The Many Lies Of The Left

[gekaap]

The claim that the position of czar is a media invention and that Obama's pay czar is not Kenneth Feinberg.

Fact is the term "czar" was used before Obama was elected by Bush no less.

You just don't like the fact that Czar may have a negative image.

I think you have me confused with someone else.

 

[mudwhistle]

The claim that the position of czar is a media invention and that Obama's pay czar is not Kenneth Feinberg.

Fact is the term "czar" was used before Obama was elected by Bush no less.

You just don't like the fact that Czar may have a negative image.

I think you have me confused with someone else.

Oh, that's right.

You're the one claiming Jesus was missing from Modern Christianity.

Somebody else chimed in and basically your premise was blown out of the water.

You also agreed that Jesus was an anti-Capitalist and attempted to project common flaws that the left have onto me.

Yes, I remember you know. It's so hard to tell one Obamamanic from the other sometimes.

Well, fact is you lied about what I did, I showed you how you lied, and you reverted to ridicule tactics rather then rationality.

So basically the original premise that Jesus is missing from Christianity is bunk and I proved it.

 

[mudwhistle]

Obama gave $900 million to Gaza aid.

Of course they lied that none of it went to Hamas, but who is currently in charge of the government in Gaza? Hamas Seizes Control of Gaza

Also, Obama is helping Palestinians with ties to Hamas relocate in the US. $20.3 dollars went to it.

Submitted by davidfarrar on Wed, 05/13/2009 - 22:21



H.R. 1388: The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act.
This wasn't mentioned on the news, but it is all over the blogisphere. By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in "migration assistance" to Palestinian refugees and "conflict victims" in Gaza. The "presidential determination", which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States, was signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on February 4.

$20.3 goes to relocate Gaza citizens to US

Yes, only the loons of the farright blogosphere know anything, right?

now, how about a little honesty

U.S. aid to the Palestinians has fluctuated considerably over the past five years, largely due to Hamas’s changing role within the Palestinian Authority (PA). After Hamas led the PA government for over a year, its forcible takeover of the Gaza Strip in June 2007 led to the creation of a non- Hamas government in the West Bank—resulting in different models of governance for the two Palestinian territories. Since then, the United States has dramatically boosted aid levels to bolster the PA in the West Bank and President Mahmoud Abbas vis-à-vis Hamas. The United States has appropriated or reprogrammed nearly $2 billion since 2007 in support of PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad’s security, governance, development, and reform programs, including $650 million for direct budgetary assistance to the PA and nearly $400 million (toward training, non-lethal equipment, facilities, strategic planning, and administration) for strengthening and reforming PA security forces and criminal justice systems in the West Bank. The remainder is for programs administered by the U.S. Agency for International Development and implemented by non- governmental organizations in humanitarian assistance, economic development, democratic reform, improving water access and other infrastructure, health care, education, and vocational
training

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS22967.pdf

now, i don't know about you, but i seem to recall baby bush being president in 2007.

facts are your friend.

Yes, yes, facts. FYI, Obama doubled the amount of aid to the PA currently under the control of Hamas, a known terrorist organization. In 07 the amount of aid was $69 million. In 08 it went to $418 million, and Obama's first year he pledged $980 million. Quite a jump.

Here's an excerpt from your own link:

