Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20

 ... 429

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

12 | 13 | 14

Next

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

MAR 07, 2008 10:39 AM

bean can't call people names, so I did it for him.

SergeantPsycho

SergeantPsycho

Hampton, VA
January 2007

MAR 07, 2008 04:54 PM

scylis said:

FearTheReaper said:
I guess that's why the article left out the information from the past two days, dumbfuck. (since we're calling names)



i've always been fond of asshat, myself.



I like to call people turds floating in the gene pool.

SergeantPsycho

SergeantPsycho

Hampton, VA
January 2007

MAR 07, 2008 05:38 PM

SergeantPsycho said:

scylis said:

FearTheReaper said:
I guess that's why the article left out the information from the past two days, dumbfuck. (since we're calling names)



i've always been fond of asshat, myself.



I like to call people turds floating in the gene pool.



For example, i'm a turd floating the gene pool when I think I'm on one thread (the John McCain one), but it turns out later I posted to another. Doh!

scylis

scylis

Anchorage, AK
November 2004

MAR 08, 2008 03:02 AM

i'm still not sure what i did.to get a link.

and i'm bored.

and delighted that the rum is, in fact, not gone.

LostLucy

LostLucy

USA
December 2006

MAR 08, 2008 07:33 AM

scylis said:
i'm still not sure what i did.to get a link.

and i'm bored.

and delighted that the rum is, in fact, not gone.



I swear you had a link... wha...?? Maybe, indeed, it was the substances...

Saraah

Saraah

Los Angeles, CA
March 2007

MAR 08, 2008 03:12 PM

FearTheReaper said:

Saraah said:

FearTheReaper said:
Turns out Obama didn't handle it well, because his people aren't the ones who spoke to the Canadian government about NAFTA.

Turns out it was people associated with a woman named Hillary Clinton.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)


If the Prime Minister is seeking the first link in the chain of events that has rocked the U.S. presidential race, he need look no further than his chief of staff, Ian Brodie, The Canadian Press has learned.

Mr. Brodie wandered over to speak to Finance Department officials and chatted amiably with journalists %u2014 who appreciated this rare moment of direct access to the top official in Mr. Harper's notoriously tight-lipped government.

The former university professor found himself in a room with CTV employees where he was quickly surrounded by a gaggle of reporters while other journalists were within earshot of other colleagues.

At the end of an extended conversation, Mr. Brodie was asked about remarks aimed by the Democratic candidates at Ohio's anti-NAFTA voters that carried serious economic implications for Canada.

Since 75 per cent of Canadian exports go to the U.S., Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton's musings about reopening the North American free-trade pact had caused some concern.

Mr. Brodie downplayed those concerns.

"Quite a few people heard it," said one source in the room.

"He said someone from (Hillary) Clinton's campaign is telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt. . . That someone called us and told us not to worry."



So, not only did he react appropriately, she was the one lying about NAFTA.



Wait, am I missing something? Obama's people aren't the ones who spoke to the Canadian government about NAFTA? Huh? That's not even what your article says.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)
There was an actual meeting that took place on this topic between someone from Obama's campaign (Goolsbee) and the Canadian goverment. There is a hard copy of the memo that references it, correct? Obama's campaign has tried to say the meeting notes were taken out of context, but as far as I can tell you are the only person on Earth claiming the conversation never happened.

Whereas the Clinton connection was not just hearsay and a casual remark, but the Clinton campaign has actually strongly denied and called for them to back it up with a source.


Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said the campaign ``did not sanction nor would we ever sanction anyone to say such a thing.''

``We flatly deny the report,'' Singer said. ``We give the Canadian government blanket immunity to reveal the name of anyone they think they've heard from.''



Source



Not at all. Here is what happened in order.

Obama's economic advisor met with Canadian embassy and told them EXACTLY what Obama has been saying on campaign trail



Source? Because everything I have found has Goolsbee claiming his intentions were "misread" or "taken out of context", but nothing reputable anywhere saying that they statements were not made.

FearTheReaper said:
Hillary's people contacted Canadian government and told them not to worry about NAFTA, changes would not be made. Opposite of what she is saying on campaign trail.



