Joe Wilson’s back. With proof, Obama did lie!

[Jarhead]

Stay away from Congress chief. For that matter..executive boards.

I seriously don't want this place starting to look like a country where they have fist fights in Congress.

I thought we were past that.

Speaking out is what it is all about Sallow.
No one is talking about fist fights.

I see nothing wrong for voicing your dissention.....I dont cre who does it.

I admired Cindy Sheehan, although I disagreed with her.
I admire the Tea party
I admired the war protesters of the 60's and the 2000's although I dont agree with them.
I admired King and all he accomplished as he spoke out.
I admire Sharpton...and disagree with much of what he says...but if he doesnt speak out, maybe no one will.....and sometimes someone has to.

Nope...nothing wrong with a politician or a citizen voicing their opinion...at any time they want.

There's a time and place for everything.

I have no problem with dissention. In fact..peaceful protests should be encouraged.

If there were no TV cameras...would that have made a difference?

How is it showingh any less respect when one side of the aisle applauds while the other sits there mute?
And the cheering AND the jeering....

Besides...admit it....our politicians are a bunch of whining children.....

 

[BDBoop]

As of late?
None.

I have lost respect for ALL politicians. They are partisan, childish, "job first, party second, country last" phonies.

One year after 9/11 there was a gathering held in Central Park. Turned out to be great, Meryl Steep hosted, Billy Joel and the Philharmonic did the music. Before the show, President Bush appeared on a screen to make a speech. There were a couple of quick boos in the crowd..and many people, myself included, told the assholes to shut up.

I may not have "respected" the man..but he was our President..and that in itself is worthy of some respect.

We live in a civil society.

I agree...

But we are referring to the Presidents responsibility to address congress.
That is not somehting he decides to do.
He is required to give an update on the SOTU to congress....and if he says something that is disingenuous or misleading, I would expect someone in congress to call him out on it.
We disagree on this..as we do on many things.....but please dont spin what I am saying...I am not saying we should have congress at each others throats.....I am saying congress and the president have the responsibility to keep each other in check for us, the American People.

He couldn't wait until the President was finished? He had to make an accusatory shout? What, does he have Tourette's? Or a short attention span? His behavior was unbecoming a gentleman. A second grade teacher would have rebuked him for such behavior in her classroom.

 

[Ame®icano]

absolutely not.
Americans should never turn away anyone in need while on our soil. It is not who we are.
I just believe the President should have presented it EXACTLY as you just did. Not outright lie.

Joe Wilson said called Barack Obama a "liar" when he said that funding from the Health Care package would not be used to provide abortions.

Obama wasn't lying about that. And it wasn't Joe's place to yell out liar even if he was lying. Bush lied about the Aluminium Tubing..in his SOTU. We know he was lying because the CIA told him NOT to say that.

Wilson should have been punted for that one..or at least severely disciplined.

Now you are the one lying. He said "you lie" when Obama was saying the health care wouldn't apply to illegals. Obama brought up abortion after that.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foOioaQf-c8]Obama Heckled by Rep. Joe Wilson, Who Says "You Lie!" as Obama Addresses Congress - YouTube[/ame]

I think it's important to notice and you can see it in the video that, Obama called out talk show hosts and politicians by saying "it is a lie plain and simple". All democrats jumped and applauded. I think that triggered Wilson to say "you lie", after that.

 

[Conservative]

He couldn't wait until the President was finished? He had to make an accusatory shout? What, does he have Tourette's? Or a short attention span? His behavior was unbecoming a gentleman. A second grade teacher would have rebuked him for such behavior in her classroom.

There is a time and place for everything. While I agree with Mr. Wilson, that was not the time, nor the place, to make his statement.

 

[Full-Auto]

Joe Wilson said called Barack Obama a "liar" when he said that funding from the Health Care package would not be used to provide abortions.

Obama wasn't lying about that. And it wasn't Joe's place to yell out liar even if he was lying. Bush lied about the Aluminium Tubing..in his SOTU. We know he was lying because the CIA told him NOT to say that.

Wilson should have been punted for that one..or at least severely disciplined.

Now you are the one lying. He said "you lie" when Obama was saying the health care wouldn't apply to illegals. Obama brought up abortion after that.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foOioaQf-c8]Obama Heckled by Rep. Joe Wilson, Who Says "You Lie!" as Obama Addresses Congress - YouTube[/ame]

I think it's important to notice and you can see it in the video that, Obama called out talk show hosts and politicians by saying "it is a lie plain and simple". All democrats jumped and applauded. I think that triggered Wilson to say "you lie", after that.

Obama was the one lying, plain and simple.

 

[Ernie S.]

He can be as uncompromising as he wants to...but not while the President of the United States is addressing congress. It's disrespectful. As someone who wore the uniform, you know that.

My respect is earned. This President has done nothing to deserve my respect.

Really now.

Which President has "earned" your respect?

In my life? well, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan GHW Bush and GW Bush.
Kennedy,Nixon, Carter and Bush lost most if not all of that respect as their administrations progressed.
I was considerably more aware of politics by 2008 and nothing I learned about obama during the campaign gave me any reason to respect him.
Everything he has done SINCE taking office has confirmed my assessment.

 

[Conservative]

I agree...

But we are referring to the Presidents responsibility to address congress.
That is not somehting he decides to do.
He is required to give an update on the SOTU to congress....and if he says something that is disingenuous or misleading, I would expect someone in congress to call him out on it.
We disagree on this..as we do on many things.....but please dont spin what I am saying...I am not saying we should have congress at each others throats.....I am saying congress and the president have the responsibility to keep each other in check for us, the American People.

Technically, there is nothing in the Constitution requiring an actual live address to Congress.

Article II, Section III states:

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient..

A simple written report was the norm at one time. The current State of the Union address is a side show, used by both sides, to push their particular agenda. It has had little to do with the actual 'state' of the union for some time.

 

[Jarhead]

I agree...

But we are referring to the Presidents responsibility to address congress.
That is not somehting he decides to do.
He is required to give an update on the SOTU to congress....and if he says something that is disingenuous or misleading, I would expect someone in congress to call him out on it.
We disagree on this..as we do on many things.....but please dont spin what I am saying...I am not saying we should have congress at each others throats.....I am saying congress and the president have the responsibility to keep each other in check for us, the American People.

Technically, there is nothing in the Constitution requiring an actual live address to Congress.

Article II, Section III states:

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient..

A simple written report was the norm at one time. The current State of the Union address is a side show, used by both sides, to push their particular agenda. It has had little to do with the actual 'state' of the union for some time.

thanks.

And you are correct. It has turned into a side show and one used to push an agenda...that is for sure.

 

[Conservative]

I agree...

But we are referring to the Presidents responsibility to address congress.
That is not somehting he decides to do.
He is required to give an update on the SOTU to congress....and if he says something that is disingenuous or misleading, I would expect someone in congress to call him out on it.
We disagree on this..as we do on many things.....but please dont spin what I am saying...I am not saying we should have congress at each others throats.....I am saying congress and the president have the responsibility to keep each other in check for us, the American People.

Technically, there is nothing in the Constitution requiring an actual live address to Congress.

Article II, Section III states:

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient..

A simple written report was the norm at one time. The current State of the Union address is a side show, used by both sides, to push their particular agenda. It has had little to do with the actual 'state' of the union for some time.

thanks.

And you are correct. It has turned into a side show and one used to push an agenda...that is for sure.

Personally, I'd like to see the State of the Union address practice stopped, in favor of the old 'here's a written report on the actual 'state' of the union.' You know... where we are financially, what is happening, etc.

 

[Sallow]

As of late?
None.

I have lost respect for ALL politicians. They are partisan, childish, "job first, party second, country last" phonies.

One year after 9/11 there was a gathering held in Central Park. Turned out to be great, Meryl Steep hosted, Billy Joel and the Philharmonic did the music. Before the show, President Bush appeared on a screen to make a speech. There were a couple of quick boos in the crowd..and many people, myself included, told the assholes to shut up.

I may not have "respected" the man..but he was our President..and that in itself is worthy of some respect.

We live in a civil society.

I agree...

But we are referring to the Presidents responsibility to address congress.
That is not somehting he decides to do.
He is required to give an update on the SOTU to congress....and if he says something that is disingenuous or misleading, I would expect someone in congress to call him out on it. We disagree on this..as we do on many things.....but please dont spin what I am saying...I am not saying we should have congress at each others throats.....I am saying congress and the president have the responsibility to keep each other in check for us, the American People.

Not in the halls of congress.

They have all sorts of forums available to them.

 

[Sallow]

My respect is earned. This President has done nothing to deserve my respect.

Really now.

Which President has "earned" your respect?

In my life? well, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan GHW Bush and GW Bush.
Kennedy,Nixon, Carter and Bush lost most if not all of that respect as their administrations progressed.
I was considerably more aware of politics by 2008 and nothing I learned about obama during the campaign gave me any reason to respect him.
Everything he has done SINCE taking office has confirmed my assessment.

Ronald Reagan committed treason, violated the Constitution and broke the law. George W. Bush violated the Constitution and broke the law.

Unless either one of them were charged with something..the man behind the office merits some respect when they are in power.

No matter how anyone "feels" about them. And if you are an elected official or work for the government in some capacity the onus on you is to display behavior worthy of your station.

 

[Jarhead]

One year after 9/11 there was a gathering held in Central Park. Turned out to be great, Meryl Steep hosted, Billy Joel and the Philharmonic did the music. Before the show, President Bush appeared on a screen to make a speech. There were a couple of quick boos in the crowd..and many people, myself included, told the assholes to shut up.

I may not have "respected" the man..but he was our President..and that in itself is worthy of some respect.

We live in a civil society.

I agree...

But we are referring to the Presidents responsibility to address congress.
That is not somehting he decides to do.
He is required to give an update on the SOTU to congress....and if he says something that is disingenuous or misleading, I would expect someone in congress to call him out on it. We disagree on this..as we do on many things.....but please dont spin what I am saying...I am not saying we should have congress at each others throats.....I am saying congress and the president have the responsibility to keep each other in check for us, the American People.

Not in the halls of congress.

They have all sorts of forums available to them.

I disagree.
The halls of congress are used for OPEN debate.

 

[Jarhead]

Really now.

Which President has "earned" your respect?

In my life? well, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan GHW Bush and GW Bush.
Kennedy,Nixon, Carter and Bush lost most if not all of that respect as their administrations progressed.
I was considerably more aware of politics by 2008 and nothing I learned about obama during the campaign gave me any reason to respect him.
Everything he has done SINCE taking office has confirmed my assessment.

Ronald Reagan committed treason, violated the Constitution and broke the law. George W. Bush violated the Constitution and broke the law.

Unless either one of them were charged with something..the man behind the office merits some respect when they are in power.

No matter how anyone "feels" about them. And if you are an elected official or work for the government in some capacity the onus on you is to display behavior worthy of your station.

I respect the authority of the position of President of the United States.
One does not need to respect the peron who holds that position if one deems such respect is not warranted.

To clarify...

I do not knock President Obama as the President.
Instead, I consider him one not worthy of the position...for reasons I can support...although I am aware others feel differently.

 

[BDBoop]

In my life? well, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan GHW Bush and GW Bush.
Kennedy,Nixon, Carter and Bush lost most if not all of that respect as their administrations progressed.
I was considerably more aware of politics by 2008 and nothing I learned about obama during the campaign gave me any reason to respect him.
Everything he has done SINCE taking office has confirmed my assessment.

Ronald Reagan committed treason, violated the Constitution and broke the law. George W. Bush violated the Constitution and broke the law.

Unless either one of them were charged with something..the man behind the office merits some respect when they are in power.

No matter how anyone "feels" about them. And if you are an elected official or work for the government in some capacity the onus on you is to display behavior worthy of your station.

I respect the authority of the position of President of the United States.
One does not need to respect the peron who holds that position if one deems such respect is not warranted.

To clarify...

I do not knock President Obama as the President.
Instead, I consider him one not worthy of the position...for reasons I can support...although I am aware others feel differently.

Given that criteria, NOBODY is worthy of the office (what with them all being human, n'all).

 

[Sallow]

I agree...

But we are referring to the Presidents responsibility to address congress.
That is not somehting he decides to do.
He is required to give an update on the SOTU to congress....and if he says something that is disingenuous or misleading, I would expect someone in congress to call him out on it. We disagree on this..as we do on many things.....but please dont spin what I am saying...I am not saying we should have congress at each others throats.....I am saying congress and the president have the responsibility to keep each other in check for us, the American People.

Not in the halls of congress.

They have all sorts of forums available to them.

I disagree.
The halls of congress are used for OPEN debate.

There are rules to everything. You may want to check up on Congressional rules.

 

[BDBoop]

I was going to say! Common rules of debate do not include interrupting your adversary by shouting at them. Just general civility, really.

 

[Sallow]

In my life? well, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan GHW Bush and GW Bush.
Kennedy,Nixon, Carter and Bush lost most if not all of that respect as their administrations progressed.
I was considerably more aware of politics by 2008 and nothing I learned about obama during the campaign gave me any reason to respect him.
Everything he has done SINCE taking office has confirmed my assessment.

Ronald Reagan committed treason, violated the Constitution and broke the law. George W. Bush violated the Constitution and broke the law.

Unless either one of them were charged with something..the man behind the office merits some respect when they are in power.

No matter how anyone "feels" about them. And if you are an elected official or work for the government in some capacity the onus on you is to display behavior worthy of your station.

I respect the authority of the position of President of the United States.
One does not need to respect the peron who holds that position if one deems such respect is not warranted.

To clarify...

I do not knock President Obama as the President.
Instead, I consider him one not worthy of the position...for reasons I can support...although I am aware others feel differently.

Of course he's worthy of the position. He campaigned and won the election.

Constitutionally that makes him "worthy".

He won.

And this whole idea of nullifying the election is really shameful.

"Wanting him to fail?", I seriously couldn't believe that immediately after the election, some of our elected officials were publicly announcing that.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHV4nDS501Y]Sen. Jim DeMint calls defeating Obama like Waterloo - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Jarhead]

Ronald Reagan committed treason, violated the Constitution and broke the law. George W. Bush violated the Constitution and broke the law.

Unless either one of them were charged with something..the man behind the office merits some respect when they are in power.

No matter how anyone "feels" about them. And if you are an elected official or work for the government in some capacity the onus on you is to display behavior worthy of your station.

I respect the authority of the position of President of the United States.
One does not need to respect the peron who holds that position if one deems such respect is not warranted.

To clarify...

I do not knock President Obama as the President.
Instead, I consider him one not worthy of the position...for reasons I can support...although I am aware others feel differently.

Given that criteria, NOBODY is worthy of the office (what with them all being human, n'all).

In the eyes of everyone collectively as one? You are correct.

But you see, whereas I do not see him as worthy of the position, many others do see him as worthy. Mine is just an individual opinion based on my personal expectations of the President.

Consider what we see on this board. People have different sentiments as it pertains to the importance of different situations.

For example.....I believe it was poor judgment for the president to unveil his new bus just two weeks after telling seniors that they may not get their SS checks if we dont give him permission to borrow more money.

A big deal? No. Poor judgement? Absolutely.

I believe he exervised pooor judgement when he said the police acted stupidly. Was he correct? Quite possibly. Was it good judgement to articulate his sentiments to the nation before the facts were in? Absolutely.

Mr. Obama has earned the right to go to Marthas Vineyard this week. He can afford it and he has earned it. But as the President, is it good judgement when he knows there are so many people that will lose their homes during that 2 week span without any light at the end of the tunnel? Yes, I see it as poor judgement.

Last year, we had a tough year...I didnt lay off, but bonuses were small and raises were CoL and nothing more. I am comfortable, and had my money saved up for a vacation. (FYI...I made less money last year than one of my employees)... Did I take one? No...as I saw it as poor judgement to takle a vacation while my employees are struggling to make ends meet.

 

[Ame®icano]

I was going to say! Common rules of debate do not include interrupting your adversary by shouting at them. Just general civility, really.

Common rule of the debate is also to bring facts to the table instead of lies...

 

[Jarhead]

Ronald Reagan committed treason, violated the Constitution and broke the law. George W. Bush violated the Constitution and broke the law.

Unless either one of them were charged with something..the man behind the office merits some respect when they are in power.

No matter how anyone "feels" about them. And if you are an elected official or work for the government in some capacity the onus on you is to display behavior worthy of your station.

I respect the authority of the position of President of the United States.
One does not need to respect the peron who holds that position if one deems such respect is not warranted.

To clarify...

I do not knock President Obama as the President.
Instead, I consider him one not worthy of the position...for reasons I can support...although I am aware others feel differently.

Of course he's worthy of the position. He campaigned and won the election.

Constitutionally that makes him "worthy".

He won.

And this whole idea of nullifying the election is really shameful.

"Wanting him to fail?", I seriously couldn't believe that immediately after the election, some of our elected officials were publicly announcing that.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHV4nDS501Y]Sen. Jim DeMint calls defeating Obama like Waterloo - YouTube[/ame]

Winning the election does not make him worthy of the position. It makes him the winner of the election and the RIGHT to the position.

From there on in he needs to prove he is worthy of the position......at least that is how I see things.

One may earn something, but if they squander it, then they were not worthy of it.