Obama Uncovered...

[Charade]

Haven't you heard? Factcheck.org is just another once decent organization that is selling out its own credibility to get the man-child elected. You know, kinda like The New York Slimes.

http://patterico.com/2008/09/23/unmitigated-garbage-from-factcheckorg-on-obamas-second-amendment-record/

Did anyone notice who runs FactCheck?

 

[rie'smom]

Did anyone notice who runs FactCheck?

The Annenberg Political Fact Check is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The APPC was established by publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg in 1994 to create a community of scholars within the University of Pennsylvania that would address public policy issues at the local, state, and federal levels.

The APPC accepts NO funding from business corporations, labor unions, political parties, lobbying organizations or individuals. It is funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation.

http://www.factcheck.org/miscreports70.html

On edit Bill Moyers on NOW used the Annenburg School as a resource frequently.

 

[Charade]

I have two words for all my conservative friends itching for a great Obama scandal


KEATING FIVE!!!!!!!!!


look it up if you want to be completely educated

I have one word...

Exonerated!!! (so to speak)

 

[LuvDuke]

I have one word...

Exonerated!!! (so to speak)

WRONG (So to speak)

Actually, the Senate Ethics committee said McCain used "poor judgment" in his dealings with Keating.

Ironically, McCain's "poor judgement"is still an issue today.

 

[allison443]

So it's ok that he said they didn't set enough bombs because he didn't actually say it on 9/11?

ABSOLUTELY NOT, and I certainly never said or implied that ...my point was that the article posted by the OP stated something as "true" when it was not accurate. So this was something that I recall personally as being inaccurate. As I said, this was a tiny part of the article, but it could be an indication of its truthfulness, couldn't it? That's all I was pointing out and I think my post made that clear.
I will let the rest of the posters dig and debate on the more serious stuff in the article.

 

[FayeW]

There is no "guilt by association". It is guilt by participation. Big difference!

You don't think that accepting gifts and trips, failing to report them to the IRS, subsequently filing false tax returns and defrauding the government of tax dollars is active participation???? Interesting...and yet Obama is alluded to be guilty of many crimes, although charged with none, simply because you don't like some of the company he kept 20 yrs ago.

Curiouser and Curisoser.

 

[crazyforgoofy]

You don't think that accepting gifts and trips, failing to report them to the IRS, subsequently filing false tax returns and defrauding the government of tax dollars is active participation???? Interesting...and yet Obama is alluded to be guilty of many crimes, although charged with none, simply because you don't like some of the company he kept 20 yrs ago.

Curiouser and Curisoser.

Where's the White Rabbit? Have you seen the Mad Hatter???

 

[DawnCt1]

WRONG (So to speak)

Actually, the Senate Ethics committee said McCain used "poor judgment" in his dealings with Keating.

Ironically, McCain's "poor judgement"is still an issue today.

Bob Bennett, a life long Democrat who defended Bill Clinton during his impeachment hearings and other legal wranglings, LEAD the investigation, and served as House prosecutor during the Keating Five hearings. After turning over every stone, his conclusion what that McCain's name should be eliminated from the defendant list. He said that the Democratically controlled house would not consider hearings with only Democrats and that is why McCain's name was kept on the list. They would also not consider a not tarring him with nothing, which resulted in the "poor judgement" lable. EXONERATED IS THE RIGHT WORD.

 

[LuvDuke]

Bob Bennett, a life long Democrat who defended Bill Clinton during his impeachment hearings and other legal wranglings, LEAD the investigation, and served as House prosecutor during the Keating Five hearings. After turning over every stone, his conclusion what that McCain's name should be eliminated from the defendant list. He said that the Democratically controlled house would not consider hearings with only Democrats and that is why McCain's name was kept on the list. They would also not consider a not tarring him with nothing, which resulted in the "poor judgement" lable. EXONERATED IS THE RIGHT WORD.

Translated: McCain was told he used poor judgment.

 

[crazyforgoofy]

Bob Bennett, a life long Democrat who defended Bill Clinton during his impeachment hearings and other legal wranglings, LEAD the investigation, and served as House prosecutor during the Keating Five hearings. After turning over every stone, his conclusion what that McCain's name should be eliminated from the defendant list. He said that the Democratically controlled house would not consider hearings with only Democrats and that is why McCain's name was kept on the list. They would also not consider a not tarring him with nothing, which resulted in the "poor judgement" lable. EXONERATED IS THE RIGHT WORD.

I disagree. Chastised and humiliated are closer to the right words.

 

[Angelhalo]

Where do you come up with this stuff ?

If you think Palin is a clean politician than you just aren't paying attention. It does seem that the Republicans on this board are willing to believe the worst about Obama and just ignore the worst about McCain.

I don't believe all politicians are scum, most will spin the story to make themselves look good. The stuff in the OP about Obama is way more than spin. There is no point in Obama supporters pointing out all the lies because you (general you) all just post more lies or say you don't believe the links. Because we all know that conservative websites and newspapers only tell the truth and liberal websites and newspapers only tell lies.