Again: source? Because that NEVER HAPPENED. At least, there is no evidence it did. The Clinton camp, as I noted above, basically dared the Canadians to prove it did. Because it DID NOT. The only reason that idea even got floated was because an anonymous source overheard Ian Brodie suggesting it had.

FearTheReaper said:
In the end, Obama and Canadians deny his economic advisor said anything different from what Obama has been saying on campaign trail.

But Canadian's PM claimed Hillary said the opposite.



Again, no. In fact, according to the Canadian PM, the Clinton camp never briefed Ottawa on NAFTA, however Obama's team did..

Honestly, I think Brodie was just talking out of his ass and trying to calm everyone down. And maybe BOTH camps gave some kind of assurance to the Canadians. Unfortunately for Obama, there is only evidence of ONE, and it's not Clinton's. But claiming they both did it (or even worse, that Clinton did and Obama did not) is just willfully ignoring the evidence on the table at this point.

LostLucy

LostLucy

USA
December 2006

MAR 08, 2008 06:09 PM



As Matt Wallace writes in the Daily Kos, "this scandal was manufactured out of whole cloth. Goolsbee said something consistent with Obama's official position -- that he wanted protections added, but it wasn't going to be a fundamental change or revocation of NAFTA, and that Obama was not a protectionist. This was morphed somewhat going into the memo, and now the embassy admits they "may have misrepresented the Obama advisor." Even after the memo misrepresented Obama, the Harper government took it a step further and then leaked a completely fantastic version of the story to the press, in order to maximize the bloodletting."

The Harper government has now apologized for any interference in an American political campaign, but the damage is done.

But a lie is a lie, whether no matter to whom it is attributed


The Clinton campaign has publicly admitted that the only way they can still win this election is by tearing Barack Obama down. They have called their attacks the "kitchen sink strategy," and Senator Clinton herself has referred to it as "the fun part" of the campaign. The result has been a constant barrage of attacks about Senator Obama's record that they know full well aren't true. And yet they repeat them, over and over again, day after day, in an attempt to deceive the American people just so that they can win this election.

This may be fun for the Clinton campaign, but this is exactly why people don't trust their leaders anymore. This is exactly why so many people are so cynical about the political process. And it's exactly what Barack Obama is running to change.

There is no more serious issue than the war in Iraq. 150,000 American troops are risking their lives every day in a conflict that this President and John McCain have no intention of ending anytime soon. It's a conflict that's cost us thousands of lives, billions of dollars, stretched our military and taxed their families, and has seriously undermined our national security, our moral standing, and our ability to go after Osama bin Laden and the core leadership of al Qaeda and finish the job against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Barack Obama had the judgment to oppose this war before it began for these exact reasons. Senator Clinton voted for this war, and yet she continues to tell the American people that her vote was for diplomacy even though the resolution was titled, "Joint Resolution to Authorize the use of Military Force Against Iraq."

When Senator Obama arrived in the Senate, he called for a phased withdrawal before Senator Clinton did. He also introduced comprehensive legislation in the Senate to begin removing combat troops at a pace of 1-2 brigades a month, with an end date for completing that drawdown - legislation that became the basis for the Senate Democrats' plan to end the war.

Barack Obama has said, repeatedly, that when he is President, his first act will be to convene the Joint Chiefs of Staff and ask them to immediately put in place his plan for withdrawal. He's also said, as he did recently on 60 Minutes, that as Commander-in-Chief he would retain the flexibility to implement this withdrawal in a way that ensures the safety and security of our troops. But there has never been a doubt about the purpose of his policy - ending this war and bringing our troops home on a timetable for withdrawal.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton is resorting to lies.

Lies about her voting record (Oh I thought I was voting for development when I authorized military involvement in Iraq!)

Lies about Barack.

If she had the bravery to run on her own merit, her own Senate record, I might have had respect for her. But she has relied on deception, aggressive attacks, and a mafioso-flavored means justify the ends behavior that makes me disrespect her and everything that comes out of her mouth.

It has nothing to do with misogyny. It has everything to do with not aquiesing to people who believe they are entitled to power based on who they are, not what they've done.

