Administration's true colors are showing.....
Posted By: nm on 2009-06-04
In Reply to: Immediate White House statement on Dr. Tiller - still no statement on - assassination of Army recruiter.
nm
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Showing your true colors?
You are one of the people on this forum who complain the loudest about democrats who voted for President Obama looking for handouts, and here you are looking for a handout. You have got a lot of nerve!
Showing your true colors?
You are one of the people on this forum who complain the loudest about democrats who voted for President Obama looking for handouts, and here you are looking for a handout. You have got a lot of nerve!
McClain showing his true colors
Does this current hissy fit McClain has thrown against New Yorks Times remind you of anyone - Cheney/Bush? McClain is infuriated with NYT for exposing his campaign manager as a beneficiary of the Fannie Mae scandal to a tune of $30,000 a month. He has declared "war" on the NYT and another reporting site. He is trying to clamp down on negative information being released about him. This is so DANGEROUS. Do not be deceived (unless you are a True Believer) about his protestations of unfairness in reporting. We need the press to report these things so we can make informed decisions. Free press, people.
This is his famous vindicative temperment at full force. Heed the warning. He is not even elected and he is trying to clamp down on the truth.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003853490
boy your colors are showing, you sound very nasty
is that how you treat your family and friends, yikes
True colors
People who are intimated by others only strike out in personal attack which is continually what happens here. No debate happens just a big ole hatefest. That's why y'all don't win elections. You have no substance just whining and complaining.
My true colors...sm
I'm not whining and not complaining. I think the disconnect is that you look up to Rush as a political hero and I don't. That will, in my book, forever stand true.
I applaud the man for becomming a successful radio personality who has 25 million followers, but it stops there with me. Thus the disconect. No respect for his "teachings" and ramblings.
I don't see what's so hard for you guys to get, you're not being smart. You're on a liberal board trying to make a case for Rush Limbaugh - not gonna happen.
Ah ha, now your true colors come out
.
Wow, your true colors came out.
Funny how you want everyone to feel bad that homosexuals are being treated unfairly and then you come out with such hateful, bitter, low-class spew.
I can smell your hypocracy from here.
True colors!
--
Well, gt you show your true colors again
you are codoning, crime, terror and mayhem. This should show everyone how unhinged you are.. Thanks for proving my point.
Another pub shows his true colors....(sm)
check this out:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/01/29/armey/
Your true colors are obvious! Ranting is probably
xx
And now your true colors shine through. Black as the ace of spades. nm
Very untrue colors
We don't "win elections"? Totally untrue. If that were true there would be no democrats currently or ever in office. Try lying about something that is harder to disprove. Bush is very good at it.
excrement comes in all cultures/colors/
depends on which excrement you choose to digest...........
however, I do remember seeing a photograph of Barak in Kenya last month in full garb/clothing of his cousin and with his cousin....
try to find that photograph today online - they/somebody pulled it........
I like Stephen Colbert's attitude. He said concerning the remarks about colors: "That was th
Dr. Seuss book ever!" We take ourselves so seriously. Someone is always going to be offended.
The pic isn't showing up for me so I am not
sure what one you are referring to, but I have seen video and pics of him saying the allegiance with his hand over his heart. There is a big snopes.com article about the whole thing and follows in line with with Chele said.
www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp
I think that showing them would....(sm)
definitely make it more dangerous for our troops in the middle east. I'm not sure how the rest of the world would look at it though. Here's the problem I see. If the photos are very damning, then it would again bring to the forefront pressure (from the public as well as other countries) to do prosecutions. I'm not so sure Obama wants to deal with that pressure since he hasn't been too excited about prosecutions anyway.
I personally wish they would go ahead and get it all over with (prosecutions, that is). If we lose a couple dems in the process, well, then so be it. If they were in on it, then they need to go anyway.
I think that showing them would....(sm)
definitely make it more dangerous for our troops in the middle east. I'm not sure how the rest of the world would look at it though. Here's the problem I see. If the photos are very damning, then it would again bring to the forefront pressure (from the public as well as other countries) to do prosecutions. I'm not so sure Obama wants to deal with that pressure since he hasn't been too excited about prosecutions anyway.
I personally wish they would go ahead and get it all over with (prosecutions, that is). If we lose a couple dems in the process, well, then so be it. If they were in on it, then they need to go anyway.
your ignorance is showing...
Your ignorance is showing...
Your paranoia is showing again. sm
Some things never change.
Once again, your naivete is showing
There are many, many, many, many roles for non-military folks to assist in Iraq. I can provide you with the information if you are interested.
But once again, perhaps your far-far-far right-wing propanda doesn't mention that.
Please refrain from speculating about what I would or would not do....it makes you look very naive and child-like and simplistic in your understanding of the motives and personalities of people you bash on a forum. You have no knowledge of me, don't know why you pretend that you do.
That is how most of the media is showing it....
McCain speaks at every rally also. Same with Obama and Biden. Biden speaks first, then Obama. That is the way they have done it for years. The VP candidate speaks first, then the Pres. candidate when they are at the same venue.
Sounds like he is just showing how
much of a pig he really is.
my ignorance is showing!
Can you tell me what is ACORN? And what are the voter fraud issues with it? Sorry, but I just don't know this stuff and trying to get informed. I found some conflicting info while trying to do some research and alot of stuff I didn't understand so can someone break it down to simple terms for me? Thanks.
Just above your level of showing your
stupidity for trying so hard to appear to be intelligent.
The desperation of the right is TRULY showing now.....sm
but after all that denial and false justification of the Bush years, all the excuses why Bush could not do a darn thing to stop this crisis, WOULD NOT, well, the shame is hard to swallow.
she's showing off the guns...
which do look amazing, probably larger than his!
Nah, this administration isn't in bed with
Document Says Oil Chiefs Met With Cheney Task Force
By Dana Milbank and Justin Blum
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, November 16, 2005; A01
A White House document shows that executives from big oil companies met with Vice President Cheney's energy task force in 2001 -- something long suspected by environmentalists but denied as recently as last week by industry officials testifying before Congress.
The document, obtained this week by The Washington Post, shows that officials from Exxon Mobil Corp., Conoco (before its merger with Phillips), Shell Oil Co. and BP America Inc. met in the White House complex with the Cheney aides who were developing a national energy policy, parts of which became law and parts of which are still being debated.
In a joint hearing last week of the Senate Energy and Commerce committees, the chief executives of Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp. and ConocoPhillips said their firms did not participate in the 2001 task force. The president of Shell Oil said his company did not participate to my knowledge, and the chief of BP America Inc. said he did not know.
Chevron was not named in the White House document, but the Government Accountability Office has found that Chevron was one of several companies that gave detailed energy policy recommendations to the task force. In addition, Cheney had a separate meeting with John Browne, BP's chief executive, according to a person familiar with the task force's work; that meeting is not noted in the document.
The task force's activities attracted complaints from environmentalists, who said they were shut out of the task force discussions while corporate interests were present. The meetings were held in secret and the White House refused to release a list of participants. The task force was made up primarily of Cabinet-level officials. Judicial Watch and the Sierra Club unsuccessfully sued to obtain the records.
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), who posed the question about the task force, said he will ask the Justice Department today to investigate. The White House went to great lengths to keep these meetings secret, and now oil executives may be lying to Congress about their role in the Cheney task force, Lautenberg said.
Lea Anne McBride, a spokeswoman for Cheney, declined to comment on the document. She said that the courts have upheld the constitutional right of the president and vice president to obtain information in confidentiality.
The executives were not under oath when they testified, so they are not vulnerable to charges of perjury; committee Democrats had protested the decision by Commerce Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) not to swear in the executives. But a person can be fined or imprisoned for up to five years for making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation to Congress.
Alan Huffman, who was a Conoco manager until the 2002 merger with Phillips, confirmed meeting with the task force staff. We met in the Executive Office Building, if I remember correctly, he said.
A spokesman for ConocoPhillips said the chief executive, James J. Mulva, had been unaware that Conoco officials met with task force staff when he testified at the hearing. The spokesman said that Mulva was chief executive of Phillips in 2001 before the merger and that nobody from Phillips met with the task force.
Exxon spokesman Russ Roberts said the company stood by chief executive Lee R. Raymond's statement in the hearing. In a brief phone interview, former Exxon vice president James Rouse, the official named in the White House document, denied the meeting took place. That must be inaccurate and I don't have any comment beyond that, said Rouse, now retired.
Ronnie Chappell, a spokesman for BP, declined to comment on the task force meetings. Darci Sinclair, a spokeswoman for Shell, said she did not know whether Shell officials met with the task force, but they often meet members of the administration. Chevron said its executives did not meet with the task force but confirmed that it sent President Bush recommendations in a letter.
The person familiar with the task force's work, who requested anonymity out of concern about retribution, said the document was based on records kept by the Secret Service of people admitted to the White House complex. This person said most meetings were with Andrew Lundquist, the task force's executive director, and Cheney aide Karen Y. Knutson.
According to the White House document, Rouse met with task force staff members on Feb. 14, 2001. On March 21, they met with Archie Dunham, who was chairman of Conoco. On April 12, according to the document, task force staff members met with Conoco official Huffman and two officials from the U.S. Oil and Gas Association, Wayne Gibbens and Alby Modiano.
On April 17, task force staff members met with Royal Dutch/Shell Group's chairman, Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, Shell Oil chairman Steven Miller and two others. On March 22, staff members met with BP regional president Bob Malone, chief economist Peter Davies and company employees Graham Barr and Deb Beaubien.
Toward the end of the hearing, Lautenberg asked the five executives: Did your company or any representatives of your companies participate in Vice President Cheney's energy task force in 2001? When there was no response, Lautenberg added: The meeting . . .
No, said Raymond.
No, said Chevron Chairman David J. O'Reilly.
We did not, no, Mulva said.
To be honest, I don't know, said BP America chief executive Ross Pillari, who came to the job in August 2001. I wasn't here then.
But your company was here, Lautenberg replied.
Yes, Pillari said.
Shell Oil president John Hofmeister, who has held his job since earlier this year, answered last. Not to my knowledge, he said.
Research editor Lucy Shackelford contributed to this report.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
Despite everything I know about this administration...
I am still stunned when I hear the next hairbrained scheme, the next faux pas, the next wrong-headed decision (a decision that is so blatantly flawed that my 10-year old neighbor can see and explain what is wrong about it), deliver the next we-will-do-whatever-we-want-and-don't- give-a -flip-about-what-you-people-think-Americans-or-anyone-else speech, then proceed to do it. The litany of wrongdoing surrounding this administration is growing exponetially; I don't know what to be more appalled at first. Last week Bush is offering help to the earthquake victims in Iran and this week he is going to nuke them...and pray tell, what is the rationale for this preemptive attack. WMD?, democracy for Iranians? or something else. I believe it is actually going to take a group of people, a coup, to just go in and remove these idiots from the White House...really. I agree with Harry Taylor, the guy in Ohio, I have never been so ashamed nor frightened of the administrators of my own country. God Help Us All and I cannot tell you how much I really really mean that.
Hug the former administration? I'm no
Bush supporter, but you can't blame Bush for this economic mess. Perhaps you should do a little more research before you go off like a screaming meemie. It was Bill Clinton who proposed everyone should have a mortgage in every pot, whether they could afford it or not, especially minorities, and the chickens came home to roost. Do a little research, kiddo.
LOL, you can't blame Bush for everything. I think the time is coming when all Americans will realize what a decent man he is, the last decent one we will have as a president. If Americans can vote in an illegal ursurper and think he is the Messiah, they sure won't vote for an honorable, Constitution-abiding successor, assuming we even have another election in this country with Comrade Obama in charge along with his Marxist cabinet.
and yet this administration is
going to make it harder for charities to get donations by not making donations tax exempt. They are going to tax people more and they will have less money to donate and contribute. It is sad really. The charities are already receiving less donations, etc. It will only hurt them more.
LOL. Is my defensiveness showing that good...nm
Excuse me but where I live they are showing ...
the RNC. They are giving it as much airtime here on CBS, NBC and ABC as they did the DNC. I'm not paying much attention to either the DNC or RNC (too much like a pep rally but no real substance IMO) but they are showing it at the same times as they DNC was last week.
Not deflecting....just showing your hypocrisy.
Acceptable in a Democrat, does not affect his ability to be President...but a Republican is a poon dog.
Takes the air out of the criticism somewhat doncha think?
YOur ignorance and racism is showing
OBAMAJAD? Could your side please give the "he's a Muslim" chant a rest?
Or do you enjoy looking stupid?
I know my ignorance is showing, but what is ACORN? nm
nm
Well, Stardust, YOUR hatred is showing. You think
nm
Be careful, your ignorance is showing!
What a stupid judgmental thing to say. Once again, proves my point about the quality of people supporting McPalin.
Of course they did. But at issue here is showing voters
I did not call you an imbecile. I said your posts are imbecilic. Being a hot-headed Obama supporter, according to the red camp, I have no character to degrade, so evidently I have nothing to lose by calling it like I see it. BTW, I've probably done all the growing I'm gonna do by age 64.
Your Ignorance Of History Is Showing
Please go back and look at the societal accolades Hitler used to make himself the prince of the German people.
You, my dear, are guilty of ignorance of history. And claiming that I have shown "extreme ignorance of history" leads me to believe that you are more into histrionic bashing than actual fact-checking.
Go away and do a bit of research.
You may not like what you see, but at least your lack of education on the subject matter might diminish a bit.
Your the one showing how little you understand about the situation
What part of Hamas and Israel at war don't you understand.
What part of Hamas terrorizing Israel don't you understand.
What part of Hamas slaughtering and killing innocent citizens, women and children don't you understand.
To me it looks like you don't understand any of what is going on over there, therefore should keep your comments to yourself.
I just say thank goodness our incoming President understands it very well.
What was that quote I read that Ben Franklin said "Better to keep one's mouth closed ...".
I agree with O's decision. Showing this
awful tortures, yes, they were very awful, might endanger the American soldiers, especially if they get caught and might be exposed to the 'same' tortures.
..and the Administration that has run the US into near insolvency
is any more credible? pleeze....
Yes, and in an Obama administration...
censorship, intimidation, and all the rest. He is already doing it and he doesn't have the job yet. Cannot BELIEVE all the people concerned about civil liberties can't see this....sigh.
With everything they have to say grace over, this administration
will need streamlined, efficient performance. He's sounds like a great pick.
Clinton Administration.
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.
Here is the link to this article
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
Here is another one
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,432501,00.html
I was taught in school if the economy is doing bad now, it was due to the president 6-8 years ago. If the economy is doing well, it is also due to the president who was in office 6-8 years ago.
Since it's almost Income Tax time, here's some interesting facts about the Democrat and Republican tax policies. Just compare - and, while you're at it, use these facts the next time you hear that President Bush only "cut taxes for the rich". Looks to me like someone single and making $30K, or a couple making $60K, got a 46% tax break under the Republicans. That's what I would call taking care of the "middle class".
And remember, the truth only comes out when we refuse to be silent....
Source: www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html
Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K - tax $8,400 Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $14,000 Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $23,250 Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K - tax $16,800 Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $21,000 Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $38,750 Married making 125K - tax $31,250
Take a gander at FDR administration. Hello.
before the winds of CHANGE blew us in a different direction. There is one thing for sure. Whatever we have been doing over the past 8 years AIN'T workin', and by the looks of things, it is going to take some bold, if not drastic measures to fix it. It is not going to be a walk in the park and most definitely will require us to put the bickering aside, come together and do our parts. When the storm has passed, we can sort it all out again, but from a personal standpoint, I will NEVER forget how we got here.
This is still the Bush administration.
There will be ZERO help for the average Americans who need it. It's like a reverse "Robin Hood." Take from the less fortunate and give to the wealthy.
This is Bush's policy (more like fascism than socialism), and we don't hear a whimper of protest, yet when Obama even hints at helping struggling Americans, everyone yells and screams SOCIALISM.
Bush can still do a lot of damage in the weeks he has remaining. That's what worries me more than anything. 
Ok, how do you think the administration will handle this
I knew it was a mistake to pick Clinton for SOS. The person who said she had no problems obliterating Iran if they didn't do what she wants (or something like that). How do you think the current administration to include Hillary will handle this one.
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSTRE50E3QB20090115
|