In March 2009, the Obama Administration pledged $900 million in U.S. assistance to the
Palestinians to address both humanitarian needs in the wake of the Gaza conflict and reform and
development priorities in the West Bank. The pledge was exceeded by appropriations made in the
Omnibus Appropriation Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-8) and the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009
(P.L. 111-32). P.L. 111-117 provides $500 million in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians for
FY2010. The Administration has requested $550 million for FY2011 (see Table 1 for details).
The United States and others within the international community have publicized their efforts to
facilitate post-conflict recovery in Gaza. However, Hamas’s control of Gaza presents a
conundrum. No one, including Israel and the PA, has figured out how to assist Gaza’s population
without bolstering Hamas, and thus aside from humanitarian assistance, the issue has been largely
ignored, despite aspirational pledges otherwise.3 Many observers believe that either Hamas’s
positions on the Quartet principles or its control over Gaza would have to change before the
United States might consider dedicating substantial resources toward the reconstruction of
buildings and infrastructure in Gaza, with the exception of U.N. facilities and other special cases
such as international schools.
In May 2010, Israeli special forces raided one of six ships trying to break the Israeli blockade of
Gaza (the Turkish-flagged MV Mavi Marmara, on which 9 Turkish citizens, including a Turkish-
American, were killed). Reports say that some of the ship’s passengers provoked or actively
resisted the Israeli special forces troops who boarded the ship in international waters. The
incident led to renewed international outcries seeking the lifting or significant loosening of the
Israeli/Egyptian closure regime (Egypt controls Gaza’s southernmost border crossing at Rafah).4
The naval blockade and a general closure of land crossings have been enforced since 2007,
ostensibly to prevent weapons, money, and dual use items from reaching Hamas, but possibly
also to squeeze the Gazan people economically in hopes that they would turn against Hamas.

A close friend of Obama participated in this flotilla. I mentioned who earlier. She's married to William Ayers, friend and benefactor of Barrack H. Obama. I doubt you read it but just in case, here it is again.

Dated June 15, 2010

Led by US President Barack Obama, the West has cast its lot with Hamas. It is not surprising that Obama is siding with Hamas. His close associates are leading members of the pro-Hamas Free Gaza outfit. Obama’s friends, former Weather Underground terrorists Bernadine Dohrn and William Ayres participated in a Free Gaza trip to Egypt in January. Their aim was to force the Egyptians to allow them into Gaza with 1,300 fellow Hamas supporters. Their mission was led by Code Pink leader and Obama fund-raiser Jodie Evans. Another leading member of Free Gaza is James Abourezk, a former US senator from South Dakota.

All of these people have open lines of communication not only to the Obama White House, but to Obama himself.

Obama has made his sympathy for the Muslim Brotherhood clear several times since entering office. The Muslim Brotherhood’s progeny include Hamas, al-Qaida and the Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Last June, Obama infuriated the Egyptian government when he insisted on inviting leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood to attend his speech at Al Azhar University in Cairo. His administration’s decision to deport Hamas deserter and Israeli counterterror operative Mosab Hassan Yousef to the Palestinian Authority where he will be killed is the latest sign of its support for radical Islam.

Given Obama’s attitude toward jihadists and the radical leftists who support them, his decision to support Hamas against Israel makes sense. What is alarming however is how leaders of the free world are now all siding with Hamas. That support has become ever more apparent since the Mossad’s alleged killing of Hamas terror master Mahmoud al-Mabhouh at his hotel in Dubai in January. http://watchmannewsletter.typepad.com/news/2010/06/our-world-hamas-rises-in-the-west.html[/quote]

 

[edthecynic]

If you say so. But you just got your ass handed to you, refused to admit you made a mistake, and now you're resorting to ridicule instead of discussing the issues. I'd say you got owned.

Okay, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt for the moment, and ask you do the same for me. Perhaps I misunderstood your many posts. So please tell me again.....Name what "mistake" have I made?

The claim that the position of czar is a media invention and that Obama's pay czar is not Kenneth Feinberg.

Fact is the term "czar" was used before Obama was elected by Bush no less.

You just don't like the fact that Czar may have a negative image.

There is no position of "Czar!" It's a term made up by the media.

The media made up the term "Czar" not only before Obama was born, as I have already pointed out, but also before BushII was born!!!!!!
Sheesh, you pretend to be dense!!!

 

[gekaap]

Yes, I remember you know. It's so hard to tell one Obamamanic from the other sometimes.

Funny you should say that, because I don't support Obama. I would have rather had Mitt Romney as President.

