Comments for Debunking anti-Obama e-mails »
Posted By jovial 1 year, 4 months ago in NewsError-filled chain e-mails designed to scare voters away from Barack Obama are circulating widely on the Internet. Salon deconstructs a pair, one smearing the candidate, the other his wife.
Read Full Story at salon.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 162
-
100%
jovial1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I submitted a story a couple of days ago about the Obama Muslim myth. It recieved over 500 comments! People agreed from all sides of the political spectrum that it was a myth. There were some, however, that continued to cling to those falsehoods. In an attempt to clarify the situation again I submitted this story. Please take note of the individuals that still believe these falsehoods and question them as to why they really believe these things. I think it has nothing with what they really believe deep down inside. I think it's what they want others to believe.
Reply-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user5 Replies
-
-
25%
TheRealizer1 year, 4 months ago
-
DanmLiberalsComment removed: Retracted by user
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user
-
Neutral
vor1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Your talking about an 8 year old here, are you not? Brought up in a totally different culture.
Reply
You people are simply beyond desperate. Seriously, you people make me
f-cking sick! Sorry for the expletive but it is completely necessary! -
-
-
-
100%
alakazam1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am third party myself. I don't think either McCain or Obama are really the right person for the job.
Reply
It seems like anything the two parties are opposed on they are opposed on diametrically. There is also a pervasive all or nothing mentality which demands no compromise from either side.
It's split about 50/50 as to which side I agree with. I think it's been made that way by the design of the Parties themselves. It is defined by an air of uncertain commitment that promises nothing.
I would like to think that I can perceive the good in both the parties. I really like some ideas from both, some ideas I really hate from both.
I would like to think I discern the best of both and know when both are wrong. Maybe someday I will.
I will not vote for the continuation of the Imperial Presidency, nor the Corporatocracy it has spawned...so McCain is out. Obama is the lesser of the two evils...I know it in my bones...but he is still not the person I would chose to be President if there were a viable option. Oh, and as an FYI...If Hillary runs I'm gonna vote third party regardless.
I think it is long past time to get back to being Americans first instead of being a Republican or Democrat first.
Jovial has a really great article up he posted the other day, there was a lot of really great discussion, but it becomes evident after a few comments that some people wouldn't believe Obama wasn't Muslim if the Moving Finger wrote it on Mt. Sinai. What can you do with that? He is a lot more promising as a Leader than 10 John McCains so the Ubercons hate him and will stop at nothing to discredit him.
I'm not really sure how much I like Obama mind you, but I can see the responses of some of the current crop of so called republicans. It's brain dead bombastic caterwauling for the most part. There isn't a conservative principle among the lot of them and most certainly not one among their leadership.-
0%
ecotourusa1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
alakazam...you're Naive if you think Obama is much different than McCain.
Reply
Obama is pro-amnesty
he supported the FISA bill,
George Soros ( a Nazi sympathizer when a teenager, who bankrolled Obama's campaign)
La Raza (very powerful hispanic political group who invited Obama to speak upon several occasions...along with Hillary)
to name a couple
we will be a policed state whether McCain or Obama makes it.
this is why main stream media controlled this process. and a good man like Ron Paul was snuffed out.
A vote for McCain or Obama will bring about the same results.
it takes more than listening to or reading MSM to figure this out.-
0%
ecotourusa1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I neglected to mention that Obama is wrapped in special interest just as much as McCain. (I gave a couple of examples in above comment)
Reply
the same results will occur if Obama or McCain makes it.
don't be naive propellerites!
Use your creative and beautiful minds.-
Neutral
alakazam1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am still waiting on a straight answer about his involvement with the Trilateral Commission and where he stands on the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I think the aim of both is the end of Constitutional Sovereignty in the United States.
Reply
I am not leaping blindly at hope for change Eco, but I am absolutely certain what four more years of PNAC influence over the Executive is going to bring.
There are a lot of little things that bug me...people who would fight to the death against a National ID would think it crazy for a person to argue against a mandatory Universal Health Card that is in effect the exact same damn thing.
People who are absolutely against any private ownership of firearms because of the militia clause would go completely batpoo if people started organizing for state sponsored and regulated weekend training at local parks.
It's hard for me to believe that Politics are more important to Americans than America Herself, but it is becoming increasingly true.