I have decided that you are both brilliant, AND my hero.

 

[Charade]

Translated: McCain was told he used poor judgment.

Translated: The "KEATING FIVE!!!" issue is a moot (talking) point.

 

[DawnCt1]

You don't think that accepting gifts and trips, failing to report them to the IRS, subsequently filing false tax returns and defrauding the government of tax dollars is active participation???? Interesting...and yet Obama is alluded to be guilty of many crimes, although charged with none, simply because you don't like some of the company he kept 20 yrs ago.

Curiouser and Curisoser.

Twenty years ago???? How about company he has kept until recently? The CAC participation is recent. Rev. Wright is recent. Frank Reigns is recent. Tony Rezko is recent. Jimmy Johnson is recent! Twenty years ago he wasn't worth sucking up to.

 

[LuvDuke]

Translated: The "KEATING FIVE!!!" issue is a moot (talking) point.

Ahh the power of prayer.

 

[crazyforgoofy]

Ahh the power of prayer.

Please, oh, please, oh please, make the American people forget.

 

[Brianne]

Ok, if we're looking at the "facts" stated in Thomas Corsi's book, he got a lot of the details wrong:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/aug/20/obama-nation-corsi-facts-fire/

The Obama campaign documented each lie and showed links from websites denouncing the book as well. But since this is an Obama link, I'm sure most will ignore it:

http://obama.3cdn.net/a74586f9067028c40a_5km6vrqwa.pdf

Obama's dealings with Rezko:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/19/obamas-rezko-connection/

The subject on Ayers:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/440/

On Israel:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/mar/14/obamas-pro-israel-anti-israel-issue/

The bogus Dowd article:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jul/08/bogus-dowd-column/


That's all I have time for right now in researching. Yes, almost all of the links are from one website, since that is the easiest way to pull information; however, please note the "About This Story" box to the right on each page. They've sourced everything they used to either credit or discredit the story.

Believe it or not, I don't think Obama's perfect or the messiah. I've stated this before. I simply do not believe that either campaign should be throwing out false accusations---and YES, that goes for Obama's campaign as well. I don't know why either one needs to put out misinformation or lies, but then again, I'm not running a campaign so what do I know.

I don't worship at the altar of Obama so throwing out the old line of "she's an OS and drinks the kool-aid" is patently false. It undercuts any argument made for or against a candidate; not to mention, I really find the kool-aid comments very distasteful and disrepectful. Both sides are guilty of it, and I think it needs to stop.

 

[c4a]

You don't think that accepting gifts and trips, failing to report them to the IRS, subsequently filing false tax returns and defrauding the government of tax dollars is active participation???? Interesting...and yet Obama is alluded to be guilty of many crimes, although charged with none, simply because you don't like some of the company he kept 20 yrs ago.

Curiouser and Curisoser.

I don't like the fact that he is LYING about his friends-even he knows that they are an embarrassment and "not nice people"...otherwise, why not just say "yeah, so???" Obama isn't doing that. He is choosing to not say anything. That way he can tell his buddies he didn't deny them & he can tell the voters that he never admitted a friendship.

NOT LIKE SOME OF THE COMPANY!?!?! We are talking about people who kill babies, children, and women with BOMBS because of their religous beliefs and the color of their skin. We are talking about people who funded the terrorist attacks on OUR country! We are talking about radical racial extremist who says that black islams should KILL white Christians because it is what God wants (link)You can honestly say that you are okay with people being killed because of their religous beliefs and skin color? That you believe it is okay that the man running for POTUS is friends with, has his Harvard education due in part to, and was mentored by such a person is okay??? Because the non-chalant tone of your post concerning Obama's "friendships" is expressing that.

Or perhaps, you are one of those posters who read only the OP's initial comment and the last page of a thread (regaurdless of when you know of it's existance)? In all fairness, perhaps a quick review of facts and actual LINKS (with actually going to that link and reading/watching/or listening to the information presented) may be needed? I am going to CHOOSE to believe that is the case.

<Hop down from soap box.>
And no, I am not a die hard McCain follower. Didn't like Hillary, either. But yes, she probably would have gotten my vote. Simply because I am a conservative independant with a major bob to the left. Of the three choices at THAT time, she came closest to my personal views. She is out of the running, now. So, it is move on to who between the 2 left do I agree with more, think will uphold the constitution for EVERYONE, has the most LEADER experience, and seems to be the most forthright on who they are and what they believe is in our countries best interest. And I do not view Obama vs. Palin a valid argument anymore than I view McCain vs. Biden one. Anyone using the argument of Palin could become President should face the consequences of Biden could become President, also. As far as I know McCain has not received death threats nor has he already had an attempt on his life. (And no that is not a direct or indirect threat against any political figures life or an endorsement of any such action. )

 

[c4a]

I will agree with this if you agree that any of Obama's "guilt by association" is bogus as well.

Obama supporters are the only ones saying it is "bogus", Obama isn't commenting, and his friends are the ones saying "it is not in Barak's best interest to discuss our friendship."