online dating service
REGISTER | MAIL/PROFILE | HELP | NOW ONLINE | SEARCH | RATING | FORUMS | SUCCESS STORIES

 

     
Posted In Forum:
Home   login   MyForums  
Show ALL Forums  
 
 Author Thread: election '08
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 101 (view)
 
election '08
Posted: 10/14/2008 8:42:09 AM

NyMan74:
POSTED ON A NOTHER WEBSITE BY:
eagleeyes7
Fort Myers, FL
age: 60

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/cin_secretworldof mccain.html
http:///www.usvetdsp.com/aug08/mccain_unfit.html
http://therealmccain.com/
http://www.wtvi.com/wesley/powmia/powpaper.html
http://www.nationalalliance.org
http://www.pow-miafamilies.org/
http://www.votevets.org
http://VetVoice.com- *shows all McCains votes AGAINST Veterans.

I do my research, and BEFORE any decision to vote, not trusting the media...

What a bunch of absolute drivel! So, you don't trust the media, but you trust a bunch of whacko websites, huh?

Hey, you read it on the internet, so it MUST be true, I know!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 8 (view)
 
Was yesterday a turning point in this election?
Posted: 9/12/2008 1:01:44 PM

Obama was smart not to do the Town halls....... McCain is very good. He has too much appeal for a centrist voter.

Hmm, Obama repeatedly refusing to do the Town Halls sounds a lot like Palin limiting her interviews this last week - the very thing the libs here on POF have been whining about so much. Guess it makes a difference WHO isn't meeting with the public as much as they'd like.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 2128 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/12/2008 7:32:30 AM

Kiss_My_Karma:
She "didn't blink" when McCain asked her to be on the ticket, yet a week prior she wanted a job description.

Its amazing the lengths some of you will go to in lame attempts to criticize Palin. I've asked for a job description for every job I've ever interviewed for in my career. If you don't, you're just damn dumb! And its clear that Palin is not that!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 169 (view)
 
Significant lead in polls for McCain
Posted: 9/11/2008 1:53:18 PM

HalftimeDad:
But at some point it is going to come back to issues, and on that the Democratic ticket has a clear advantage.

Overall, there should be a 3 - 5 % point Democratic edge come election day, but a significant edge in electoral votes.

Wow, someone ought to tell all those news networks and polling organizations they're wasting their time. Some guy on the internet, "HalftimeDad" on POF has it all figured out 2 months in advance, they're just wasting their time!

If you repeat a lie often enough, many will believe it.

What about if you repeat an opinion with ZERO basis in fact behind it often enough?
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 150 (view)
 
Significant lead in polls for McCain
Posted: 9/11/2008 9:13:47 AM

We are still really far out, with just over a month to go to the debates. So much can happen to either side between now and then, that I don't think EITHER side should start putting on party hats at this moment.

I completely agree with you on that, although I wonder if you truly "see a longer term strength in Obama's numbers over time" or if you just WISH you were seeing that. I'm not sure any objective evidence right now would show that.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 132 (view)
 
Heeeeeere's Johnny!
Posted: 9/11/2008 9:05:41 AM

Bluesman2008:
About as far as being a smart aleck got McCain in the Navy. I'm sure his admiral father and grandfather are rolling in their graves. He was a jerkoff in the military and a womanizer and he still is. Some things never change.

Yeah, some things never change - including, it would appear, your ignorance about McCain.

A "jerkoff" in the military? Guess you aren't aware of his continuing military career after being released.

McCain underwent treatment for his injuries, including months of grueling physical therapy, and attended the National War College at Fort McNair in Washington, D.C. during 1973–1974. Having been rehabilitated, by late 1974, McCain had his flight status reinstated, and in 1976 he became commanding officer of a training squadron stationed in Florida. He improved the unit's flight readiness and safety records, and won the squadron its first-ever Meritorious Unit Commendation.

McCain served as the Navy's liaison to the U.S. Senate beginning in 1977. In retrospect, he has said that this represented his "real entry into the world of politics and the beginning of my second career as a public servant." His key behind-the-scenes role gained congressional financing for a new supercarrier against the wishes of the Carter administration.

McCain retired from the Navy on April 1, 1981 as a captain. His 17 military awards and decorations include the Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Distinguished Flying Cross, Bronze Star and Navy Commendation Medal, for actions before, during, and after his time as a POW.

Of course, after retiring from the Navy in 1981, he immediately ran for Congress and was elected in 1982, and has served ever since.

As for a womanizer, yes he stands up and admits and takes responsibility for having an affair in the late 70's. He's now been married to Cindy for 28 years, and I don't believe he's ever been accused, nor have there been even whispers of any affairs during that 28 year time span.

Sorry Bluesman, but calling him a military jerkoff and a womanizer just reflects your gross ignorance on the topic, based on the cold hard FACTS.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 4 (view)
 
Will Palin's interview change things? Will she campaign alone? Is it now Obama/Palin?
Posted: 9/10/2008 8:48:02 PM

I did not even try to watch her speech.