The Constitution makes not only the Law clear but sets forth the design whereby a Government can exist in a Free land. Without a return to those principles this country will fall into an Abyss from which only great tribulation will bring us out.
I honestly wish there was a viable third party Candidate Eco, but lacking that I must vote to defeat the Evil that I know.
-
-
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
100%
Grrr1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If he was fronting a third party that could benefit in the future from a percentage of votes, I'd support him for sure. But he's not, so it's a completely wasted vote. Nobody takes your dissatisfaction with the contenders into consideration on election day. There are vast differences between the two parties in contention that impact our daily lives greatly, even within the narrow scope of the interests of the corpocracies they represent. Sure, help hand it to the warmongers for another four years, see where that gets us.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
jovial1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes, there is a group of veterans that own a site that has been on a constant campaign against McCain. I don't know if it's a smear site, because it has a former Republican congressman chiming in. Here's the link.
Reply
.vietnamveteransagainstjo...com/">http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjo...com/ -
-
-
-
-
-
100%
miklkit1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
George W. Bush: My constituency, the haves...and the have mores.
Reply
McSame, the son of an Admiral who was the son of an Admiral. He graduated 894th out of 899, crashed 5 jets in training, and was way over ranked for his position in the squadron. He doesn't know how many houses he owns.
Nope! Nothing elitist to see here! -
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
Global_WarmerComment removed: Abusive1 Reply
-
-
Neutral
wardcranston1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Please define "Eliteist." And it is "cognizant of" not "cognizant with." You might want to check that definition, too. I find it astonishing that these circulating myths still exist and have some effectiveness. Even the use of the word "eliteist," which was certainly not widely used as either noun or adjective by the average person until its recent application to Barack Obama has that same sensibility. It seems incredibly cynical and somehow vulgar that there are political operatives that will take certain words or stories that they know people will not know, and will never bother to research, and turn them into catch-phrases that can be so simultaneously meaningless and damaging. Anyone who actually knows what the word "eliteist" means knows that the philosophy of the Republic Party is fundamentally eliteist...and that's not an insult, by the way.
Reply-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Elitist- –noun 1. practice of or belief in rule by an elite.
Reply
2. consciousness of or pride in belonging to a select or favored group
Obama's father and grandfather were wealthy and were part of the government of Kenya. That is how his father got the scholarship to the University in Hawaii. When he left and abandoned his wife and son he went back to his first wife in Kenya and was part of the government. OBama's mother married another Muslim and went to Indonesia with him. He later was sent to Hawaii to live with his grandmother. She was wealthy and put him in an exclusive school in Hawaii. He went to Occidental College in LA and Columbia for two years each. Then he went to Harvard Law School where he graduated with J.D. magna cu m laude. Any lawyers dream.
He comes from wealth and had a great education. His accomplishments place him in a small select group. He acts like he has the best answer for everyone.
-
-
-
-
7%
allamerican1231 year, 4 months ago
-
89%
lbrtyordeath1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How in the HELL does the name Hussein mean anything at all?
Reply
I live in Missouri, the state run for the past four years by the horribly corrupt Matt Blunt. He is in trouble for various sorts of things, deleted e-mails, cover-ups, etc. Facing impending litigation, Gov. Blunt is the first Missouri governer in MANY MANY years (50+ I believe) who has not ran for re-election.
So, we have Jay NIXON running for the Dems for Governer of Missouri.
I don't see anyone equating him to tricky ****, just because they share the same last name.
Your choice to use the facts that a) he is black; b) he is Hawaiian; and (the dumbest of all) c) that his middle name is Hussein as reasons not to vote for him show the depth of ignorance and childishness that most likely guides every decision you make. And that's sad.
Do some research. Quit listening to Rush Limbaugh. READ.
Then form your OWN opinions.-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh yeah. Matt Blunt is bad. Most of my family is involved in some way or fashion with counseling and they've had to turn away sooooo many clients because of lack of funding at the state level. They've been bitching about Blunt since 2005.
Reply -
-
-
100%
jovial1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I believe the title of the story was "debunking anti-Obama emails". The story didn't ask you for a vote. It just tried to set the record straight and make more people aware of a deteriorating situation. If you would, please comment on that.