I think we've all had enough of it!

scylis

scylis

Anchorage, AK
November 2004

MAR 09, 2008 01:59 AM

LostLucy said:

scylis said:
i'm still not sure what i did.to get a link.

and i'm bored.

and delighted that the rum is, in fact, not gone.



I swear you had a link... wha...?? Maybe, indeed, it was the substances...



i am so awesome that i needed no link to direct you to the information pertinent to the discussion that i wasn't even cognizant of.

hah.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

MAR 09, 2008 03:10 AM

Saraah said:

Saraah said:

FearTheReaper said:

Saraah said:

FearTheReaper said:
Turns out Obama didn't handle it well, because his people aren't the ones who spoke to the Canadian government about NAFTA.

Turns out it was people associated with a woman named Hillary Clinton.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)


If the Prime Minister is seeking the first link in the chain of events that has rocked the U.S. presidential race, he need look no further than his chief of staff, Ian Brodie, The Canadian Press has learned.

Mr. Brodie wandered over to speak to Finance Department officials and chatted amiably with journalists %u2014 who appreciated this rare moment of direct access to the top official in Mr. Harper's notoriously tight-lipped government.

The former university professor found himself in a room with CTV employees where he was quickly surrounded by a gaggle of reporters while other journalists were within earshot of other colleagues.

At the end of an extended conversation, Mr. Brodie was asked about remarks aimed by the Democratic candidates at Ohio's anti-NAFTA voters that carried serious economic implications for Canada.

Since 75 per cent of Canadian exports go to the U.S., Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton's musings about reopening the North American free-trade pact had caused some concern.

Mr. Brodie downplayed those concerns.

"Quite a few people heard it," said one source in the room.

"He said someone from (Hillary) Clinton's campaign is telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt. . . That someone called us and told us not to worry."



So, not only did he react appropriately, she was the one lying about NAFTA.



Wait, am I missing something? Obama's people aren't the ones who spoke to the Canadian government about NAFTA? Huh? That's not even what your article says.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)
There was an actual meeting that took place on this topic between someone from Obama's campaign (Goolsbee) and the Canadian goverment. There is a hard copy of the memo that references it, correct? Obama's campaign has tried to say the meeting notes were taken out of context, but as far as I can tell you are the only person on Earth claiming the conversation never happened.

Whereas the Clinton connection was not just hearsay and a casual remark, but the Clinton campaign has actually strongly denied and called for them to back it up with a source.


Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said the campaign ``did not sanction nor would we ever sanction anyone to say such a thing.''

``We flatly deny the report,'' Singer said. ``We give the Canadian government blanket immunity to reveal the name of anyone they think they've heard from.''



Source



Not at all. Here is what happened in order.

Obama's economic advisor met with Canadian embassy and told them EXACTLY what Obama has been saying on campaign trail



Source? Because everything I have found has Goolsbee claiming his intentions were "misread" or "taken out of context", but nothing reputable anywhere saying that they statements were not made.

FearTheReaper said:
Hillary's people contacted Canadian government and told them not to worry about NAFTA, changes would not be made. Opposite of what she is saying on campaign trail.



Again: source? Because that NEVER HAPPENED. At least, there is no evidence it did. The Clinton camp, as I noted above, basically dared the Canadians to prove it did. Because it DID NOT. The only reason that idea even got floated was because an anonymous source overheard Ian Brodie suggesting it had.

FearTheReaper said:
In the end, Obama and Canadians deny his economic advisor said anything different from what Obama has been saying on campaign trail.

But Canadian's PM claimed Hillary said the opposite.



Again, no. In fact, according to the Canadian PM, the Clinton camp never briefed Ottawa on NAFTA, however Obama's team did..

Honestly, I think Brodie was just talking out of his ass and trying to calm everyone down. And maybe BOTH camps gave some kind of assurance to the Canadians. Unfortunately for Obama, there is only evidence of ONE, and it's not Clinton's. But claiming they both did it (or even worse, that Clinton did and Obama did not) is just willfully ignoring the evidence on the table at this point.


.
Well, wait a couple of days, then respond. Since I posted, the PM has made this statement. Kudos to you.