Well, fact is you lied about what I did, I showed you how you lied, and you reverted to ridicule tactics rather then rationality.

How did I lie about what you did? You said yourself that you took things off on a tangent. Were you lying about that?

So basically the original premise that Jesus is missing from Christianity is bunk and I proved it.

You didn't prove anything. You disagreed, but provided nothing in support thereof.

 

[mudwhistle]

Yes, I remember you know. It's so hard to tell one Obamamanic from the other sometimes.

Funny you should say that, because I don't support Obama. I would have rather had Mitt Romney as President.

Well, fact is you lied about what I did, I showed you how you lied, and you reverted to ridicule tactics rather then rationality.

How did I lie about what you did? You said yourself that you took things off on a tangent. Were you lying about that?

So basically the original premise that Jesus is missing from Christianity is bunk and I proved it.

You didn't prove anything. You disagreed, but provided nothing in support thereof.

Fucken liar. I didn't say anything of the kind.

Fact is your premise was totally insane. It's easy to prove. Not my fault you can't recognize the truth when it's presented to you.

 

[mudwhistle]

Okay, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt for the moment, and ask you do the same for me. Perhaps I misunderstood your many posts. So please tell me again.....Name what "mistake" have I made?

The claim that the position of czar is a media invention and that Obama's pay czar is not Kenneth Feinberg.

Fact is the term "czar" was used before Obama was elected by Bush no less.

You just don't like the fact that Czar may have a negative image.

There is no position of "Czar!" It's a term made up by the media.

The media made up the term "Czar" not only before Obama was born, as I have already pointed out, but also before BushII was born!!!!!!
Sheesh, you pretend to be dense!!!

I suppose the Czar in Russia was made up by the media too?

Oh, by the way, Pay Czar was an accepted term for Kenneth Feinberg in this briefing aboard Air Force One:

What does the President think about the pay czar's decision to limit the pay for the outgoing Bank of America CEO? Does he think that was the right way to handle that?

MR. BURTON: Well, as you know, the President put in place Kenneth Feinberg to take a look at some of the compensation bonuses that executives at companies and firms receiving extraordinary assistance are scheduled to get. The results of his analysis will be out I think on October 30th. I don't want to get ahead of that. But I've seen those same reports and it appears that Kenneth Feinberg has, indeed, been a pretty forceful advocate for the American taxpayer. But we'll have to wait for the results, just like everybody else.

Q And then in general on the issue of banks that have received federal support in the past now having huge bonuses for their executives and making large profits, how does the President feel about that? And what does he think they should be doing with those profits and with those bonus pools?

MR. BURTON: Well, as you note, you're talking about firms that are -- no longer have TARP money and have paid back the federal government, just as the President prescribed when he announced the program with Secretary Geithner early in the administration. But I don't want to get into any specific firms or institutions and what they're doing.

Gaggle by Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton aboard Air Force One en route Houston, Texas, 10/16/09 | The White House

So it seems to be the term everyone is using for him.

Keep arguing asshole. It only makes you look foolish.

 

[edthecynic]

The claim that the position of czar is a media invention and that Obama's pay czar is not Kenneth Feinberg.

Fact is the term "czar" was used before Obama was elected by Bush no less.

You just don't like the fact that Czar may have a negative image.

There is no position of "Czar!" It's a term made up by the media.

The media made up the term "Czar" not only before Obama was born, as I have already pointed out, but also before BushII was born!!!!!!
Sheesh, you pretend to be dense!!!

I suppose the Czar in Russia was made up by the media too?

Oh, by the way, Pay Czar was an accepted term for Kenneth Feinberg in this briefing aboard Air Force One:

[Q]What does the President think about the pay czar's decision to limit the pay for the outgoing Bank of America CEO? Does he think that was the right way to handle that?

So it seems to be the term everyone is using for him.

Keep arguing asshole. It only makes you look foolish.

In typical dishonest CON$ervative fashion, you left out the Q in your "quote." The Q, of course, means it was a question from the MEDIA!!!!!!

Keep arguing asshole. It only makes you look foolish.

 

[gekaap]

Fucken liar. I didn't say anything of the kind.

Fact is your premise was totally insane. It's easy to prove. Not my fault you can't recognize the truth when it's presented to you.

Okay, let's take this one at a time.....Did you or did you not bring up the subject of Jesus?

 

[mudwhistle]

There is no position of "Czar!" It's a term made up by the media.

The media made up the term "Czar" not only before Obama was born, as I have already pointed out, but also before BushII was born!!!!!!
Sheesh, you pretend to be dense!!!

I suppose the Czar in Russia was made up by the media too?

Oh, by the way, Pay Czar was an accepted term for Kenneth Feinberg in this briefing aboard Air Force One:

[Q]What does the President think about the pay czar's decision to limit the pay for the outgoing Bank of America CEO? Does he think that was the right way to handle that?

So it seems to be the term everyone is using for him.

Keep arguing asshole. It only makes you look foolish.

In typical dishonest CON$ervative fashion, you left out the Q in your "quote." The Q, of course, means it was a question from the MEDIA!!!!!!

Keep arguing asshole. It only makes you look foolish.

You're grasping at straws. There was no leaving out of anything. Anyone can see it was a question simply because it ended with a "Question Mark" you pathetic fool!!!! The questioner asked the Obama Adm official a question about the pay czar and he knew to talk about Kenneth Feinberg. Any more stupid questions????????????

You know, I seriously think you're delusional.

If the Obama Administration acknowledges and recognizes the use of the term "PAY CZAR" then they own it. It doesn't matter where it originated from. It is an accepted term by everyone except a stupid fuck such as yourself.

It's similar to arguing over the use of the term "Stimulus Bill". That's not the official name of the bill of course but everyone with half a brain knows what you're talking about. So if you refuse to call it a stimulus bill that's your fucken problem. Everyone else is calling it a stimulus bill and everyone else is calling Kenneth Feinberg the pay czar. So go ahead and act like you don't know what is being talked about, you only look stupid.

 

[mudwhistle]

Fucken liar. I didn't say anything of the kind.

Fact is your premise was totally insane. It's easy to prove. Not my fault you can't recognize the truth when it's presented to you.

Okay, let's take this one at a time.....Did you or did you not bring up the subject of Jesus?

Does it matter?

We're talking about lies from the left which covers a whole gambit of subjects. One lie is that Jesus is said to have been Liberal which actually is dishonest. How can someone that Conservative be a Liberal? As if kindness and charity is owned by Liberals alone.

Then you went out and made a statement you couldn't prove that Jesus was missing from modern Christianity. I think you have removed Jesus from Christianity in your mind because you don't like such a nice guy with what many believe are liberal traits being associated with what you consider to be a large group of assholes. Fact is you just don't understand what goes on in Churches these days because you probably haven't been in one recently. If you did you were ether attending a service in Trinity United or were asleep. Now if you attended Obama's former church in Chicago I'm sure you'd get that impression, because most of the time they were talking about slavery or lynchings and how screwed up White America is.

 

[midcan5]

Jeez, it is hard to know what constitutes a lie? If we leave 'left' and 'right' and other labels out, what do we get actually. Find the lie in this repost of history? LOL.

Brief history of the last century and beginning of present.