Reply-
25%
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Part of the problem is the church he attended for over 20 years. It preaches racial hatred in the form of Black Liberation Theology. Their web site declares:
Reply
"We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. "
" 4. A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.
6. A congregation committed to CULTURAL EDUCATION.
7. A congregation committed to the HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF AFRICAN PEOPLE IN DIASPORA.
8. A congregation committed to LIBERATION.
9. A congregation committed to RESTORATION.
10. A congregation working towards ECONOMIC PARITY."
Nowhere on their site do they say anything positive about being Americans.
These things in view of the theology they follow are very racist. The theology views EVERYTHING including the Bible through that lens which is "Blacks are fighting off the yoke of White suppression." They say that Jesus was a black man crucified by white Romans. The sound bites that were broadcast are part of the sermons that Rev. Wright preached over the years. You can get the sermons from the church. That is the racist theology he preached.
This is a problem for Obama. Especially since he quotes Rev. Wright warning him about getting involved with his church because the other black churches and other people would be angry with him over it. So why would there be any doubt that the Obama's might say things they heard in sermons for over 20 years?-
83%
Dionys1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You should do some actual research on Black Liberation Theology (or liberation Theology in general) before attacking it as racist or antithetical to Christian beliefs. Your lack of knowledge and decidedly racist interpretation just shows how much this nation has to learn in general and specifically about people who don't live in the same economic/social structure you do. It's very sad that anti-African American racism survives today so strongly hiding behind euphemisms.
Reply
As for saying something positive about America, I don't even see a great deal of Evanglical web sites saying positive things about America. They live in America and want to make positive changes in America. They are not so stupid as to believe the line "love it or leave it," because that is not what this nation has ever been about. It has been about and will remain about loving your country and changing it for the betterment of all people.-
0%
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I did the research. A lot of it. Its basic theology is summed up in that sentence. "Blacks are fighting off the yoke of White suppression." That is what "Black Liberation" means. The sermons blast America over and over for wrongs that many time are not real. I heard one of the sermons where Rev. Wright said the thing about Jesus being black and the white Romans crucified him.
Reply
The people who wanted to get rid of the drug pushers were the people living where they were doing it, blacks. A large percent are black so a large percent of blacks went to prison. Black on black crime is very high. So a lot of blacks go to prison. They claim this is racism.
The problem is that a lot of blacks have bought into the concept that they are just held down by whites so why bother going to school. Why try to get a job. Selling drugs or committing other crimes is a lot easier way to get money. This is the issue that needs to be fought but that church buys into that concept with their theology. Look at what happens to the blacks that make it big in politics that are Republican. They are called names like Uncle Tom, Oreo, not really black, etc. They are held up to public ridicule by the "black leaders". This makes the situation worse not better. We need to address why the blacks believe they will not be able to succeed not blast blacks that have made it and reinforce the reasons that they feel hopeless.-
100%
jovial1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Out of all the politicians in this country, I think Obama was the only one that addressed race and prejudice thoroughly. In his speech in Pennsylvania he attempted to bridge the divide that exists between people of all color in this country. As I said in the beginning of this post people like you have certain opinions you would like others to believe, but have no basis in reality. In fact, deep down inside you probably don't believe it yourself. Obama isn't a racist. He loves his country. No matter how you interpret the sermons of his preacher, everything that I've heard out of his mouth is to the contrary. The guilt through association ploy that is being used by you and others is deeply motivated by politics. Dirty politics, and you know it. Obama distanced himself from his preacher and all who speak of divisiveness in this country. He wants to bring people back together again. He has made major strides to the middle and there wa even talk of him taking on a conservative VP. I dare you or any other person to find anywhere in his speeches where he advocated division in race, sex, or religion in this country.
Reply-
0%
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A person talking about problems between races usually makes the divide harder to bridge. I have two multiracial children. I am very conscious of the problem. The way to bridge the problems is to ignore race and just help each other. Reach out a helping hand to people of the other race. My church practices that method. Our Mercy committee works hand in hand with a black church to help the needy. We also help support the church with finances. We do not go there talking about race we just help people in need. We provide mentoring of children, feeding the poor, refurbishing houses that are in bad shape, etc.
Reply
You talk about painting him with a brush of people he knew. That is part and parcel of how you judge a person. The concept of "birds of a feather" has some credibility.