As far as the Obama memo, go look it up yourself. It's everywhere. Never happened. At some point I stop doing people's home work for them.

scylis

scylis

Anchorage, AK
November 2004

MAR 09, 2008 04:06 AM

FearTheReaper said:
At some point I stop doing people's home work for them.



does this mean you're not going to do that English paper i paid you write for me?

abbazappa

abbazappa

Los Osos, CA
June 2006

MAR 09, 2008 04:19 AM

LostLucy

LostLucy

USA
December 2006

MAR 09, 2008 09:06 AM

^^excellent video excerpt, and there is Joe Scarborough secretly wanting to defend her as the GOP sees her as a better candidate to run against (of blah blah I do not buy that he is an 'independent').

Nolan_Void

Nolan_Void

Salisbury, NC
July 2004

MAR 09, 2008 11:29 AM

LostLucy said:
^^excellent video excerpt, and there is Joe Scarborough secretly wanting to defend her as the GOP sees her as a better candidate to run against (of blah blah I do not buy that he is an 'independent').



He's about as independent as the character Stephen Colbert plays.

abbazappa

abbazappa

Los Osos, CA
June 2006

MAR 09, 2008 02:31 PM

Nolan_Void said:

LostLucy said:
^^excellent video excerpt, and there is Joe Scarborough secretly wanting to defend her as the GOP sees her as a better candidate to run against (of blah blah I do not buy that he is an 'independent').



He's about as independent as the character Stephen Colbert plays.


He might be independent as in he is a conservative and not a GOP party loyaltist, just like Glenn Beck isn't a party loyaltist but is a conservative that is independent from the two partys (altho he swings more GOP then not). I dunno i just thought the video was really funny

Clidna

Clidna

Emo, ON
January 2005

MAR 09, 2008 02:39 PM

Oh for pete's sake, don't you guys know that Canadian politicians will say anything to get in print? We don't have anything newsworthy going on in Canada (not that any of our newsworthy political stuff would make it to the US media anyway), so our pollys have to jump on the American election bandwagon. Don't take it personally - these are the same guys that yell at eachother and call eachother scumbags, dogs, and grave-robbers when they are in session, in hopes of getting a little print. (They do apologize later, though, so that makes it ok.) biggrin

LostLucy

LostLucy

USA
December 2006

MAR 10, 2008 11:55 AM

Clidna said:
Oh for pete's sake, don't you guys know that Canadian politicians will say anything to get in print? We don't have anything newsworthy going on in Canada (not that any of our newsworthy political stuff would make it to the US media anyway), so our pollys have to jump on the American election bandwagon. Don't take it personally - these are the same guys that yell at eachother and call eachother scumbags, dogs, and grave-robbers when they are in session, in hopes of getting a little print. (They do apologize later, though, so that makes it ok.) biggrin



Oh our politicians would never, ever... confused

What I am treasuring today is what Dick Morris's advises Obama to do re: the red phone... :



Suggestion for Obama:


The next time Hillary uses the recycled red phone ad, counter with one of your own.
When the phone rings in the middle of the night, have a woman's voice, with a flat
Midwestern accent, answer it and say, "Hold on" into the receiver. Then she should
shout, "Bill! It's for you!"


Because with Hillary's complete lack of any meaningful experience in foreign affairs,
and her lack of the "testing" that she boldly claims, she'll be yelling for Bill.

SERIOUSLY. surreal

mingol

mingol

Singapore
July 2005

MAR 10, 2008 02:16 PM

LostLucy said:

Suggestion for Obama:

The next time Hillary uses the recycled red phone ad, counter with one of your own. When the phone rings in the middle of the night, have a woman's voice, with a flat Midwestern accent, answer it and say, "Hold on" into the receiver. Then she should shout, "Bill! It's for you!"

Because with Hillary's complete lack of any meaningful experience in foreign affairs, and her lack of the "testing" that she boldly claims, she'll be yelling for Bill.


Heh. Not a bad idea, actually. It drives me nuts to see Hillary pontificating about her greater experience, which in actual fact doesn't exceed Obama's unless she counts her husband's as her own.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

12 | 13 | 14

Next