Coolidge / Hoover - Banks collapse, economy collapses
Great Depression begins - Hoover ineffective
FDR rescues the nation from Great Depression, creates regulatory structure
FDR creates the greatest single asset for all Americans: Social Security
FDR masterfully fought WWII along with Churchill and help from Stalin
Truman ends the savagery of the war with Japan with the ultimate savagery
Truman extends New Deal and Civil rights
Eisenhower ignores war mongering republicans, extends civil rights
Warren court hands down ruling on public school segregation
Eisenhower continues progressivism, Vietnam involvement continues from Truman
Eisenhower commits to helping South Vietnam
'Cold War' clouds the mind of America creating contradictory values
WWII end brings prosperity due to GI bill, home growth, and durable goods growth
Kennedy buys into ridiculous Bay of Pigs plan from Eisenhower administration
America's youth gain power prestige and purchasing power
Kennedy reduces taxes for wealthy
Battle for space with Russia consumes America's resources
Blacks decide waiting any longer for equality is too long
LBJ foolishly listens to war cries concerning domino effect and tragically involves US in Nam
LBJ advances civil rights and extended welfare so all Americans can have a little of the pie
Anti war demonstrations change attitudes and hurt LBJ social achievements
Nixon has secret plan for ending Vietnam but paranoid personality ruins administration
Nixon opens up trade to China and negotiates with Mother Russia
Fear of loss causes Watergate
Carter inherits stagflation economy from Nixon / Ford
Carter supports Afghanistan against Russian occupation, seeds are set for growth of insurgency terrorism
Carter reduces taxes for wealthy and increases military spending
Iranian militants take Americans captive
Oil embargo hurts Carter but efforts at energy policy are forgotten as Reagan wins
Reagan starts the destruction of the middle class in part by making government a problem
Reagan starts destruction of regulatory agencies that eventually lead to the Great Recession of today
Reagan reduces taxes for wealthy, corporations and think tanks gain persuasive powers
Bush Sr experiences effect of Reagan economic policies, economy collapses, real estate boom crash, S&L scandal, bailouts to rescue nation again after republican policy
GH Bush losses as Republican policy fails once again
Clinton raises taxes, economy recovers aided by millennium and Internet bubble
Clinton buys into financial nonsense, supporting NAFTA, regulatory and welfare reform
Armies of money and power go after Clinton on Healthcare proposal, spending publicly and privately millions
Bush-Gore election goes to Bush as SCOTUS has moved from lawyers to ideologue
Bush proves inept in all ways, but 911 attack creates fear and more war cries
Bush proves himself an incompetent leader who creates massive debt and death
Clinton surplus is squandered on tax relief primarily for the wealthy
'War on Terror' clouds the mind of America creating contradictory values
Bush invades Iraq based on trumped up nonsense about WMDs and fear
Economy collapses under Bush and bailouts are once again required after a republican administration
Obama wins election for 'change' due to the failure of Bush and the republicans
Armies of money and power again mount offensive attacking the American values of justice and fairness represented by Obama
Obama passes Healthcare policy, keeps promises on wars
Once again the economy is moving in the right direction but the armies of money and power are greater today and propaganda and revisionist history have gained large footholds in the minds of the uneducated....

And so it goes....republicans fail democrats try....it would seem monkeys and humans never learn....

 

[edthecynic]

I suppose the Czar in Russia was made up by the media too?

Oh, by the way, Pay Czar was an accepted term for Kenneth Feinberg in this briefing aboard Air Force One:

So it seems to be the term everyone is using for him.

Keep arguing asshole. It only makes you look foolish.

In typical dishonest CON$ervative fashion, you left out the Q in your "quote." The Q, of course, means it was a question from the MEDIA!!!!!!

Keep arguing asshole. It only makes you look foolish.

You're grasping at straws. There was no leaving out of anything. Anyone can see it was a question simply because it ended with a "Question Mark" you pathetic fool!!!! The questioner asked the Obama Adm official a question about the pay czar and he knew to talk about Kenneth Feinberg. Any more stupid questions????????????

You know, I seriously think you're delusional.

If the Obama Administration acknowledges and recognizes the use of the term "PAY CZAR" then they own it. It doesn't matter where it originated from. It is an accepted term by everyone except a stupid fuck such as yourself.

