Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Meant like "YOU GOT BEHIND BUSH"

Posted By: --am sure you did NOT. nm on 2009-06-26
In Reply to: You mean like to got behind Bush in time of - war?! Hypocrites everywhere..pathetic.nm

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

    Sorry Dem, meant my comment for Lila Bush :)~nm
    z
    I don't know about "you all" but
    I don't judge people by what they wear.  I don't shop at Neiman or Saks and I'm not overly impressed by those who do.  I wouldn't care if she did her shopping at Good Will if I thought she had enough brains to turn this country around.  With her foreign policy knowledge being that Russia flies over Alaska and she can see Russia from her front porch on a clear day, The odds are highly in favor of her running this country at some point if McCain is elected. 
    "You better" ....
    :)
    The "you's" are the judiciary committee....
    never meant to imply anyone else. And I frankly don't care how many are exposed, be they Republican, Democrat or polka-dotted. What I think would happen is that there would be a lot of people exposed, a lot of ties between people that might shock people, and that it will never get to the impeachment process. Ever think that it might be to the advantage of professional politicians tha America stays split? The end result, "we the people" will be more disgusted with politics than ever and with both parties. Of course there will still be the hard-liner tunnel-visioned on both sides who won't believe what comes out anyway if it does not fall in their belief system that the Democratic party (or the Republican party) can do no wrong. Some things never change. Sigh.

    And there is that segment of the population, the professional politicians, who who don't really believe anything other than what it takes to advance their power base. As I have said ad nauseam, I only register as a Republican in primary years because I HAVE to in order to vote in them. Otherwise, independent because neither of the major parties interest me in the least and it is getting worse by the day.

    And no, I don't necessarily think more republicans would come home to roost than democrats in republican administration. Especially since this republican administration kept over so many from the Clinton administration (so much for trying to bipartisan and reach across the aisle. He kept more people over from the last admin in his first term, I think, than any other Pres has. Most of them clean house when they come in). And not much of that went well (Armitage, Tenet, and how many others?). I think anyone honest can say a lot of the problems we face today were in part brought about by those very folks. They at the very least had both hands in it.

    And when I said I wanted to know the truth...I meant that. I said the same thing during the Clinton impeachment...and everyone who watched any of that knows the man is guilty of both perjury and obstruction, no matter what he was lying under oath ABOUT, And THAT congressional montage let him walk. So I don't have faith, personally, in ANY professional politician. It is all about power and keeping it.

    However, if all this ranting and raving and posturing does inadvertently prove that both parties were involved perhaps this two-party system we have basically been forced into will finally get shaken up enough to listen to "we the people" because they have not in a long time.

    Piglet, I think this is a political exercise and I think those starting it have no interest in justice, just like those who started against Clinton had no interest in justice. If they had, they would have convicted him. It was an exercise, this is an exercise. But it has gotten so hatefully, bittery partisan that maybe some of them may not see that they perhaps would be hammering nails into their own political coffins (save Pelosi and a few others who are trying to keep it from happening). And by they, I mean any and all of the resident politicians in DC.

    So I say let them have at it. And when the dust settles, we might actually have enough disgusted rank and file in America that who might get elected at that point? Ron Paul? I am at the point now where the whole thing is just ridiculous.

    Pelosi is using her power the only way she knows how...in an effort to KEEP it. That is what they are ALL about. If she cared about the truth or justice and really felt in her heart of hearts that anyone in the administration was guilty of impeachable offenses she SHOULD go forward. The fact that she does not, and even tries to keep her fellow Dems from going forward, tells me all I need to know.

    That being said...I have not had faith in much of any congressional montage period since Clinton walked and not only walked, continued as President. And even if WE the people push for it, we are not going to see anything done unless the professional politicians weigh the pro's and con's and if they think it will help insure winning the White House, they will go forward. If they think it will not, or will in any way hinder that goal, they won't. That is, sadly, the bottom line and because of that, we may never know the truth. It is in their best interest to just have the innuendo out there...because seeking the truth sometimes finds it, and that might not be the most opportune thing for getting the White House back. Politics.

    And in the end...I am wondering if THAT matters, because we knew the truth about Bill Clinton and it didn't matter..he still was not convicted though they all knew he was guilty. Not of multiple affairs, against which there is no law, but lying under oath before a federal grand jury. There is no question he did it, we all saw him do it on national television. So it is not a question of guilt. The perjury automatically proved the obstruction count, he lied to keep from being caught, thereby obstructing "justice." And he not only walked on perjury and obstruction, he remained President. The Arkansas Bar Association knew he was guilty...said so and disbarred him. I believe that soured me (not because it was Bill Clinton...sheesh...but because the law should be applied equally to ALL and certainly that should include the President of the United States no matter what party he is a member of). And those same people who bemoan Clinton being impeached are thirsting for impeachment of someone else for the SAME crime. I don't understand that. I do not understand the incapability of some to grasp the concept of equality under the law. I thought that was a founding concept of America. Equal application of the law to all, no matter how high up the chain it goes. Guess that is just asking too much of people, to put down partisan politics and just look at the facts, guilty or not guilty. Didn't happen with Clinton. I don't have much faith that it will happen this time either, though the same people who want to excuse Clinton want to fry Cheney and use that to jump start frying Bush. They really don't care if it is true or not. Sigh. Almost laughable.

    And I think that the powers that be in Washington just don't want us to know everything that would come out in impeachment hearings. Which are televised, so it would be HARD, HARD, HARD to spin. And the American people, I believe, are in a place where certain kinds of information would have very long-reaching effects. because I think there are more people toward the middle of the spectrum that the hard right or hard left.

    So, I still say bring it on, have the hearings if they think they have the goods, and let it all come out. If the evidence points to guilt of Cheney, them impeach him, and if it is proven he is guilty, then remove him from office. And if others are in the process found to have committed crimes, then prosecute them and throw them in the cell next to Libby. Be they Dem, Repub, or polka-dotted. Let's try to get it right this time. Put the criminals in jail, not back in the White House. We can't go back and put Clinton in jail where he belongs, but we can get it right this time (yeah right, like that will happen, but one can hope).

    If I sound disgusted, I am. As disgusted as kam but in a totally different way.


    "you're" oops.
    i hate spelling errors! :)
    It should be "you're welcome" not "your welcome"
    oh my
    Oh, he knows. "You elect me", I will find
    nm
    "You're answer"
    If you don't want discussion and/or argument, don't post. Simple as that. If I know something related to someone's post, I'm gonna post a reply.

    And you never argue on this forum, do you?
    I am not one of what you call "you people."
    I didn't state any number or any guesstimate of how many people attended tea parties. I can speak for my town, which is a small town, and there were about 300 people at our court house yesterday.

    Final counts aren't in from some of the larger cities, but even that won't be a fair representation of the numbers because of small towns like mine that might not be added in the mix - those numbers do add up.

    All I was wondering from you is why you chose to quote a Canadian article - you answered that it was because it would be an unbiased source. However, it would be a biased source because they would really have no first-hand knowledge of how many parties there were, where they were, how many people attened, etc.

    Personally, I attended not because I'm a conservative or republican or anything like that. And it wasn't a front for some big corporation so the rich could keep their taxes low (and I'm far from being rich!) I attended because I don't think Congress is doing a very good job spending my money. When people like Chuck Schumer stand up there and say things like the American people don't care about the pork, that's when I get upset. And for them to get all up in arms about the AIG bonuses, only to find out it was all right there in black and white in the stimulus package, but none of them even bothered to read it, that's when I get upset! If you and I did something like that in our jobs, we'd be fired on the spot!

    This sort of thing should have happened years ago because the spending in DC has been out of control, even when the republicans were in charge (that's when I started voting democrat for a while.)It just makes my blood boil to hear the republicans in DC spout off about all the spending the democrats are doing - why weren't they doing anything about it 8 or 10 years ago? But it makes me madder still to hear them all (republicans and democrats) DEFEND spending all this money now and then leaving our children to have to pay for it later.

    I just don't think it's right for the government to think that it can live by one set of rules while the rest of us have to live by another.

    Okay, enough of a book, just needed to get that off my chest.
    I am not one of what you call "you people."
    I didn't state any number or any guesstimate of how many people attended tea parties. I can speak for my town, which is a small town, and there were about 300 people at our court house yesterday.

    Final counts aren't in from some of the larger cities, but even that won't be a fair representation of the numbers because of small towns like mine that might not be added in the mix - those numbers do add up.

    All I was wondering from you is why you chose to quote a Canadian article - you answered that it was because it would be an unbiased source. However, it would be a biased source because they would really have no first-hand knowledge of how many parties there were, where they were, how many people attened, etc.

    Personally, I attended not because I'm a conservative or republican or anything like that. And it wasn't a front for some big corporation so the rich could keep their taxes low (and I'm far from being rich!) I attended because I don't think Congress is doing a very good job spending my money. When people like Chuck Schumer stand up there and say things like the American people don't care about the pork, that's when I get upset. And for them to get all up in arms about the AIG bonuses, only to find out it was all right there in black and white in the stimulus package, but none of them even bothered to read it, that's when I get upset! If you and I did something like that in our jobs, we'd be fired on the spot!

    This sort of thing should have happened years ago because the spending in DC has been out of control, even when the republicans were in charge (that's when I started voting democrat for a while.)It just makes my blood boil to hear the republicans in DC spout off about all the spending the democrats are doing - why weren't they doing anything about it 8 or 10 years ago? But it makes me madder still to hear them all (republicans and democrats) DEFEND spending all this money now and then leaving our children to have to pay for it later.

    I just don't think it's right for the government to think that it can live by one set of rules while the rest of us have to live by another.

    Okay, enough of a book, just needed to get that off my chest.
    Olbermann: "You owe this country an apology." sm
    Another great special comment from Keith Olbermann. 
    "You're not forced to read this" is what I was
    nm
    What part of "you don't have a choice" don't you understand
    "Obama will call on citzens of all ages to serve America" My God!!!! Don't you hear this. Don't you question this. Don't you know what the germans when through with Hitler????

    Forced is forced. You can put any fancy name on it you want. It is still the same as military service. Once in you don't have a choice of what you do. I was in the military, I lived with a german couple who went through the holocaust and heard many stories. I KNOW the military. What starts out as civil service turns into military service. Heck call it the country club service if it makes you feel more important than the military. The truth is this is forced and you don't have a choice. This is how the Hitler youth started (by feeling more important than those who weren't in the Hitler youth). They then went on to be the SS and finally the Gestapo. Sure the Hitler youth felt very "patriotic" and wanted to serve the Fuhrer. They were made to feel privilaged and would receive things (i.e. tuition to college, etc). It later turned out to be a much different story and unfortunately they had no choice. You cannot just leave whenever you want to. I don't want to see my nieces and nephews have to go through that. I blame all who voted for the O for that.

    P.S. - NOT voluntary! What part are you not understanding. Mandatory and forced do not mean you have a choice. Just wait til the uniforms come. It's going to be slow but when it happens maybe you'll remember what I said. But then again the parents of the Hitler youth's wanted their children to enter the Hitler youth so they too would feel privaleged and patriotic. I just can't believe people are buying into it without a second question. That is what is so "disgusting" about that!!!!
    who are "you guys". I'm a democrat and ashamed of
    xx
    Who are "you guys">>>>I couldn't care less about Ewards
    00
    "She" made it easy for "you" to lose control of yourself? sm
    and end up writing that trash you wrote?

    Only you are responsible for how low you sink. Anyone can see that.
    Bush aides challenge Biden's boasts of Bush slapdowns.
    Aides to former President George W. Bush are challenging the veracity of Vice President Joe Biden's claim this week of having privately castigated Bush, who does not remember the incident or an earlier episode in which Biden claims to have similarly rebuked Bush.

    Biden spokesman Jay Carney declined to specify the dates of his boss's purported Oval Office scoldings of Bush. Nor would he provide witnesses or notes to corroborate the episodes.

    "The vice president stands by his remarks," Carney told FOX News without elaboration.
    Those remarks include a shot that Biden took at Bush on Tuesday.

    "I remember President Bush saying to me one time in the Oval Office," Biden told CNN, "'Well, Joe,' he said, 'I'm a leader.' And I said: 'Mr. President, turn and around look behind you. No one is following.'"

    That exchange never took place, according to numerous Bush aides who also dispute a similar assertion by Biden in 2004, when the former senator from Delaware told scores of Democratic colleagues that he had challenged Bush's moral certitude about the Iraq war during a private meeting in the Oval Office. Two years later, Biden repeated his story about dressing down the president.

    "When I speak to the president - and I have had plenty of opportunity to be with the president, at least prior to the last election, a lot of hours alone with him. I mean, meaning me and his staff," Biden said on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" in April 2006. "And the president will say things to me, and I'll literally turn to the president, say: 'Mr. President, how can you say that, knowing you don't know the facts?' And he'll look at me and he'll say - my word - he'll look at me and he'll say: 'My instincts.' He said: 'I have good instincts.' I said: 'Mr. President, your instincts aren't good enough.'"

    Bush aides now dispute the veracity of both assertions by Biden.

    "I never recall Biden saying any of that," former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said after reviewing detailed notes of Bush's White House meetings with Biden, which include numerous direct quotes from Biden. "I find it odd that he said he met with him alone all the time. I don't think that's true."

    Fleischer said that whenever Bush met with Sen. Biden, the meeting also included a congressional counterpart so as to not "antagonize" the House.

    Karl Rove, former White House political adviser, also was skeptical of Biden's claim to have spent "a lot of hours alone" with Bush.

    "I remember checking on such a Biden exaggeration while at the White House and no one witnessed the meeting and his comments in remotely the same way," Rove said.

    Candida P. Wolff, Bush's White House liaison to Capitol Hill, said the only meetings she remembered between Bush and Biden also included other lawmakers. She said such meetings were held in the Cabinet Room or the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, not the Oval Office, and certainly did not last for "hours."

    "The president would never sit through two hours of Joe Biden," Wolff said. "I don't ever remember Biden being in the Oval. He was such a blowhard on all that stuff - there wasn't a reason to bring him in."

    Andy Card, former White House chief of staff, reviewed the two Biden claims and said: "This does not ring true to me. I doubt that it happened."

    A spokesman for Bush declined comment, although a person close to the former president said Bush does not remember either episode.

    This is not the first time the veracity of Biden's assertions has been challenged. In 1988, he dropped out of the presidential race after being accused of plagiarizing British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock. The Washington Post also cited "the senator's boastful exaggerations of his academic record."

    Last year, liberal Slate magazine recalled that "Biden's misdeeds encompassed numerous self-aggrandizing thefts, misstatements, and exaggerations that seemed to point to a serious character defect."

    Also last year, Biden came under fire for telling a questionable story about being "shot at" in Iraq.

    "Let's start telling the truth," Biden said during a presidential primary debate sponsored by YouTube in July. "Number one, you take all the troops out -- you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die."

    But when questioned about the episode afterward by the Hill newspaper, Biden backpedaled from his claim of being "shot at" and instead allowed: "I was near where a shot landed."

    Biden went on to say that some sort of projectile "landed" outside a building in the Green Zone where he and another senator had spent the night during a visit in December 2005. The lawmakers were shaving in the morning when they felt the building shake, Biden said.

    "No one got up and ran from the room-it wasn't that kind of thing," he told the Hill. "It's not like I had someone holding a gun to my head."

    Seven weeks after claiming to have been "shot at" in Iraq, Biden again raised eyebrows with another story about his exploits in war zones -- this time on "the superhighway of terror between Pakistan and Afghanistan, where my helicopter was forced down."

    "If you want to know where AL Qaeda lives, you want to know where bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me," Biden bragged to the National Guard Association. "Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at 10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are."

    But it turns out that inclement weather, not terrorists, prompted the chopper to land in an open field during Biden's visit to Afghanistan in February 2008. Fighter jets kept watch overhead while a convoy of security vehicles was dispatched to retrieve Biden and fellow Sens. Chuck Hagel and John Kerry.

    "We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn't have to," joked Kerry, a Democrat, to the AP. "Other than getting a little cold, it was fine."
    Bush aides challenge Biden's boasts of Bush slapdowns.
    Aides to former President George W. Bush are challenging the veracity of Vice President Joe Biden's claim this week of having privately castigated Bush, who does not remember the incident or an earlier episode in which Biden claims to have similarly rebuked Bush.

    Biden spokesman Jay Carney declined to specify the dates of his boss's purported Oval Office scoldings of Bush. Nor would he provide witnesses or notes to corroborate the episodes.

    "The vice president stands by his remarks," Carney told FOX News without elaboration.
    Those remarks include a shot that Biden took at Bush on Tuesday.

    "I remember President Bush saying to me one time in the Oval Office," Biden told CNN, "'Well, Joe,' he said, 'I'm a leader.' And I said: 'Mr. President, turn and around look behind you. No one is following.'"

    That exchange never took place, according to numerous Bush aides who also dispute a similar assertion by Biden in 2004, when the former senator from Delaware told scores of Democratic colleagues that he had challenged Bush's moral certitude about the Iraq war during a private meeting in the Oval Office. Two years later, Biden repeated his story about dressing down the president.

    "When I speak to the president - and I have had plenty of opportunity to be with the president, at least prior to the last election, a lot of hours alone with him. I mean, meaning me and his staff," Biden said on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" in April 2006. "And the president will say things to me, and I'll literally turn to the president, say: 'Mr. President, how can you say that, knowing you don't know the facts?' And he'll look at me and he'll say - my word - he'll look at me and he'll say: 'My instincts.' He said: 'I have good instincts.' I said: 'Mr. President, your instincts aren't good enough.'"

    Bush aides now dispute the veracity of both assertions by Biden.

    "I never recall Biden saying any of that," former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said after reviewing detailed notes of Bush's White House meetings with Biden, which include numerous direct quotes from Biden. "I find it odd that he said he met with him alone all the time. I don't think that's true."

    Fleischer said that whenever Bush met with Sen. Biden, the meeting also included a congressional counterpart so as to not "antagonize" the House.

    Karl Rove, former White House political adviser, also was skeptical of Biden's claim to have spent "a lot of hours alone" with Bush.

    "I remember checking on such a Biden exaggeration while at the White House and no one witnessed the meeting and his comments in remotely the same way," Rove said.

    Candida P. Wolff, Bush's White House liaison to Capitol Hill, said the only meetings she remembered between Bush and Biden also included other lawmakers. She said such meetings were held in the Cabinet Room or the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, not the Oval Office, and certainly did not last for "hours."

    "The president would never sit through two hours of Joe Biden," Wolff said. "I don't ever remember Biden being in the Oval. He was such a blowhard on all that stuff - there wasn't a reason to bring him in."

    Andy Card, former White House chief of staff, reviewed the two Biden claims and said: "This does not ring true to me. I doubt that it happened."

    A spokesman for Bush declined comment, although a person close to the former president said Bush does not remember either episode.

    This is not the first time the veracity of Biden's assertions has been challenged. In 1988, he dropped out of the presidential race after being accused of plagiarizing British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock. The Washington Post also cited "the senator's boastful exaggerations of his academic record."

    Last year, liberal Slate magazine recalled that "Biden's misdeeds encompassed numerous self-aggrandizing thefts, misstatements, and exaggerations that seemed to point to a serious character defect."

    Also last year, Biden came under fire for telling a questionable story about being "shot at" in Iraq.

    "Let's start telling the truth," Biden said during a presidential primary debate sponsored by YouTube in July. "Number one, you take all the troops out -- you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die."

    But when questioned about the episode afterward by the Hill newspaper, Biden backpedaled from his claim of being "shot at" and instead allowed: "I was near where a shot landed."

    Biden went on to say that some sort of projectile "landed" outside a building in the Green Zone where he and another senator had spent the night during a visit in December 2005. The lawmakers were shaving in the morning when they felt the building shake, Biden said.

    "No one got up and ran from the room-it wasn't that kind of thing," he told the Hill. "It's not like I had someone holding a gun to my head."

    Seven weeks after claiming to have been "shot at" in Iraq, Biden again raised eyebrows with another story about his exploits in war zones -- this time on "the superhighway of terror between Pakistan and Afghanistan, where my helicopter was forced down."

    "If you want to know where AL Qaeda lives, you want to know where bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me," Biden bragged to the National Guard Association. "Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at 10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are."

    But it turns out that inclement weather, not terrorists, prompted the chopper to land in an open field during Biden's visit to Afghanistan in February 2008. Fighter jets kept watch overhead while a convoy of security vehicles was dispatched to retrieve Biden and fellow Sens. Chuck Hagel and John Kerry.

    "We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn't have to," joked Kerry, a Democrat, to the AP. "Other than getting a little cold, it was fine."
    Bush aides challenge Biden's boasts of Bush slapdowns.
    Aides to former President George W. Bush are challenging the veracity of Vice President Joe Biden's claim this week of having privately castigated Bush, who does not remember the incident or an earlier episode in which Biden claims to have similarly rebuked Bush.

    Biden spokesman Jay Carney declined to specify the dates of his boss's purported Oval Office scoldings of Bush. Nor would he provide witnesses or notes to corroborate the episodes.

    "The vice president stands by his remarks," Carney told FOX News without elaboration.
    Those remarks include a shot that Biden took at Bush on Tuesday.

    "I remember President Bush saying to me one time in the Oval Office," Biden told CNN, "'Well, Joe,' he said, 'I'm a leader.' And I said: 'Mr. President, turn and around look behind you. No one is following.'"

    That exchange never took place, according to numerous Bush aides who also dispute a similar assertion by Biden in 2004, when the former senator from Delaware told scores of Democratic colleagues that he had challenged Bush's moral certitude about the Iraq war during a private meeting in the Oval Office. Two years later, Biden repeated his story about dressing down the president.

    "When I speak to the president - and I have had plenty of opportunity to be with the president, at least prior to the last election, a lot of hours alone with him. I mean, meaning me and his staff," Biden said on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" in April 2006. "And the president will say things to me, and I'll literally turn to the president, say: 'Mr. President, how can you say that, knowing you don't know the facts?' And he'll look at me and he'll say - my word - he'll look at me and he'll say: 'My instincts.' He said: 'I have good instincts.' I said: 'Mr. President, your instincts aren't good enough.'"

    Bush aides now dispute the veracity of both assertions by Biden.

    "I never recall Biden saying any of that," former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said after reviewing detailed notes of Bush's White House meetings with Biden, which include numerous direct quotes from Biden. "I find it odd that he said he met with him alone all the time. I don't think that's true."

    Fleischer said that whenever Bush met with Sen. Biden, the meeting also included a congressional counterpart so as to not "antagonize" the House.

    Karl Rove, former White House political adviser, also was skeptical of Biden's claim to have spent "a lot of hours alone" with Bush.

    "I remember checking on such a Biden exaggeration while at the White House and no one witnessed the meeting and his comments in remotely the same way," Rove said.

    Candida P. Wolff, Bush's White House liaison to Capitol Hill, said the only meetings she remembered between Bush and Biden also included other lawmakers. She said such meetings were held in the Cabinet Room or the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, not the Oval Office, and certainly did not last for "hours."

    "The president would never sit through two hours of Joe Biden," Wolff said. "I don't ever remember Biden being in the Oval. He was such a blowhard on all that stuff - there wasn't a reason to bring him in."

    Andy Card, former White House chief of staff, reviewed the two Biden claims and said: "This does not ring true to me. I doubt that it happened."

    A spokesman for Bush declined comment, although a person close to the former president said Bush does not remember either episode.

    This is not the first time the veracity of Biden's assertions has been challenged. In 1988, he dropped out of the presidential race after being accused of plagiarizing British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock. The Washington Post also cited "the senator's boastful exaggerations of his academic record."

    Last year, liberal Slate magazine recalled that "Biden's misdeeds encompassed numerous self-aggrandizing thefts, misstatements, and exaggerations that seemed to point to a serious character defect."

    Also last year, Biden came under fire for telling a questionable story about being "shot at" in Iraq.

    "Let's start telling the truth," Biden said during a presidential primary debate sponsored by YouTube in July. "Number one, you take all the troops out -- you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die."

    But when questioned about the episode afterward by the Hill newspaper, Biden backpedaled from his claim of being "shot at" and instead allowed: "I was near where a shot landed."

    Biden went on to say that some sort of projectile "landed" outside a building in the Green Zone where he and another senator had spent the night during a visit in December 2005. The lawmakers were shaving in the morning when they felt the building shake, Biden said.

    "No one got up and ran from the room-it wasn't that kind of thing," he told the Hill. "It's not like I had someone holding a gun to my head."

    Seven weeks after claiming to have been "shot at" in Iraq, Biden again raised eyebrows with another story about his exploits in war zones -- this time on "the superhighway of terror between Pakistan and Afghanistan, where my helicopter was forced down."

    "If you want to know where AL Qaeda lives, you want to know where bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me," Biden bragged to the National Guard Association. "Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at 10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are."

    But it turns out that inclement weather, not terrorists, prompted the chopper to land in an open field during Biden's visit to Afghanistan in February 2008. Fighter jets kept watch overhead while a convoy of security vehicles was dispatched to retrieve Biden and fellow Sens. Chuck Hagel and John Kerry.