Obama went to a church where the pastor warned him that other black churches would be angry with him. He went anyway. For 20 years he sat there with his wife and later children listening to those sermons. Only when it was publicly exposed did he leave the church. That says a lot about him.
Obama was jump started into politics by Tony Rezco. Somehow by magic all opponents were found to be disqualified including the incumbent. He maintained a working relationship with Rezco. He wrote letters for him and voted for items that were on his agenda. In return he got that sweetheart deal on the house with a special mortgage. He voted against the bipartisan group that was trying to clean up Chicago corruption. He voted with the machine, Tony Rezco, and Mayor Daley.
He is friends with Bill Ayres. Bill Ayres gave the coming out party for his first election. Obama served as chairman of a foundation Ayres created to get money for education, the Annenberg Challenge. An ethical problem was that Ayres received some of the money. He went to parties given by him. So this was not simply being an acquaintance as he says.
These three people and the church are part and parcel of who he is and show what his core beliefs are. These things are a big problem to me.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
50%
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is another myth that you promote. He is 1/2 white, part Arab and part black. But people call him Black. Why? That is just a part of his race.
Reply
There have been several stories about the racial background of his father and it get confusing. Since he is half white why is that portion being ignored. I adopted two multiracial children. Half white, part black and part American Indian. Same thing happens. Why have them be Black.
-
-
davidhallstromComment removed: Spammer9 Replies
-
13%
dandt16121 year, 4 months ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
miklkit1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here is a moveon.org ad. Is it factually wrong?
Reply
https://pol.moveon.org/donate/gettowork.html?r=4015&id=13414-9486959-5.ZvD.x-
-
100%
UnusualSuspect1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
endo...
Reply
Since you're not Obama's opponent's keeper, I don't expect you to know whether he was there for any vote at any time. But one stat is true...Obama's opponent has been more absent for voting than any other senator. How can he talk about "work" and being "on vacation" when he's been absent more times than any other senator?-
-
0%
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Lets look at a bigger picture.
Reply
McCain has run for POTUS twice.
Obama once.
McCain has been in congress for 25 years.
Obama has been in office for 3 years.
Put the amount of time absent for McCain over the time in office.
Do the same for Obama.
Which number is bigger?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
93%
Bkumm1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Does anyone seriously believe that if there was a question in Senator Obama's mind about whether or not he was a U.S. citizen able to run for the Presidency that he wouldn't have had that checked? I use that example because that's the one I got most recently.
Reply
People need to pull their heads out of the sand and THINK about what's being said about Senator Obama. This is the usual Republican/Conservative smear and jeer that we've come to know and hate. I'm so tired of this crap. If Senator McCain can't stand on the issues and on his plan for America then he shouldn't win. It's that simple. Why do you folks have to lie and distort everything? I just don't get it. Is keeping power more important than a better place for your children and grandchildren? I guess it is.-
89%
chuck-the-canuck1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"If Senator McCain can't stand on the issues and on his plan for America then he shouldn't win. It's that simple. Why do you folks have to lie and distort everything? I just don't get it. Is keeping power more important than a better place for your children and grandchildren? I guess it is."
Reply
Pretty much says it.-
40%
slate1 year, 4 months ago
-
80%
Mdiar1 year, 4 months ago
-
-
-
33%
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ROTFLMAO
Reply
Wrongdoing in firing people who serve at the pleasure of the president. He could fire them because he didn't like the way they combed their hair. But they must be covering up something. The Democrats only wanted to try and get soundbites on TV when they questioned them. Each Democrat would be able rant at the witnesses and they would just have to sit and take it. Maybe get a reply in once in a while. I have watched those circuses. They sicken me. Both side do it but Democrats are the worst.-
-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ROTFLMAO
Reply
They were federal prosecutors not judges. They serve at the pleasure of the president. When Clinton came in he swept the place clean and put in all of his people. Bush didn't do that but had some sort of evaluation process and had selected ones removed. He was kinder and gentler than your guy Bill. Just like the travel office that Clinton swept out and later realized he had done that to the wrong travel group. He did that by having them sit in vans without windows or seats. Where were the liberal rants about that when it happened. Not a peep.
Go fly a kite. Take a long walk on a short pier. Etc.