It's similar to arguing over the use of the term "Stimulus Bill". That's not the official name of the bill of course but everyone with half a brain knows what you're talking about. So if you refuse to call it a stimulus bill that's your fucken problem. Everyone else is calling it a stimulus bill and everyone else is calling Kenneth Feinberg the pay czar. So go ahead and act like you don't know what is being talked about, you only look stupid.

BULLSHIT!!!!
Just because the administration understands a MEDIA term does not mean it is not a term created by the media as you rationalize!!!!!
It is a term created by the media and used by the media in your example. The administration did not use the term and they don't own it. The term was created by the media long before Obama was born. There is no position of "Czar," never has been and never will be.
Grow up, child!!!

 

[edthecynic]

Fucken liar. I didn't say anything of the kind.

Fact is your premise was totally insane. It's easy to prove. Not my fault you can't recognize the truth when it's presented to you.

Okay, let's take this one at a time.....Did you or did you not bring up the subject of Jesus?

Does it matter?

We're talking about lies from the left which covers a whole gambit of subjects. One lie is that Jesus is said to have been Liberal which actually is dishonest. How can someone that Conservative be a Liberal?

Acts 4:32 Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common.

4:34 There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold.

4:35 They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.
(New Revised Standard version)

 

[gekaap]

Does it matter?

Yes it does. Because it was a tangent. If you brought it up, then you took things off on a tangent.

 

[mudwhistle]

Jeez, it is hard to know what constitutes a lie? If we leave 'left' and 'right' and other labels out, what do we get actually. Find the lie in this repost of history? LOL.

Brief history of the last century and beginning of present.

Coolidge / Hoover - Banks collapse, economy collapses
Great Depression begins - Hoover ineffective
FDR rescues the nation from Great Depression, creates regulatory structure
FDR creates the greatest single asset for all Americans: Social Security
FDR masterfully fought WWII along with Churchill and help from Stalin
Truman ends the savagery of the war with Japan with the ultimate savagery
Truman extends New Deal and Civil rights
Eisenhower ignores war mongering republicans, extends civil rights
Warren court hands down ruling on public school segregation
Eisenhower continues progressivism, Vietnam involvement continues from Truman
Eisenhower commits to helping South Vietnam
'Cold War' clouds the mind of America creating contradictory values
WWII end brings prosperity due to GI bill, home growth, and durable goods growth
Kennedy buys into ridiculous Bay of Pigs plan from Eisenhower administration
America's youth gain power prestige and purchasing power
Kennedy reduces taxes for wealthy
Battle for space with Russia consumes America's resources
Blacks decide waiting any longer for equality is too long
LBJ foolishly listens to war cries concerning domino effect and tragically involves US in Nam
LBJ advances civil rights and extended welfare so all Americans can have a little of the pie
Anti war demonstrations change attitudes and hurt LBJ social achievements
Nixon has secret plan for ending Vietnam but paranoid personality ruins administration
Nixon opens up trade to China and negotiates with Mother Russia
Fear of loss causes Watergate
Carter inherits stagflation economy from Nixon / Ford
Carter supports Afghanistan against Russian occupation, seeds are set for growth of insurgency terrorism
Carter reduces taxes for wealthy and increases military spending
Iranian militants take Americans captive
Oil embargo hurts Carter but efforts at energy policy are forgotten as Reagan wins
Reagan starts the destruction of the middle class in part by making government a problem
Reagan starts destruction of regulatory agencies that eventually lead to the Great Recession of today
Reagan reduces taxes for wealthy, corporations and think tanks gain persuasive powers
Bush Sr experiences effect of Reagan economic policies, economy collapses, real estate boom crash, S&L scandal, bailouts to rescue nation again after republican policy
GH Bush losses as Republican policy fails once again
Clinton raises taxes, economy recovers aided by millennium and Internet bubble
Clinton buys into financial nonsense, supporting NAFTA, regulatory and welfare reform
Armies of money and power go after Clinton on Healthcare proposal, spending publicly and privately millions
Bush-Gore election goes to Bush as SCOTUS has moved from lawyers to ideologue
Bush proves inept in all ways, but 911 attack creates fear and more war cries
Bush proves himself an incompetent leader who creates massive debt and death
Clinton surplus is squandered on tax relief primarily for the wealthy
'War on Terror' clouds the mind of America creating contradictory values
Bush invades Iraq based on trumped up nonsense about WMDs and fear
Economy collapses under Bush and bailouts are once again required after a republican administration
Obama wins election for 'change' due to the failure of Bush and the republicans
Armies of money and power again mount offensive attacking the American values of justice and fairness represented by Obama
Obama passes Healthcare policy, keeps promises on wars
Once again the economy is moving in the right direction but the armies of money and power are greater today and propaganda and revisionist history have gained large footholds in the minds of the uneducated....

