RE: Presidential lies (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Lucylastic -> RE: Presidential lies (1/7/2012 6:01:03 PM)

no drama, just facts, where they are true.
shame you cant say the same




MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Presidential lies (1/7/2012 6:07:44 PM)

 
O'Failure lied. [8|]





Fellow -> RE: Presidential lies (1/7/2012 6:31:51 PM)

Conspiracy theorist and political activist David Icke proposes to create a legal protection against the situation where a candidate for high office promises all kind of things people want to hear with no intent to deliver to win the office. If you promise not to do something, such law would not allow to do it. Then,  "No more taxes" for example means no more taxes under your presidency.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNx642Tj9cc
Obama, of course, has very has long list of things (described in great length in documentaries "Obama Deception", "Lifting the Veil" and others). Some think, he has gone way too far, and he has difficulties to recover. Take for example the latest: At first he says publicly that he probably would not sign the National Defense Authorization Act as written because it allows detention of American citizens without due process. Then, it comes out, he was the one who asked his aides to put this provision into the act, and he told the senotors he would not sign it without American citizens indefinite detention provision. Then he signs it in private, last day of the year to attract minimum attention. Can it get worse than that?




tazzygirl -> RE: Presidential lies (1/7/2012 6:57:21 PM)

quote:

Then, it comes out, he was the one who asked his aides to put this provision into the act, and he told the senotors he would not sign it without American citizens indefinite detention provision.


Hmmm... I cant find that. Mind hooking me up with a source?




Lucylastic -> RE: Presidential lies (1/7/2012 6:59:21 PM)

yea it can when you imagine things




VideoAdminGamma -> RE: Presidential lies (1/7/2012 7:24:48 PM)

Fast Reply

I believe the topic was Presidential lies. Please stay on topic and not make the topic each other.

Thanks,
VideoAdminGamma




LizDeluxe -> RE: Presidential lies (1/7/2012 7:41:28 PM)

They all lie at one point or another. None of them has ever made it through even one term without a lie.
When they stand at a podium and wag their finger on camera and lie... those are the ones I remember most:

"I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."  Bill Clinton 1998

I guess it depends on what your definition of "not" is.   [8|]






DaddySatyr -> RE: Presidential lies (1/7/2012 9:27:41 PM)

Remember when President (Then, Candidate) Clinton said on On Jan. 19, 1992:

quote:

"I want to make it very clear that this middle-class tax cut, in my view, is central to any attempt we're going to make to have a short-term economic strategy."


then, on Jan. 14, 1993 at a press conference, he said:

quote:

"From New Hampshire forward, for reasons that absolutely mystified me, the press thought the most important issue in the race was the middle-class tax cut. I never did meet any voter who thought that."






Fellow -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 7:33:13 AM)

quote:

Hmmm... I cant find that. Mind hooking me up with a source?


Here is the description of the Act itself;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxWvz-6KWyY

And here is the proof Obama administration asked for the indefinite detention of citizens:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO23HoRv6Ms&feature=related




tazzygirl -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 8:03:58 AM)

Ah so if we are taking Carl Levin as your "proof" and you are accepting his word on this issue, then you must also accept the following...

The Senate on Thursday sent a defense policy bill to President Barack Obama, who has said he would reluctantly sign it after months of fighting over the handling of suspected terrorists, especially those who are U.S. citizens.
The vote was 86-13.
..........

“Those who say that we have written into law a new authority to detain American citizens until the end of hostilities are wrong. Neither the Senate bill nor the conference report establishes new authority to detain American citizens – or anybody else,” said Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich), one of the key negotiators on the issue, who at times expressed frustration with the administration and opponents of the provisions over what he called “misstatements” about what they contained.

........

In order to satisfy the administration and other opponents’ concerns, the final legislation states that nothing in it may be “construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.” The Supreme Court has said U.S. citizens can be held by the military as enemy combatants, but the law is unclear on whether that includes those captured inside the United States and the issue is hotly disputed.



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70527.html




Sanity -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 8:24:50 AM)


He signed it, its his. He owns it, whether he is man enough to accept responsibility or not.

At least he was smart enough to hide himself away at the time. Hes not a total moron...




SilverBoat -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 10:21:59 AM)

Well ...

If there was anything approaching honesty in political rhetoric, the language used by the rightwing wouldn't be that Obama/leftists "lied" and "failed" but that the glorious rightwing homeland political establishment "stalled" and "blocked" any and all changes to military operations, budget expenses, tax assessments, etc that they possibly could.

But that wouldn't play well in audio/video clips, and doesn't suit the various personalize-and-attack radical-politics methods that the rightwing adopted after seeing Alinsky's success. Watching the rightwing use those on each other is sort of entertaining, though.

...




lovmuffin -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 10:24:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

read my lips.........


That one was a solemn promise he broke among others. You could call it a lie if you think he never intended to keep it like
Fellow eluded to.




lovmuffin -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 10:26:57 AM)

I didn't inhale. 




tazzygirl -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 10:59:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


He signed it, its his. He owns it, whether he is man enough to accept responsibility or not.

At least he was smart enough to hide himself away at the time. Hes not a total moron...



no one denied he signed it.




Sanity -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 11:00:34 AM)


He just didnt inhale.

Didnt have sex with that bill... 




tazzygirl -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 11:04:05 AM)

Not my fault you cant read the bill. Sorta like you couldnt with the Health Care bills.




Lucylastic -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 11:17:47 AM)

SHe didnt inhale bill
the stain proves shes messy!




tazzygirl -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 12:14:12 PM)

A sloppy slut! The horror! I would be beaten for such lack of diligence!




Lucylastic -> RE: Presidential lies (1/8/2012 12:15:58 PM)

and so you SHOULD be:)
heeeee.
spit, ( Off the dress) swallow or gargle ....only three possible scenarios
LOL




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
5.078125E-02