|
|
Post by Mink on Oct 20, 2008 21:07:54 GMT -5
This is the classic case of two wrongs don't make a right.
Obviously, Alaska's law on child abuse needs amending. I think this guy should have paid a price. Palin, on the other hand, as governor, should have just done her job and not used her position to abuse the laws or intimidate others. Why you insist it was a biased investigation, is beyond me when the preponderance of the council was Republican. You should know the media by now. Had she not run for the VP position, she could have gone on unknown to the rest of the country, so it really was her gamble.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Oct 20, 2008 23:22:55 GMT -5
if the left put half as much effort into investigating obama as they do palin........
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Oct 20, 2008 23:57:47 GMT -5
They already did, 4 years ago and that is why he has garnered the votes that he has and then some.
|
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Oct 21, 2008 0:17:49 GMT -5
They already did, 4 years ago and that is why he has garnered the votes that he has and then some. Then, please explain why Obama refuses to answer questions about his association with Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko. Please explain how an explaination that "our kids went to school together" can be valid when Ayers' kids are grown and Obama's kids are pre-teen. Please explain how Obama could keep directing federal tax subsidies to Tony Rezko for affordable housing projects in Chicago when Rezko had a history of slapping up a project, then walking away right before it collapsed. Please explain how Obama can sit in the Trinity Church for 20 years, listening to Rev. Jeremiah Wright spewing racist hatred, and not be called to task for disavowing the preachings he listened to. If Obama is intelligent enough to get a law degree from Harvard, is he intelligent enough to see that the "black liberation theology" preached by Rev. Wright is a combination of Marx and Malcom X? No, Obama has not been vetted, and the Democrat Party will live to regret that choice. Unfortunately, it will affect the rest of us, too. |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Oct 21, 2008 10:20:59 GMT -5
They already did, 4 years ago and that is why he has garnered the votes that he has and then some. Then, please explain why Obama refuses to answer questions about his association with Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko. Please explain how an explaination that "our kids went to school together" can be valid when Ayers' kids are grown and Obama's kids are pre-teen. Please explain how Obama could keep directing federal tax subsidies to Tony Rezko for affordable housing projects in Chicago when Rezko had a history of slapping up a project, then walking away right before it collapsed. Please explain how Obama can sit in the Trinity Church for 20 years, listening to Rev. Jeremiah Wright spewing racist hatred, and not be called to task for disavowing the preachings he listened to. If Obama is intelligent enough to get a law degree from Harvard, is he intelligent enough to see that the "black liberation theology" preached by Rev. Wright is a combination of Marx and Malcom X? No, Obama has not been vetted, and the Democrat Party will live to regret that choice. Unfortunately, it will affect the rest of us, too. Obama has been vetted for the past 20 months. He does not refuse to answer questions about Rezko and Ayers. He has answered them multiple times. His statement was "our kids went to the same school," and this is wholly possible. Ayers and Rezko are not important figures in Obama's life or career. Spending so much time on them is obvious desperation on the part of the Right. They are hoping to avoid talking about the issues. Like a senior McCain advisor said, "if we keep talking about the economy we will lose this election." |
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Oct 21, 2008 12:07:49 GMT -5
Obama has been vetted for the past 20 months. He does not refuse to answer questions about Rezko and Ayers. He has answered them multiple times. Where? And to what level of detail? "Yeah, I knew him," is not detail. Someone alert Bill Clinton.... Saunterelle has come of with a new meaning of "is".  [/size][/quote] Well Rezko was Obama's fundraiser in chief back in the day and did a dirty deal for the land Barack's house sits on. I'd say that makes him pretty important in Barack's career. There is a possibility being investigated now that Bill Ayers ghostwrote much of Obama's first book. And we know that Ayers handpicked Barack to serve as chair on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge... Barack's only "executive experience". They worked side by side in that arena for five years. I'd say that makes him more than a passing moment in Barack's life. But we really don't know, in great detail, because Barack has steadfastly stonewalled and refused to answer questions in detail on these and other associations. If you can locate hard answers from Barack on these subjects I'd be very interested to see them because so far they are eluding a whole lot of people who are spending a whole lot of time looking for them. Desperation... maybe a bit. But that does not decrease the legitimacy of the questions. If we have learned anything over the past four election cycles we've learned that character should count for something and that a man of questionable character or judgement has no business holding the office of the presidency. If Barack wants to put all questions of his character and judgement to rest then he would answer those questions instead of avoiding them with quips like "his kids and my kids went to the same school". |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Oct 21, 2008 12:28:29 GMT -5
Here: "The suggestion that Ayers was a political adviser to Obama or someone who shaped his political views is patently false," said Ben LaBolt, a campaign spokesman. Mr. LaBolt said the men first met in 1995 through the education project, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and have encountered each other occasionally in public life or in the neighborhood. He said they have not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Mr. Obama began serving in the United States Senate in January 2005 and last met more than a year ago when they bumped into each other on the street in Hyde Park. From: www.snopes.com/politics/obama/ayers.asp |
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Oct 21, 2008 12:42:17 GMT -5
Mmmmmmmm Snopes. Again, they publicly support Obama.
And I asked for specific, detailed answers. Should I have made it clearer that I'm looking for specific answers from Barack himself? You've provided a summation sourced from a campaign spokesman... hardly credible, wouldn't you think? After all, why should we expect something other than spin from a campaign worker?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Oct 21, 2008 21:09:34 GMT -5
Obama has answered the questions and has addressed how he will move the country forward. Mccain is stuck on mud-slinging as is his VP choice, who is still knee deep in her own dukey.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Oct 21, 2008 21:16:54 GMT -5
They already did, 4 years ago and that is why he has garnered the votes that he has and then some. come on now. had you even heard of barry obama 4 years ago? pulheeeeze. |
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Oct 21, 2008 22:00:29 GMT -5
He spoke at the Democratic Convention 4 years ago at Kerry's request. It was his words that had meaning for the country. It was then, that he said something like, "We are not the Red States of America or the Blue Staes of American, but the United States of America!"
It was answered with cheers then and now.
But enough of Obama, what about that Palin and her real cool press conference on SNL?
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Oct 21, 2008 22:04:34 GMT -5
wow! did yo get a tingle up your leg then? and now? "we are not red and blue states, we are america!" wow! so prophetic. sounds like a high school senior wrote that preparing for the class presidential debate. so 4 years ago the DNC trots out a completely unkown state senator from illinois and puts him on stage at the big convention. gee, that doesn't sound like they were prepping him for anything at all. all hail the chosen one! |
|