And so it goes....republicans fail democrats try....it would seem monkeys and humans never learn....

I wonder how many lies were in your post?

Here's a new one:

Charles Ozgood of the CBS radio Ozgood File implied this morning that Mubarak was responsibe for the assassination of Anwar Sadat

 

[drsmith1072]

oh good, you learn how to post longwinded nothings....

BTW dipshit pulling out of Iraq, obama is using Bush's exit plan.
You stupid fuckhole.

So, how do you explain the fact that his long-term plan was to keep 50,000 troops in Iraq?

Doesn't sound like a pull-out to me...

All he did, knot-head, was rename it. It's nolonger a combat mission. Course our troops are still on the ground in Iraq, but that's just a technicality.

So he reverts the mission to Afghanistan, where every army in history has had their asses handed to them.

Genius.

Seems that you know what he actually said and choose to ignore the FACTS so you can claim he lied when it's obvious that you are the one having issues with honesty.

His argument was to pull COMBAT troops out of iraq while leaving behind some troops to continue training the iraqi military. That was always what he had said he would do and he followed through with it. He didn't lie but you sure are.

 

[drsmith1072]

So sad when Cons post after hitting the sauce.

Funny thing is, I didn't have to get drunk to type this up, nor did I have to make a word of it up.

Maybe you folks need to, but I don't.

Nope you didn't HAVE to get drunk or make it up but apparently that didn't stop you from doing so. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Good question.

Of course, the response will be "Well the right is lying about...." as if that is some justification.

You're right, one side lying does not justify the other side doing so. But, I would question whether this stuff constitutes lying, or if it's just failure to follow through on promises whether through distraction or incompetence or some combination thereof (the bit about his religion is unfounded speculation with no evidence). Not the same thing.

I also would wonder what is the alternative that the right has to offer. If it is no better in this regard, then shouldn't the "people in glass houses" rule apply?

Also, since the right seems to so detest Obama's promised actions, why should the right complain if he fails to follow through?

A lie is a lie. The difference is does the liar know he's lying when he does so.

Many won't cut Bush the same slack.

Everyone in Congress, the CIA, and every intelligence agency in the world said Saddam was building WMDs. They said that he had them. But when we finally got there most of them were gone. What was left was documents that proved he was building them and intended to start up a nuke program, and that it was much worse then we thought. We found a few old remnants of Saddam's stockpiles. A few shells containing binary agents were found.

So, Bush believed they were there and we didn't get there in time to find them. So Bush is a liar, but Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, many others told us some huge whoppers, yet they get the slack nobody wants to give Bush.

Just doesn't seem fair to me.

Yeah and that is why there was unified world support for the invasion and everyone in the world was behind us. That's sarcasm BTW.
LOL You start a thread about lying and then proceed to LIE.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Funny you should say that, because I don't support Obama. I would have rather had Mitt Romney as President.

Perhaps not now, but did you vote for him one or more times?

MOST people are embarrassed by voting for Obama now that he has been in office and fucking up for two years, but some 30% of the voting public HAD to have voted for him. (Considering the multiple votes by democrats, this adds up quick! And the dead overwhelmingly supported the Chicago candidate!)