Wow, you've sure had quite a bit to say negatively about her, in that you're now admitting you didn't even bother to watch her speech.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Government officials handling billions of dollars in oil royalties
Posted: 9/10/2008 1:40:48 PM
Comments? Gee, obviously highly improper, likely to the point of criminal felonies.

But doesn't belong in the politics forum. I don't see anything tying those rogue officials to either party, and it seems that its being investigated and action taken. It belongs in "News/Current Events", not Politics, I'd say.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 2064 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/10/2008 12:45:41 PM

So, come on, Dallas. If you have something, then bring it.

Ah, c'mon Vulf, that's just too easy. First of all, note that on the "lipstick" thread that I weighed in with a comment that its much ado about nothing, and not an attack on Palin. But you want an example of moveon.org's lies - this time with Obama joining the lies? Sure, easy - try this one for starters:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH6_SDxQD2s

Note that factcheck.org is said to say that moveon.org and Obama's claims that McCain wants 100 years of war in Iraq are a "serious distortion, to the point of rank falsehood."

So let me know, Vulf, if you think factcheck.org is biased on this - since they're recognized as one of the most non-partisan sites out there.

That ONE took about 30 seconds to find with google - and its the tip of the iceberg.

I remind them that Republicans slander their opponents with lies and innuendo; we don't.

Utter bullsh!t Vulf, as proven by the above example. Falsehoods are all too rampant in these campaigns, and are every bit as present from the Dems as they are from the Republicans.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 93 (view)
 
Obama's Lipstick on a Pig
Posted: 9/10/2008 12:26:06 PM

turns out the lipstick on the pig comment had absolutely nothing to do with Palin, he wasn't even talking about her. I swear people don't even listen or read the comments they just copy and paste the chain e-mails into the freaking forum.

True - on BOTH sides of the aisle!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 89 (view)
 
Obama's Lipstick on a Pig
Posted: 9/10/2008 12:07:35 PM

The woman is a conniving, pathological liar that is severely challenged in the ethics department.

Wow, speaking of neanderthal! Oh, and totally OFF TOPIC also - the topic for this thread was Obama's statement, not Palin.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 85 (view)
 
Obama's Lipstick on a Pig
Posted: 9/10/2008 11:49:30 AM
I'd say Gape's neanderthal comment was WAY more than a little harsh. It was enough that it deserves a suspension from the forums, and I'll go on record as saying I hope that's exactly what he gets.

As for the "lipstick on a pig" remark, I agree that all the uproar is much ado about nothing, and I'm a McCain supporter. But as has been pointed out, this isn't a tactic owned by the Republicans, both sides are and unfortunately will probably continue to use things like that - like the attacks on Palin for her daughter. Would be great to see it stop from both sides, but I'll wager that's not going to happen.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 25 (view)
 
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/10/2008 11:36:05 AM
Bluesman, I guess when faced with evidence of your own hypocrisy, your only real option is to ignore it, because you're sure not going to admit or address it.

Bluesman2008:
We have to change election funding immediately. It MUST be publicly funded so that everyone is on a level playing field. When it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to run a presidential race, we will ALWAYS get the best (or worst as the case may be) government money can buy.


DallasFlier:
Wow, so you're supporting the guy who lied, broke his public promise about using the public funding and following the rules, so he could take the big money that you're complaining about? To quote you directly, "sounds like the epitome of ignorance to me."
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 2056 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/10/2008 9:15:19 AM
That ad is from a "527", an independent organization that McCain isn't a part of and has no control over. If that's your evidence, then we're going to start bringing up the plethora of lie-filled "smear" ads from moveon.org. You REALLY don't want to go there, trust me!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 29 (view)
 
Ron Paul Set for Major Annoucement 9.10.2008
Posted: 9/10/2008 9:10:07 AM

Paul rejects McCain's plea for endorsement

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: September 10, 2008
Filed at 10:51 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Ron Paul says he rejected John McCain's appeal for his endorsement.

At a news conference Wednesday, Paul said he received a surprise call from McCain's campaign on Tuesday asking for his endorsement. Paul turned them down.

Paul said: ''The idea was that he would do less harm than the other candidate.''

Paul won no primaries in the Republican nomination contest but developed a strong following on the Internet. He appeared at a news conference with third-party candidates, including Ralph Nader and former Georgia Democratic Rep. Cynthia McKinney. Paul suggested backing the non-major party candidates.

THAT'S the "Major Announcement"???
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 18 (view)
 
John McCain, Big Oil, and renewable energy.
Posted: 9/10/2008 7:56:44 AM

MG:
I trust that all these clear up any confusion about the citations first mentioned.

Yes, thanks. According to your sources, green energy was a footnote on that bill, accounting for "a fraction of 1%" of the cost of the bill. Sounds to me like there could have been lots of other reasons for not voting for that bill, having NOTHING to do with green energy.

But since you started this thread to tar & feather McCain for missing that vote, care to elaborate on why Obama missed THIS one a few weeks later, which I believe McCain WAS there to vote on? This one obviously has a LOT more focus on green energy than the one you cited, and if you're going to slam McCain for not voting on that one, then please comment on Obama's failure to show up for this one:

On the Cloture Motion H.R. 3221
Moving the United States toward greater energy independence and security, developing innovative new technologies, reducing carbon emissions, creating green jobs, protecting consumers, increasing clean renewable energy production, and modernizing our energy infrastructure, and to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax incentives for the production of renewable energy and energy conservation.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 10 (view)
 
Is my profile causing allergic reactions???
Posted: 9/9/2008 9:54:46 PM
Everyone, note that "Emperor" has been o POF for a year and a half, and in that period of time has managed to get on ****one**** person's favorite list!

Simply ignore him, its obvious everyone else is!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 42 (view)
 
The GOP's Cheerful Viciousness
Posted: 9/9/2008 9:33:55 PM

You're just too funny. When McCain lies, it's always a mistake but anyone else? It's a lie.

What about when Obama lies? Lets see, McCain was talking about something Palin did, and got the details wrong. I'm sure that if McCain had been the one selling the jet, he would have gotten the details right.

So, here's Obama, unable to get it right about his OWN dealings - from the Huffington Post that all you liberals love to quote:


Responding to an Israeli reporter's question Wednesday on his commitment to protect the Jewish state, Barack Obama pointed to a bill "we passed" in the U.S. Senate Banking Committee that tightens sanctions and authorizes divestment from Iran. "My committee," he called it.

Except that he isn't a member of the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs.

"Just this past week, we passed out of the out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee - which is my committee - a bill to call for divestment from Iran as way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don't obtain a nuclear weapon," Obama said at a press conference in Sderot, Israel.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/23/obama-makes-a-gaffe-says_n_114568.html

So, Obama didn't know whether the banking committee was HIS committee or not? Or was it an outright lie? Can't have it both ways, can you? Sounds like a definite LIE to me! But you know, when your resume is SO light, you try to embellish it with such LIES, I guess.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 28 (view)
 
The GOP's Cheerful Viciousness
Posted: 9/9/2008 8:52:39 PM

how I would LOVE to put together ads for the Obama campaign!! I'd have Obama up my 20 points in less than a week with my ads.

Ah, reading the forums here can sometimes be SO entertaining!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 12 (view)
 
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/9/2008 8:21:48 PM

One word: Obama. He also wants to get lobbyists OUT of washington. We MUST do that. This government was SUPPOSED to be by the people and for the people and NOT by the corporations for the corporations. We're in debt up to our eyeballs because lobbyist have more power than the people do simply because corporations have all the money. The people have to put a stop to that cronyism once and for all or nothing will change. We have to change election funding immediately. It MUST be publicly funded so that everyone is on a level playing field. When it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to run a presidential race, we will ALWAYS get the best (or worst as the case may be) government money can buy.

Wow, so you're supporting the guy who lied, broke his promise about using the public funding and following the rules, so he could take the big money that you're complaining about? To quote you directly, "sounds like the epitome of ignorance to me."
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 12 (view)
 
The GOP's Cheerful Viciousness
Posted: 9/9/2008 8:16:24 PM

Or the eBay bullshit--yeah, I know--she DID put it on eBay, blah blah blah. The truth is, she didn't sell it on eBay--not a big deal, in light of other far more serious things going on in the world--but you have to ask yourself: Why lie about something so easy to disprove? If she lies about freaking eBay, then what about the really BIG stuff?

Damnit, it sure gets tiring with all the baseless, FALSE crap being thrown around here by the likes of you! For the record, Palin NEVER said she SOLD the jet on eBay, she said she PUT the jet on eBay. She DID put the jet on eBay, three different times, as a matter of fact. NO, it didn't sell there, and yes, McCain made an honest mistake and said "sold" rather than "put" or "listed", but Palin has NEVER, EVER said that the jet was SOLD on eBay.

So, either quit LYING about her, or come up with proof for your statement (which you can't do, since its not true!)
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 43 (view)
 
Who has the right temperament to be a great leader?
Posted: 9/9/2008 5:52:25 PM

welldonemedrare1:
I am a Vietnam POW and I can tell you...it does not qualify you for Anything! And John McCain has Never Led Anything and is nasty un-disciplined Dude! I am 67.

Right on Brother! And I am a Vietnam POW, age 64!

Six posts in a row, and you can't remember your age from one post to the next? Doesn't give the rest of your comments just a whole lot of credibility as to leadership temperment!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 12 (view)
 
John McCain, Big Oil, and renewable energy.
Posted: 9/9/2008 2:21:57 PM
MG - reading again through that extra info you provided - yes, I think that's a vote that McCain obviously missed, and it fell one vote short of passing. But I see NOTHING there in that additional info, or on Obama's site as mentioned earlier, that says that bill has anything to do with energy or oil. So I guess I'd say it doesn't fit into an argument about McCain not being supportive and voting in favor of renewable/green energy initiatives.

That may well be the part that the Huffington Post got wrong. :wink:
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 11 (view)
 
John McCain, Big Oil, and renewable energy.
Posted: 9/9/2008 2:14:33 PM

MG:
Based on the fact you said Obama wasn't there to vote (he was) , I think you may have got the wrong bill.

Let's see what other information we can dig up, and see if someone's going to eat some humble pie here.....and who that person may in fact be.

59-40 .........and one vote changed (after voting) to return it to 58-41

Does that satisfy your needs ?

Well, as for humble pie, I admitted I didn't know which was correct, but just noted that no bill was listed in February as having a 59-40 vote according to Obama's site.

Here's the description of the one I "guessed" might be it - read the description and you can see the reason for my "guess":

On the Cloture Motion H.R. 3221
Moving the United States toward greater energy independence and security, developing innovative new technologies, reducing carbon emissions, creating green jobs, protecting consumers, increasing clean renewable energy production, and modernizing our energy infrastructure, and to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax incentives for the production of renewable energy and energy conservation.

Sure sounds like what we were looking for, huh? But again, that one was voted down 48-46 with Obama not voting, according to his website.

Revising the vote from the earlier stated 59-40 to 58-41 per your new info, there is one bill on Obama's site with that vote in February, and it's described as follows (with Obama voting Yea):

On the Cloture Motion S.Amdt. 3983 to H.R. 5140 (Recovery Rebates and Economic Stimulus for the American People Act of 2008)
Of a perfecting nature.

"Recovery Rebates and Economic Stimulus" sure doesn't sound like the right topic, but maybe. *shrug*
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 8 (view)
 
John McCain, Big Oil, and renewable energy.
Posted: 9/9/2008 11:19:57 AM
MG - I guess you don't have an answer to the discrepancies I found in the info you posted from the Huffington Post to make McCain look bad, so you're just going to totally ignore what I posted about Obama's own website contradicting the Huffington Post info?

Interestingly though, Obama's own Senatorial website says that bill (voted on 2/28) was actually defeated 48-46, with a 60 vote majority required. Oh, by the way, Obama was ALSO absent on that one, according to his own website. According to Obama's website, there were NO votes for cloture in February on any bill about anything, where the vote was 59-40-1.

http://obama.senate.gov/votes/index.cfm?start=161

So, who ya gonna believe, that paragon of journalism the Huffington Post that you guys love to quote so much, or Obama's own website? Because, its pretty clear, ONE of them is lying!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 28 (view)
 
Is Obama going too easy on his opponents in an effort to avoid negative campaigning.
Posted: 9/8/2008 4:35:27 PM

Look her up, she's got a pretty compelling bio, maybe even better than your would-be VP.

Well, not unless you're impressed with the strategy of marrying and divorcing an ultra-rich guy, adopting his name post-divorce to trade on his fame even though she used her maiden (Greek) name primarily during the marriage, and then using all his millions she walked away from in the divorce to pour into an extreme left-wing online blog that's now often quoted as a "news source" by wild-eyed liberals.

She met oil millionaire Michael Huffington, a family friend of the Bushes at a 1985 party hosted by Ann Getty in San Francisco. The couple were married in 1986 at a wedding paid for by Ann Getty, who had declared that she needed to find Arianna a husband. They moved to Washington, D.C., when he was appointed to serve as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Negotiations Policy. They later established residency in Santa Barbara, California, in order for him to run in 1992 as a Republican for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, which he won by a significant margin.

The couple divorced in 1997. The financial terms of their divorce agreement remain undisclosed, but Huffington gained most of her wealth from her husband. Arianna Huffington chose to retain her former husband's surname, although she had been known as Arianna Stassinopoulos Huffington during the period of her marriage.

Yeah, wow, what a compelling bio!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 34 (view)
 
The band Heart and other bands complaining about where their music is played!
Posted: 9/8/2008 3:05:26 PM
^^^^^^

One of the best laughs of the day - and true!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 24 (view)
 
Is Obama going too easy on his opponents in an effort to avoid negative campaigning.
Posted: 9/8/2008 2:31:27 PM

Meanwhile, (covered, as usual, only by the huffington post)

Did it ever occur to you that the only reason this stuff is "covered, as usual, only by the huffington post" is because its total crap, that no REAL news organization would touch with a 10 foot pole?

"I read it on the internet, so it MUST be true!!!"
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 16 (view)
 
Is Obama going too easy on his opponents in an effort to avoid negative campaigning.
Posted: 9/8/2008 1:24:00 PM

As for the poor judgment, they have found no more and really less complicity in Obama's poor judgment with Antonin Rezko. It's a moot point really but as they say "What's good for the goose is good for the gander". If your campaign point is poor judgment of your opponent, then be prepared to answer why your poor judgment in the past is no longer a part of what you are. Sounds fair to me.

itechman42, I totally agree. You haven't seen me mention Antonin Rezko here and you won't. Along with the cost of someone's wife's dress, a teenage boyfriend's blog, or so much of the other crap that passes for "enlightened political discourse" by way too many here.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 23 (view)
 
The band Heart and other bands complaining about where their music is played!
Posted: 9/8/2008 1:09:58 PM

Well, actually I was wrong in my post above...
In fact they DO have the right to "say how it's being used" and whether or not they agree or disagree with the way it's being used... as per the Constitution of the United States of America.
However, they don't have the right to control how it's being used once the license is given.

Yep! And that's why their "cease and desist" letter they claim to have sent to the RNC is laughable. "The McCain campaign respects intellectual-property rights,” Brian Rogers, a campaign spokesman said. “Accordingly, prior to using ‘Barracuda’ at any events, we paid for and obtained all necessary licenses.

As fly said, if they're not happy with the terms of the license that they previously granted ASCAP, they better go back and try to renegotiate that license, rather than sending silly "cease and desist" letters to those who are fully complying with the license terms. I'm sure it was done by them as just a publicity stunt, any good lawyer would have told them the cease and desist demand was meaningless.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 14 (view)
 
Is Obama going too easy on his opponents in an effort to avoid negative campaigning.
Posted: 9/8/2008 12:55:13 PM

Um, he IS one of the Keating Five.

Yes, one of the two who were exonerated, a fact you and the others who keep bringing that up ever so "conveniently" forget to mention.

Cranston (DEMOCRAT): severely reprimanded

The Senate Ethics Committee ruled that Cranston had acted improperly by interfering with the investigation by the FHLBB.[16] He had received more than a million dollars from Keating, had done more arm-twisting than the other Senators on Keating's behalf, and was the only Senator officially rebuked by the Senate in this matter.

Cranston was given the harshest penalty of all five Senators.

Riegle and DeConcini (both DEMOCRATS): criticized for acting improperly

The Senate Ethics Committee ruled that Riegle and DeConcini had acted improperly by interfering with the investigation by the FHLBB.

Glenn (DEMOCRAT) and McCain: cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor judgment

The Senate Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of Glenn in the scheme was minimal, and the charges against him were dropped. He was only criticized by the Committee for "poor judgment."

The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him. McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising "poor judgment" when he met with the federal regulators on Keating's behalf. The report also said that McCain's "actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the level of requiring institutional action against him....Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate." On his Keating Five experience, McCain has said: "The appearance of it was wrong. It's a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do."

Several accounts of the controversy contend that McCain was included in the investigation primarily so that there would be at least one Republican target. Glenn's inclusion in the investigation has been attributed to Republicans who were angered by the inclusion of McCain, as well as committee members who thought that dropping Glenn (and McCain) would make it look bad for the remaining three Democratic Senators. Democrat Robert S. Bennett, who was the special investigator during the scandal, suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee that it pursue charges against neither McCain nor Glenn, saying of McCain, "that there was no evidence against him."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 380 (view)
 
Sarah Palin's 17 year old pregnant daughter!
Posted: 9/8/2008 12:43:13 PM

marriage is a traditional arrangement between a man and a woman for the sole purpose for legitimizing the children ...there for purely religious orientated...there for why force the issue of whether two same sex people can marry ...civil unions which afford the same rights and protections as marriage..without stealing the name from the traditional marriage why is this not acceptable ...a marriage by another name ...and we can live together in harmony ..its like the Gay groups invading the church in San Fransisco ...what point did that serve other than to intimidate religion ...why cannot freedom from religion and freedom of religion co exist side by side

Totally agree, deerdog. The word "marriage" existed in the Bible thousands of years before there ever WAS a United States or any U.S. government. Therefore there's no excuse for trying to co-opt and redefine the meaning of that word. But, I *do* completely support civil unions for gays with the same *legal* rights and privileges that heterosexual married's have. And I'm a Christian and a Republican - so the libs here need to quit saying that all Christians and Republicans oppose gay equal rights. Most of them DO oppose them being able to "marry" though.

NObama '08!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 24 (view)
 
You Can Lead a Horse to Water ...
Posted: 9/8/2008 12:36:27 PM
Heck, since the Obamans have insisted on pasting Anne Kilkenny's letter here IN FULL several different times now, in violation of her expressly stated wishes, no reason why we shouldn't have the entire letter from Debbie Frost also, right?

Dueling letters from private citizens in Wasilla, both with the same knowledge and background of Palin, and therefore both with equal credibility! Somehow, I'm sure the libs here won't be nearly as happy with Debbie Frost's letter being cited!

Sarah Palin is the US's answer to Margaret Thatcher! Anyone who thinks she cannot handle the job or deal briskly and efficiently with ANY issue, including foreign governments ... well, they haven't met our Sarah.

As an Alaskan resident as well as a resident of Wasilla, AK, where Sarah Palin was at one time Mayor ... I can speak with confidence. Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska is exactly what she portrayed during her introduction this morning and exactly what our US Government needs. She is ethical to a fault (if there is such a thing), a refreshing change to the status-quo and as smart and determined a PERSON (gender really isn't an issue here as far as I'm concerned) as anyone could ask for at the head of government.

Sarah is no naive 'small town mayor' — she just *started out* there. BTW, as Mayor of Wasilla<, she brought this 'small town' through a lot of GOOD changes and left it at the end of her term having grown to the 4th largest CITY in Alaska — a lot of growth and a stronger economic base than ever before.

She has EXECTUTIVE experience *running a government* (something NONE of the other candidates can actually boast, even John McCain) as Governor of Alaska and got there by defeating the *incumbent* Republican Governor, who was definitely part of the 'old school' and who WAS very much in the pocket of the big oil companies. We in Alaska wanted change — and we got it in the person of Sarah Palin!

Sarah Palin is everything she looks to be and more. Her approval rating as Governor of Alaska has been as high as 95% and is currently leveled out consistently in the upper 80 percentile throughout the state (and in both parties) - the HIGHEST approval rating of ANY sitting Governor.

Sarah has been turning around corruption in the Legislature of Alaska - turning things on their ear for that matter; cutting spending in spite of the increased income the state is currently receiving due to the high oil prices - she has insisted on putting a huge amount of the 'windfall' into savings for the future rather than spending, spending, spending - and has insisted from the get-go on what she refers to as 'honest, ethical and transparent governing' - no more closed door meetings and dealings - the big oil companies thought she would be a pushover and have learned better to their chagrin.

She understands the 'real people' and the economic issues we all face (Alaskans along with the rest of the country) - she was one of 'us' not long ago. Rather than passing useless 'laws' or throwing money at pet projects, she (most recently) temporarily suspended the state gas tax (on gasoline at the pumps, fuel oil and natural gas for homes, etc.) and has ordered checks issued to ALL residents of Alaska this fall in an attempt to assist with the burden of high fuel costs for the upcoming winter. I could go on and on, but that's enough for now. She isn't doing these things to be popular – she is doing it because her constituents are HURTING financially and she can help.

She became Governor of Alaska by defeating the Incumbent Republican Governor and doing it *without* the money or the support of the Republican Party, which was amazing in itself - and she won by a landslide. The 'powers that be' at that time totally underestimated Sarah and learned better the hard way. She has done exactly what she claimed she was going to do and is just as popular today as the day she was elected - perhaps more so since even the Democrats up here seem to like her - she works well with both sides in the Legislature here.

Sarah 'belongs' to us (Alaskans) ... and although we are going to be terribly sorry to see her leave before she finishes the job she started here (two years ago) straightening out OUR State ... we understand she is needed for a bigger purpose and hopefully her Lt. Governor will be able to fill her shoes here and continue the job.

As for worrying about what would happen if McCain were to die or step down or whatever ... Up here in AK we've only been wondering how long we would be able to KEEP Sarah in Alaska and have seen her as our first woman President of the USA from the start. It's always been a matter of whether she would wait until the end of her TWO terms as Governor (no doubt at ALL that she would be re-elected if she ran for a second term at the end of her current term) ... or end up in Washington sooner. She could do the job TODAY.

Personally, I feel a lot better about McCain now that I know he has someone as savvy, as strong, as ethical and as steady as Sarah at his back. She will be an excellent Vice President ... and my guess is she will be our US Republican Presidential candidate in four years - AND by then the country will KNOW her – will love and respect her as we do here - and she'll win by as much of a landslide as she did here in Alaska. I only wonder if McCain has a clue what he is unleashing on the US of A. She is going to be a fresh wind, but also a strong wind.

Is that enough of an endorsement? If not, I'll add this ... Jerry and I have for many years felt the best 'vote' was to vote for the lesser of two 'evils' and hope they didn't do too much damage. Two years ago during our State Governor's race was the first time EVER that we actually asked for not just a little sign to put in our yard showing our support of our candidate (something we've never felt the desire to do at all before) - we asked for a full 4' x 8' 'SARAH PALIN FOR GOVERNOR!' sign and were proud to have it. She hasn't let us or Alaska down. She will do the same for the USA if given the opportunity.

Deb Frost in Alaska

Debbie & Jerry Frost
Wasilla, AK 99652
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 321 (view)
 
Palin Bombshell about to be exposed?
Posted: 9/8/2008 11:29:51 AM

halftimedad:
She did want to ban books. She wasn't able to. Full stop.

Yanno, despite what you MIGHT think about your own importance, declaring it so on your word alone with no supporting documentation is pretty damn funny! I'm sure you'll be able to convince those here who already don't like Palin though.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 372 (view)
 
Sarah Palin's 17 year old pregnant daughter!
Posted: 9/8/2008 11:01:17 AM

faith2565:
So, MG it is fair game. But, I still love you!

So now, in a political campaign, you honestly believe that a myspace site, of a 17 year old boy, who is the boyfriend of the daughter of one of the candidates is fair game?

Wow faith, you used to be calm, rational and intelligent with your arguments here. I sure hate to see that that's apparently changed.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 311 (view)
 
Palin Bombshell about to be exposed?
Posted: 9/8/2008 10:42:31 AM

The only reason some books weren't banned is because the librarian stood up to Palin.

You're giving Palin credit because she wasn't able to ban the books she wanted to?

Says who? Some internet poster from Canada called "halftimedad" reading liberal internet blogs?

Read carefully again montanan's (who LIVES up there in Alaska) fact list, and try to pay particular attention to Fact #3 this time:

Fact 1 again.....No Books Were Ever Banned.
Fact 2 again.....No Books Were Ever Removed.
Fact 3 again.....No Attempt To Ban Or Remove A Single Book Ever Took Place.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 3 (view)
 
John McCain, Big Oil, and renewable energy.
Posted: 9/8/2008 10:33:14 AM
MG, you posted:

In early February, the Senate version of the Stimulus package had provisions for roughly $5 billion in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and green jobs. That $5.7 billion package included:

* 1-year extension of the Production Tax Credit-$3 billion
* Solar, fuel cell, and micro turbine investment credits-$130 million
* Clean Renewable Energy Bonds-$400 million
* High-efficiency appliance credits-$323 million
* Energy efficiency credits for new homes-$61 million
* Energy efficiency credits for home retrofits-$1.5 billion
* Energy efficiency credits for commercial buildings-$153 million


When the vote for cloture came up on the Stimulus Package including this funding for green technologies: 59-40-1. Do I need to tell you who was the one Senator Missing in Action and Absent WithOut Leave?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/a-siegel/mccain-lied-or-was-confus_b_119385.html

And then added:

McCain didn't show up....and it wasn't passed.

Interestingly though, Obama's own Senatorial website says that bill (voted on 2/28) was actually defeated 48-46, with a 60 vote majority required. Oh, by the way, Obama was ALSO absent on that one, according to his own website. According to Obama's website, there were NO votes for cloture in February on any bill about anything, where the vote was 59-40-1.

http://obama.senate.gov/votes/index.cfm?start=161

So, who ya gonna believe, that paragon of journalism the Huffington Post that you guys love to quote so much, or Obama's own website? Because, its pretty clear, ONE of them is lying!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 301 (view)
 
Palin Bombshell about to be exposed?
Posted: 9/8/2008 6:49:22 AM

Bluesman2008:
MEDIA: "Uh, Governor Palin. You said that you sold that plane on eBay for a profit. That's not true is it? In fact Senator McCain repeated that during the convention. What do you have to say about that"?

PALIN: I hunt moose. Make no mistake about it".

Jesus.. I can see it all now.

No, Bluesman, you won't see it, because the media (with whom she now DOES have interviews scheduled) aren't dumb enough to ask something like that.

Its only the ignorant and uninformed here on POF that I've seen accusing her of lying about that, because she never said she SOLD the plane on eBay, she said she PUT the plane on eBay, which is factually 100% the truth. She DID list it on eBay, 3 times in fact. No, it didn't sell there and she had to finally sell it via an aircraft broker. She DID put or list the plane on eBay, and she DID sell the plane as she felt it was excessive.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 1982 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/7/2008 10:45:40 PM
Since Cindy has the money, if she wants another house, I'm sure she'll get it. Whether or not John is running for President certainly won't enter into the decision, as anyone with even half a brain could figure out.

Interesting that on all these threads, that all you Dems resort to attacks on things like Cindy's dress and jewelry, and other similarly ridiculously off-topic items. Must not have much to say about the topic of the thread, I guess?
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 1980 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/7/2008 10:27:12 PM

faith2565:
Laura Bush's outfit was in that price range, Cindy's was in the 300,000.00 price range. I love you, but that is the truth.

Faith, that is simply NOT the truth, and it would sure be nice if you quit claiming it is. If I was one of the other libs here, I'd be calling you a LIAR about now, because the claim that Cindy's dress or "outfit" was in the $300,000 price range is total BS. Investment-grade diamond jewelry isn't part of an "outfit" and that's what was cited with the six figure cost - NOT her dress, "outfit", or anything else.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 289 (view)
 
Palin Bombshell about to be exposed?
Posted: 9/7/2008 10:22:13 PM
OK Dems, time to "fish or cut bait" as it were. The OP posted this sensationalist topic about a "Palin Bombshell" and said:

From the people who brought us the Edwards story, apparently they are going to expose a similar story about Palin and her husband.

I heard rumors ranging from affair to being swingers. . . Perhaps we found her excape clause after all. . .

Not sure when the news is suppose to break, but anything this juicy should happen by Friday.

Faith keeps asking everyone to stay on topic - the topic is a "Palin Bombshell" to be released by Friday. OK, Friday has passed. Saturday has passed. Sunday has passed. Sounds to me like its time to put up or shut up on this sensationalist thread. exodus, faith, the rest of you, where's the "bombshell"??
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 287 (view)
 
Palin Bombshell about to be exposed?
Posted: 9/7/2008 10:17:57 PM

Obama has missed 231 of the last 398 votes in the Senate, dating back through July of last year.


McCain has missed 146 of the last 179 votes in the Senate, dating back through July of last year.

Charlemagne, obviously one of us is wrong. You came up with a total of 179 votes, I came up with a total of 398 votes, in the same period of time. Not sure who's right or wrong, as I couldn't make any sense out of the site you referenced - it seems to mix up votes from all sorts of different dates, rather than listing them all chronologically.

Also, there's the little matter that this term is Obama's ONLY term, and if he's basically not showing up and participating, that means he has almost NO experience in the Senate, unlike McCain who has served continuously since 1986.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 274 (view)
 
Palin Bombshell about to be exposed?
Posted: 9/7/2008 7:08:53 PM

I don't want some bottom of the class guy in the White House!

Then may we assume you didn't vote for Kerry in 2004, who's grades and position in his graduating class were both BELOW that of Bush's?
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 273 (view)
 
Palin Bombshell about to be exposed?
Posted: 9/7/2008 7:07:02 PM

Rhetorical nonsense. Please provide evidence that Obama has "squandered" his Senate seat.

Evidence you'd like This is most definitely NOT "rhetorical nonsense." Obama has missed 231 of the last 398 votes in the Senate, dating back through July of last year. That means his attendance record since last July is he's been absent 58% of the time. Now I don't know about you, but if I elect someone to "represent" me in the Senate, that's not the "representation" I'd expect. And I definitely think not even showing up half the time counts as "squandering" the seat.

Try showing up only 42% of the time for YOUR job and see how long you're employed.

Oh - evidence - you're going to have a tough time shooting down this source! Its Obama's own Senatorial website.

http://obama.senate.gov/votes/
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 213 (view)
 
Palin Bombshell about to be exposed?
Posted: 9/6/2008 10:26:31 PM
Faith, I'm disappointed, I had thought you were better and more intelligent than to buy into AND constantly repeat the unsubstantiated "internet rumors" about "Palin bombshells." I get "internet rumors" of "Obama bombshells" about to be exposed in my email too, but I'm not passing those along, nor am I getting on here and hyping them, with no substance behind them. Sorry to see you've slipped down into the mud with so many of the others here now.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 1921 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/6/2008 10:15:52 PM
psssttt Faith? What you heard on the radio wasn't true, its the same crap that exodus was parroting. That figure included some expensive diamond jewelry she was wearing, nothing at all to do with the dress. The dress cost $3000 - still not cheap, of course, but only about 1/100 of what the liberal radio stations you and exodus are listening to are apparently trying to claim.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 191 (view)
 
Palin Bombshell about to be exposed?
Posted: 9/6/2008 5:06:46 PM

I want a smart guy who has the temperament, intellect, and skill to be our next president. Barack Obama is that man! He certainly has shown his sound judgement by selecting Joe Biden for his running mate.

Sound judgment indeed! And Biden has exercised some pretty sound judgment of his own in the past.

Biden:

I think he (Obama) can be ready but right now, I don’t believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training.


I would be honored to run with or against John McCain, because I think the country would be better off.

Yep, listen to Biden about who's the most qualified to be President.
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 1899 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/6/2008 1:52:44 PM

How frigging dumb do you have to be to post obvious lies?????????????

You mean like Cindy McCain's dress costing $312,000, exodus??? Pretty damn frikkin' dumb, you're right!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 183 (view)
 
Palin Bombshell about to be exposed?
Posted: 9/6/2008 7:09:16 AM

exodusi1:
If you were more educated, then perhaps you would feel differently!

I mean seriously, YOU AREN'T EVEN SPELLING YOUR OWN CANDIDATE'S NAME RIGHT!!!!!

Please, don't EDUCATE MY children at all, I'll wait for a well educated Liberal that lives by the values they espouse.

dictionary.com . . . In case you don't understand any of the words in my post!

Hey, Mr. "multiple degrees, I'm more educated than you, don't you forget it, elitist" the word is "hypocrisy" not "hypocracy" as you've written at least a dozen times in this thread.

dictionary.com indeed! And hypocrisy indeed!
 DallasFlier
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 36 (view)
 
McCain's Speech at the Republican National Convention
Posted: 9/5/2008 5:50:06 PM
geeleebee, the jet is about as off-topic to "McCain's Speech" topic here as your fellow lib's ridiculous crack about Cindy's dress. And its just as false too. She never said she sold it on eBay, although she did try. To be exact:


During her speech at the Republican National Convention, VP nominee and Alaska governor Sarah Palin said that when she took office she first started cutting state spending by selling her predecessor's jet. Then Palin nailed a crowd-pleaser saying: "I put it on eBay." And it's true, she did. But eBay, then helmed by Palin's fellow RNC speaker Meg Whitman, couldn't handle the business. Palin's people listed the jet three times on the site, but no one would bid a minimum of $2.5 million. "The eBay thing didn't work out very well," a local paper wrote after the failures. Palin eventually sold the jet using a traditional aircraft broker, selling it for $2.1 million — $500,000 less than the state paid.

So she did most certainly NOT lie. She absolutely DID "put it on eBay", three times even.

http://valleywag.com/5045838/meg-whitmans-ebay-couldnt-actually-sell-sarah-palins-jet

Care to try to get back ON topic now, since you complained about OFF topic? Or have you guys all run out of whines about "McCain's Speech at the Republican National Convention"???
 
Show ALL Forums