Your guys do it and silence. Bush does it and you yell and scream over nothing.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Any time a president has had their things investigated there is executive privilege and things go missing. Keep in mind that there is a massive amount of paperwork and emails. Keeping track of it correctly is a difficult job. People file things in the wrong places. Software keeps track of the emails. Software is created by people. There is no piece of software that is perfect. I went to site that had some software for over 10 years. I had to fix new found bugs in it.
Reply
With the best intentions in the world thins can happen. Then you add to the mix deliberate hiding of things. How do you know which is which.-
-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
When software or hardware fails it doesn't read the law to figure out it is doing the right thing or not. Laws are fine. Implementation is something else. Under Clinton it was blamed on hardware failure, They were trying to recreate them from previous backups. Having worked with tape backups I can tell you that they MOSTLY work. Murphy's Law says it will fail at the worst possible time.
Reply
Laws can't fix mistakes in filing papers or software and hardware failure. There is the theoretical world and then there is real life. We live in real life.
Where do you live. Do you have your hard drive(s) backed up? It will fail. The only question is when. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
lbrtyordeath1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
He does things that severely stretch the scope of the Executive branch's power, while giving the figurative finger to the other two branches.
Reply
It's like when Cheney invoked Executive Priviledge over turning over his "guest book" saying who came to visit him at his office.
A large percentage of the executive's acts during this administration have been downright illegal. They should arrest the both of them and lock them away like the criminals they are.-
-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LOL
Reply
Every president does the same things. There is a continuing conflict as to where the line is drawn between each major branch. With an opposition party to the president in power in congress the battle begins. each side wants everything. The president want everything off limits and the congress wants to investigate every time he passes gas.
The fight is on and watch out for all the obfuscation from each side.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Great! Let us see how many people show up just to call us ignorant fools for believing a man named Hussein is a Christian... I can't wait for the laughs to start... though seeing the gullibility of the general populace will be saddening.
Reply-
100%
lbrtyordeath1 year, 4 months ago
-
0%
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
When you post silliness like that then think about the fact that the Republicans had Tricky Di ck and told him to take a hike over possible cover up of a cover up.
Reply
The Democrats has Slick Willy who lied on TV to the public, committed sexual harassment with someone far below him, perjured himself, and conspired to perjure and the Democrats held fast and embraced and the watch word was "does not rise to the level of". With his example he has made it difficult to prosecute sexual harassment.
Who has the better ethics?-
Neutral
lbrtyordeath1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obviously Endo has no sense of humor...
Reply
I was just sort of commenting on the fact that the people that go around parroting Hussein Hussein are stupid...
I sincerely wish the neocons would get over their love affair with trashing Bill Clinton.
IMO the man was one of the best POTUS ever.
All I know is that during the Clinton Admin people made money. During the Bush admin people have not.
Of course, you'll probably go on about how all of that was just the carryover of Reagan that somehow jumped over Bush sr and landed in 92 to make Clinton "appear" to be an economic whiz kid.
Give me a break.-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I was. I thought it was funny. Look at my the start of my first sentence. The problem is that I also saw a serious side to it as well. What would have happened if I had posted your statement putting in "Adolf Clinton" instead. The rants would go for a mile of posts outraged at it. Liberals always ignore their parties failings. Ethics then get confused.
Reply
Bill Clinton the best POTUS ever?
During Clinton people made money but under Bush they did not?
That sums up the blindness of Liberals all right.
What you totally ignore and most liberals blind themselves to the fact of what occurred during his administration. Republicans took control of congress. They FORCED Clinton kicking and screaming to a balanced budget keeping one of their promises. Clinton wanted to have a gradual draw down over 6 years. Why do Libs get amnesia over that and say Clinton balanced the budget.
When Libs get over trashing Nixon we can get over trashing Clinton for what he was as a man. Democrat leaders in congress admitted off the record that he was the best liar they had ever seen.
Publicly in the campaign there were the rolling disclosures. Something was reported about Clinton. First absolute denial. Then admitting a little. Then a little more. this went of for about 5 or 6 cycles until the whole store was confirmed. There were several of these. There were the disclosures about his womanizing. To me those made him a disgusting man. There seemed to be an unspoken pact that he would keep his zipper up for the time in office but he didn't make it.
He committed sexual harassment. It does not matter if the underling begged for it or not. The relative positions of power dictate it being a crime. He was POTUS and she was an intern.-
Neutral
lbrtyordeath1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't see how getting ******** constitutes sexual harrassment. It was a consensual, albeit immoral act. You cannot say that Bill Clinton committed sexual harrassment. Consenting adults, endo.
Reply
Where Bill Clinton erred is that it is a federal crime for a POTUS to maintain a relationship with an employee. That, you are correct about.
But you must ask yourself. What's worse, lying about a sexual relationship, or lying about breaking into the DNC headquarters?
What's worse, screwing an intern, or screwing the country?-
-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NOW had the law read that consensus has nothing to do with it. The underling can beg and cry for it. The job relationship is all that counts. The assumption that NOW has that just that relationship could be the reason for the willingness of the subordinate. That in their mind was an "or else" or an "if then" attached that was never spoken.
Reply
All the people screaming about the fact that it was a consensual relationship has made it hard for prosecution of this law. Question - Would she have done the same if someone else was president or not. Was her fixation on the office or the man? Was she expecting to come from it? This is where NOW was coming from. -
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The cover up was not about the break in. The issue was whether Nixon was covering up the cover up. You have it framed wrong. The Democrat watchword was what did he know and when did he know it. Nixon was never under oath in a court of law and he stonewalled questions.
Reply
Clinton committed perjury about the sexual harassment and conspired to perjure. Three actually documented crimes. This was in addition to looking the country in the eye and lying.
You do the typical liberal back Bill form of just "screwing and intern". You leave out all the crimes. Which actual crimes did Nixon commit? Did he actually order the cover up of the cover up or not? That was never found out.-
Neutral
alakazam1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The destroyed evidence would probably answer that question.
Reply
I also note that the man stood down before he dared defy Congress.
This assumption that since it has "always" been done a certain way it makes a practice acceptable is what really bugs me.
I get the impression that you would have people just accept corruption and misdeed in Politics because someone in the past was guilty of it.
That makes no sense to me...I was appalled by the disrepute the BJ scandal brought on The White House, but not because of the BJ...who cares about that. There was the three ring circus around it that was disgusting to me. He lied under oath and he should have stood down when caught out about it or removed from office if he wouldn't go willingly. I was very disappointed when he wasn't fired. .
I still insist that anything done by Clinton or anyone else for that matter does not excuse direct obfuscation of fact finding relevant to a current investigation.
The deliberate destruction of evidence and refusal to answer to legally constituted authority in the course of that investigation is and of itself criminal.
So I ask you...Why would someone commit a criminal deed to cover up not doing anything wrong?
That makes about as much sense as a three handled football bat.
I must conclude that there is some fire causing the smoke.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
-
-
0%
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There you go bypassing the actual crimes that Clinton committed.
Reply
1. sexual harassment
2. perjury
3. conspiracy to commit perjury
The Democrats backed Clinton to the hilt. The watch word was "this does not rise to the level of". They always ignored the actual crimes and only talked about consensual sex.
Nixon was accused of covering up a cover up. He was NEVER accused of the original cover up. They never proved he did it but the Republicans told him to leave.-
100%
lbrtyordeath1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Conventional wisdom says that a consensual act cannot be defined as "harrassment".
Reply
According to my company bylaws, sexual harrassment, paraphrased, is "as defined by the harrassed,"
I doubt Monica considered herself harrassed.\
Perjury-Agreed
conspiracy to commit perjury- Bill Clinton never asked anyone to lie.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
bruhaha1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Unfortunately you are right. What we can do though, is make it known where these "facts" about Obama are from so that they don't grow legs like they sometimes do when the mainstream media picks up on them......the media is often just as bad (worse really because they should know better) at not bothering to look up the sources of all this crap.
Reply
-
-
67%
slate1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Too bad we can't send emails to McCain's voter to scare them off too but they don't know what computers are!
Reply
Well that makes sense! How are those folks sending emails again if not by computers?
Isn't it funny that your post was pos'ed by people that agreed with that from thier own computers. -
-
Neutral
alakazam1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I got into a discussion about out current President with an individual who just turned 68 the other day. Someone that's brilliant and a very successful businessman. He never touches a computer.
Reply
The conversation turned to the election and he asked for whom I was voting. This is a good friend and I really didn't mind the question.
I told him that I didn't like my choices and he immediately asked me what I meant by that. I tried explaining why I felt that way and he was completely bewildered about what was going on in this Country.
Out of touch in so many ways it was frightening.
Flat out denies well established facts about an incredible number of things.
He doesn't believe NSPD-51 exists because Congress wouldn't let a President get by with that sort of thing.
He is gonna vote for McCain come hell or high water.
That scares me a little.
-
-
ML2007Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
airwick1944Comment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
Global_WarmerComment removed: Abusive
-
90%
Spadecaller1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
While I don't agree with much of the right wing ideology that is espoused, it takes two wings to fly. Something this nation has stopped doing. We are too busy wallowing in the mud to see and do what is best for our nation.
Reply
Perhaps that is one of the reasons that our misguided electorate allows both sides of the aisle to get away with all the corruption in Washington.
Mainstream media loves fueling the animosity between races, gender, woman's rights, Republicans, Democrats, Jews, Christians, Protestants, evangelists, atheists, Muslims, Mexicans, immigrants, Gays, ... and don't forget those Porto Ricans who can't vote in elections, but can vote in the primary...
If they can keep us fighting among ourselves, the corporate hoodlums running this country can stay in power.
Keep up the good work, guys!
We love the cost of oil and gas. We love shopping for food we can no longer afford and that is not even safe to eat. We love giving away our jobs to other nations, they need the work more than us anyway. We love staying out of the doctors offices because we cannot afford insurance or qualify for it. We love moving into cozy apartments and getting rid of our expensive mortgages. We love buying cheap toys from China that make our children sick. We love selling our ports and highways to foreign companies. Who needs all the expense and taxes on them anyway. We can't wait for another war to wipe out the rest of Social Security and who needs Medicare; that's for poor old people who failed to save enough anyway.
Keep up the good work guys!-
0%
Endoscopy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You did fine until the middle. Then you went into a very liberal rant.
Reply
There are pros and cons for most of that rant.
For example who is responsible for the cost of gas?
We have to import most of our oil because the drilling for it has not been allowed where there are known oil deposits. Refineries have not been built and some were knocked down when the law forced conversions on them that the smaller companies could not afford. Nuclear power plants are not allowed to be built.
Could these things impact the price of gas today?
-
-
-
-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Honestly, my mail service seems to do great at getting rid of spam. I have yet, in over two or three years of using it, to receive a single "Enlarge your penis!" spam mail. On the other hand, I had an ex-girlfriend who used the same service and got them rather consistently. Maybe a mix-up occurred?
Reply
Oh, back to the topic, I've not gotten a single one of these e-mails yet. Lucky me!-
Neutral
StillUnashamed1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Add me to that list of not ever receiving an anti-Obama email. I have heard friends in conversation mention that Obama is a Muslim and I quickly correct them.
Reply
There is enough true facts about Obama, much of it coming from his own lips, to scare any independently thinking person that made up and untrue claims not only are unnecessary, they tend to have the opposite effert of elliciting sympathy for him.
-
-
17%
wdfisher571 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Mr. Corsi, in his book "Obama Nation", documents a long history of Obamas financial deals in all of of his political campaigns which were either directly financed or anonymously funded by corporations who were either owned outright or run by Muslim finaciers or Middle East power brokers living here in the states, incling Mr. Resko. Much of what he cites, are direct quotes from articles and investigations undertaken by the Chicago Tribune and its staff investigative reporters, folks who are in the best position to report on the comings and gouings inside Chicago politics if anyone ever was. After reading these reports, its a wonder that Obama can even show his face in public, much less run for the highest office in the land. Only the truly partisan Democrat Party faithful, longing for a return to power in Washington by any means necessary or or the basically politically naive, would vote for this guy. I cannot believe how much Mr. Corsi has found to write about on Mr. Obamas past that the national media, for whatever reason, has decided was unworthy of the public knowing about the candidate before this next election. We have all been sold a bill of goods by a slick group of radical left leaning political activists in my opinion.
Reply -
25%
tbkennedy531 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
One reason some of these "myths" have legs is because Obama has lied so many times that people may wonder if he's lying again. I take him at his word that he's a Christian. If you look at his site designed to fight the rumors he says he was never trained in Islam or was ever a Muslim. That is not factual he was in Indonesia. This is documented and verified by former teachers and his half sister. He says he would have voted for the born alive bill if it had the federal language. Well it did and he didn't. The list goes on and on.
Reply
Maybe if he was more open about his past these rumors would go away.-
80%
Dionys1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You're the one spreading lies. I was in Indonesia. I'm not Muslim. Neither is Obama, neither WAS Obama.
Reply
The question remains, however -- So what if he was? Honestly are you that racist? Evangelicals spout garbage about tidal waves being the wrath of God against Muslims and earthquakes being the wrath of God against Gays and Katrina being the wrath of God against homosexuals, abortion and bad morals in New Orleans and you're spouting off about Muslims? You should worry about the evanglical end-of-worlders who hold so much sway and power in Washington. The kind of rhethoric they spout is much more scary than any moderate Muslims.
Stop with your lies and scare tactics. Try to embrace some morals.-
25%
tbkennedy531 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am not spreading lies. He was registered as a Muslim. I don't care where you were or are it has nothing to do with the discussion. The abortion question I see you have no comment about because that's been proven as well. The man is a liar so don't try to tell me I'm one.
Reply-
-
-
-
Neutral
alakazam1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I dunno what he is getting at...I am sure someone in my family registered me as something or another before I even knew what the words meant.
Reply
I was singing songs in kindergarten about all sorts of things religious and otherwise, does it define my convictions as an adult?
Of course not, claiming so would be a ridiculous assertion
I dunno what it would prove even if it was true. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
Klarissa1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
simon
Reply
"We know whom we will vote for and we've known for months. This thing has gone on too long ..."
This time, since one of the candidate was an unknown, with a lot questions about experience and leadership, the long campaign will allow enough exposure to show the true colors of the both candidates. -
sortofcute01Comment removed: Hard Banned
-
sortofcute01Comment removed: Hard Banned
-
sortofcute01Comment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
-
-
0%
ecotourusa1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
excuse me! Obama is as much a war monger as McCain. He already proclaimed we needed more troops in Afganistan. this morning he vowed to give Russia a strong message.
Reply
(fact is: it was Georgia who started the aggression.)
aren't you mainstream?
and, what is your name about?
it's misleading...you seem like an Obama supporter. if so, your man supports FISA!!
(not liberty amongst the citizens of the USA)-
100%
lbrtyordeath1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm not necessarily an Obama supporter. I have accepted that in order to get real change in this government one has to play by the two party system. The fact is, John McCain wants to continue eroding our civil liberties, fighting a needless war, and allowing our jobs to be shipped overseas.
Reply
As is obvious to any one with half a brain, Bob Barr and Ron Paul have ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE of getting elected President. Rather than delude myself that I can get either one of them elected (I believe both are much more in line with my beliefs) I will pick the lesser of two evils and actually create CHANGE, actually make a difference.
We all saw what Ross Perot (supposedly) did in 1992. We also saw what Nader (supposedly) did in 2000.
If Barack Obama is elected President it will mark a huge change in American politics by default, since such an unorthodox choice was actually voted for by a majority of Americans. This COULD pave the way for indepependents and Libertarians to MAYBE get elected to some lower level government postitions in the future.
The fact is, you are DELUDING yourself if you think that anyone besides McCain or Obama has a chance at winning the Presidency.
I'm not saying it's right, but I AM saying that that's the way it is and neither you nor I can change it.
I, myself, live in the real world, and make decisions that have a REAL impact on the election, rather than a symbolic one (however small and insignificant it may be).
Don't hate me. Hate reality.-
0%
ecotourusa1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
dude-
Reply
I don't vote to pick a winner...I VOTE MY CONSCIENCE.
"you are DELUDING yourself if you think that anyone besides McCain or Obama has a chance at winning the Presidency."
Your comment only proves you're one of the naive masses.
the intelligentsia goes with what is unique and true.
-
-
-
Neutral
ecotourusa1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
my comment seemed to disappear.
Reply
I will see if it pops up. if not, I will respond. and, oh, I forgot to mention that not only are McCain and Obama pro-amnesty (against our constitution) but, they are both members of the cfr.
not good. (do your homework...clue: you won't find info on MSM)
-
-
-
-
-
-
mgarnett25Comment removed: Spam
-
mgarnett25Comment removed: Spam
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.