, who was there. "There was no question that everyone who spoke including the First Lady was for NAFTA, it was a rally on behalf of NAFTA to help it get passed. It's unquestionable. And there are many people out there who were there who remember the incident who work in this industry."
Julia K. Hughes, senior vice president of the same organization is likewise incredulous of the Clinton campaign's claims.
"This is such a non issue to us, because obviously it was a pro-NAFTA group and a pro-NAFTA event," says Hughes. "It was a 100 percent pro-NAFTA event. No one suggested any inklings of doubt since part of the agenda was to promote enthusiasm for passage of NAFTA."
Did that include then-First Lady Clinton?
"Absolutely. She was the highlight of the event. She was absolutely the capper to the event. It was a positive rally. I assure you if there had even been a hint of waffling from her -- because we were in the last days before NAFTA passed and it was a pretty hectic time -- we would have freaked out."
It is entirely possible that Clinton opposed NAFTA personally and was just being a good soldier. But that doesn't change the fact that she helped NAFTA pass, and that at this meeting she was pushing for it.
-- jpt
UPDATE: I originally had thought Carson was saying this November 10, 1993, meeting was one of the four in which she was pushing back -- my mistake. But the campaign will not concede that this was a meeting where she clearly advocated for NAFTA, so the point is the same, since the two attendees say she very clearly was.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
With the Obama camp putting that figure at 1.1 million votes behind.harSon said:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
speculawyer said:
Yep the best possible time this whole year. :lol
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Why does anyone acknowledge him as anything other then an evil genius?reilo said:
For that matter why does Ann Coulter get any playtime on TV?
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Thunder Monkey said:
Where is Obama's team getting their numbers from?
User 10639
Member
Washington, Maine, Iowa, and some other state haven't announced official vote totals yet for their caucuses, I think.JCreasy said:
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Ding Ding Ding!Amir0x said:
Stuffed bear for the Mother fan!
Tear off the bears head and pot falls out! Along with a translated copy of Mother 3!
edit: I apologize... Hillary Clinton has taken the last Mother 3 and pot filled Bear.
There's still the Bear filled with Gonorrhea and Syphilis though...
NullPointer
Member
Mark Penn has been the worst thing that could happen to Hillary's chances in this campaign.
Its amazing to look at how quickly we went from a party with an "embarrassment of riches" having two incredible candidates for the presidency... to what we have now.
The kitchen sink was where it all began.
Why anybody even listens to Mark Penn anymore is beyond my understanding.
Its amazing to look at how quickly we went from a party with an "embarrassment of riches" having two incredible candidates for the presidency... to what we have now.
The kitchen sink was where it all began.
Why anybody even listens to Mark Penn anymore is beyond my understanding.
RubxQub
ÏÎ¯Î»Ï á¼Î¾ÎµÏÎÎ³Î»Î¿Ï Ïον καί ÏÎµÏ Î´Î¿Î»Ïγον οá½Îº εἰÏÏν
"Hey Bill! So could you uh...endorse me? That'd be swell... think about it, k!"Clevinger said:
"I endorse Barack Obama"
"Well your endorsement means fuck-all anyway you crazy bearded mexican!"
*hangs up*
*cries*
*eats babies*
*punches servants*]
*effs a male prostitute*
*murders male prostitute*
*throws male prostitute into the pile of dead male prostitutes*
....
I'm just guessing but I'm sure she does at least 3 of those things regularly.
User 10639
Member
It really is. It completes him, like Lincoln's beard.
Although Richardson w/o a beard is definitely not as freaky looking as Lincoln without one. Yikes.
EDIT: regarding Richardson's beard, o'course
Although Richardson w/o a beard is definitely not as freaky looking as Lincoln without one. Yikes.
EDIT: regarding Richardson's beard, o'course
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Clevinger said:
:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
The Clinton people are now saying Bill Richardson doesn't matter. WTF?!
maximum360
Member
Lou Dobbs speaking on Bill Richardson's endorsement: "Is Obama pandering to ethnocentric special interests? We'll find out tonight."
Lou seems almost giddy about the rev. Wright affecting Obama's poll numbers negatively. Boy is he bitter. :lol
Lou seems almost giddy about the rev. Wright affecting Obama's poll numbers negatively. Boy is he bitter. :lol
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
thekad said:
What do you agree with? What if his endorsement leads to Obama pulling a good number of superdelegetes over the next 2 or 3 weeks?
maximum360 said:
within 2 weeks, cable will start calling the race all but over.
the blogosphere started a month ago, now legit online newssites have started, it'll trickle down to cnn 2 weeks ahead of the Penn primary, and enter popular opinion about a week later.
CNN is tilting at windmills at this point and they know it. they just want one more good debate with ratings beforehand.
Deus Ex Machina
Member
DeathbyVolcano
Banned
...Are there actually people who like Lou Dobbs?
Tamanon said:
i want him as veep so bad. hes a nice guy with a ton of experience who really fits with Obamas theme of change.. a richardson presidency 8 years from now would be welcome too.. Ive been pushing it for a while, and really think it *should* happen
not to mention Obama + Richardson really may put Texas in play, hand the dems New Mexico, make Nevada and Colorado easier wins.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
RubxQub said:
Well... we already have photo proof of the baby eating.
Star Power
Member
StoOgE said:
yes. then they will say "hillary has to win pennsylvania HUGE or it's over." then hillary wins pennsylvania, where she has always been favored to win, by 10-15 points and they call it a huge upset and say "hillary = comeback kid," "how can obama win if the ge if he loses all of the big states", "it's bat at square one again" etc.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Deus Ex Machina said:
I agree with you Richardson. Your endorsement matters.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Clevinger said:
While I understand the need to downplay and spin in politics, that's just stupid. Richardson's endorsement is probably irrelevant in the grand scheme of things but Penn's comments seem far too negative, especially considering Richardson is a good friend of the Clintons
StopMakingSense
Member
PhoenixDark said:
Indeed, Penn remarking on his irrelevance only makes him MORE relevant.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked