PDA

View Full Version : Phony in Chief



Grapenut
10-09-2012, 04:58 AM
http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2012/10/09/phony_in_chief/page/full/

"The truth is one thing that never wears out".

Nut

eg8r
10-09-2012, 08:07 AM
The argument the left is using is that they are not talking about Obama's lies and short-comings. They want to focus on Mitt. Obama is good Mitt is bad.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-09-2012, 09:39 AM
See this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=av3q7-a-ayc)

From another new thread here.

Sowell using the Rove principle here, attack your opponent on one of your own candidate's biggest weakness, phoniness.

Romney was called out as a phony, and having no core beliefs or plans, by his own party's candidates.

You have a 5-year old example presented as to the president. Anything slightly more recent? You'd think they'd use something current?

As to Romney, he does his phoniness act at all times. That's who he is. Listen to his GOP explain that fact.

eg8r
10-09-2012, 10:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You have a 5-year old example presented as to the president. Anything slightly more recent?</div></div>All of a sudden a person's history cannot be used as a barometer of their character? When did that start? When we started mentioning Obama?

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-09-2012, 12:57 PM
A one-off example from long ago hardly is definitive. If that's his character, we should see examples of the same thing while he's in office, as we now approach a 4 year mark.

If there are such examples, harping on a 5 year old example without more current examples showing that pattern is a mistake.

Are there such examples? If so, why didn't they mention them? What are they, if they exist, according to you?

Absent any showing of this in the last four years, what kind of pattern does that show?

eg8r
10-09-2012, 01:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A one-off example from long ago hardly is definitive.</div></div>This is only a "one-off" example if you have kept your ears shut for the past 4 years. He lied about his ability to keep UE down, he lied about his ability to help the latinos, he lied about his ability to halve the debt. The list just goes on and on.

How about going a little further back and we talk about those poor people in La that Obama "fights" for. Yeah he loves them so much but then again he votes against them when it comes to money being sent to help them. The money that was supposed to go to Alaska to pay for the bridge to nowhere was brought up in a revised bill to be sent to Lousiana to rebuild bridges damaged from Katrina. Did Obama care about them, nope, he voted against that bill. Obama preferred sending $80 million to Alaska to build a bridge for 50 people. In the end that bill did not get approved. So it was revised again this time instead of sending the money where it was needed in Louisiana Obama voted to send that money to Alaska so they could use it however they wanted. Bridge to Nowhere (http://www.factcheck.org/2008/09/bridge-to-nowhere/)

Obama was building a track record of voting against the people of New Orleans and Lousiana and he tries to make it sound like only the Reps are against them.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-09-2012, 11:44 PM
LOL! Look at the margins those passed by. The strong majority of both Republicans and Democrats voted the same as Obama. It wasn't about funding a damaged bridge in LA vs. the bridge to nowhere in Alaska. It was about keeping the funding distribution from that bill that had been negotiated, and only by which the bill got passed. Coburn grandstanded to try to strip Alaska of that money, even though the earmark had been removed requiring it fund that bridge. What did the Senate think of that idea? 82-15, 3 not voting.

LA deserved and got funding in these transportation bills, and in many other ways. That was done in regular order, and significant repair funds provided in many different ways. Poaching what had been delicately negotiated as to another state's separate share was neither required nor a good precedent to be allowed.

eg8r
10-10-2012, 07:07 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL! Look at the margins those passed by. The strong majority of both Republicans and Democrats voted the same as Obama.</div></div>Obama voted against the people of Louisiana more than once. When he says Washington doesn't like them they were too dumb to recognize that he was from Washington and he was the one voting against them each time. He was bringing them his own message of how he felt about them. His votes are proof he never cared about them.

eg8r