    "We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn't have to," joked Kerry, a Democrat, to the AP. "Other than getting a little cold, it was fine."
    Bush aides challenge Biden's boasts of Bush slapdowns.
    Aides to former President George W. Bush are challenging the veracity of Vice President Joe Biden's claim this week of having privately castigated Bush, who does not remember the incident or an earlier episode in which Biden claims to have similarly rebuked Bush.

    Biden spokesman Jay Carney declined to specify the dates of his boss's purported Oval Office scoldings of Bush. Nor would he provide witnesses or notes to corroborate the episodes.

    "The vice president stands by his remarks," Carney told FOX News without elaboration.
    Those remarks include a shot that Biden took at Bush on Tuesday.

    "I remember President Bush saying to me one time in the Oval Office," Biden told CNN, "'Well, Joe,' he said, 'I'm a leader.' And I said: 'Mr. President, turn and around look behind you. No one is following.'"

    That exchange never took place, according to numerous Bush aides who also dispute a similar assertion by Biden in 2004, when the former senator from Delaware told scores of Democratic colleagues that he had challenged Bush's moral certitude about the Iraq war during a private meeting in the Oval Office. Two years later, Biden repeated his story about dressing down the president.

    "When I speak to the president - and I have had plenty of opportunity to be with the president, at least prior to the last election, a lot of hours alone with him. I mean, meaning me and his staff," Biden said on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" in April 2006. "And the president will say things to me, and I'll literally turn to the president, say: 'Mr. President, how can you say that, knowing you don't know the facts?' And he'll look at me and he'll say - my word - he'll look at me and he'll say: 'My instincts.' He said: 'I have good instincts.' I said: 'Mr. President, your instincts aren't good enough.'"

    Bush aides now dispute the veracity of both assertions by Biden.

    "I never recall Biden saying any of that," former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said after reviewing detailed notes of Bush's White House meetings with Biden, which include numerous direct quotes from Biden. "I find it odd that he said he met with him alone all the time. I don't think that's true."

    Fleischer said that whenever Bush met with Sen. Biden, the meeting also included a congressional counterpart so as to not "antagonize" the House.

    Karl Rove, former White House political adviser, also was skeptical of Biden's claim to have spent "a lot of hours alone" with Bush.

    "I remember checking on such a Biden exaggeration while at the White House and no one witnessed the meeting and his comments in remotely the same way," Rove said.

    Candida P. Wolff, Bush's White House liaison to Capitol Hill, said the only meetings she remembered between Bush and Biden also included other lawmakers. She said such meetings were held in the Cabinet Room or the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, not the Oval Office, and certainly did not last for "hours."

    "The president would never sit through two hours of Joe Biden," Wolff said. "I don't ever remember Biden being in the Oval. He was such a blowhard on all that stuff - there wasn't a reason to bring him in."

    Andy Card, former White House chief of staff, reviewed the two Biden claims and said: "This does not ring true to me. I doubt that it happened."

    A spokesman for Bush declined comment, although a person close to the former president said Bush does not remember either episode.

    This is not the first time the veracity of Biden's assertions has been challenged. In 1988, he dropped out of the presidential race after being accused of plagiarizing British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock. The Washington Post also cited "the senator's boastful exaggerations of his academic record."

    Last year, liberal Slate magazine recalled that "Biden's misdeeds encompassed numerous self-aggrandizing thefts, misstatements, and exaggerations that seemed to point to a serious character defect."

    Also last year, Biden came under fire for telling a questionable story about being "shot at" in Iraq.

    "Let's start telling the truth," Biden said during a presidential primary debate sponsored by YouTube in July. "Number one, you take all the troops out -- you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die."

    But when questioned about the episode afterward by the Hill newspaper, Biden backpedaled from his claim of being "shot at" and instead allowed: "I was near where a shot landed."

    Biden went on to say that some sort of projectile "landed" outside a building in the Green Zone where he and another senator had spent the night during a visit in December 2005. The lawmakers were shaving in the morning when they felt the building shake, Biden said.

    "No one got up and ran from the room-it wasn't that kind of thing," he told the Hill. "It's not like I had someone holding a gun to my head."

    Seven weeks after claiming to have been "shot at" in Iraq, Biden again raised eyebrows with another story about his exploits in war zones -- this time on "the superhighway of terror between Pakistan and Afghanistan, where my helicopter was forced down."

    "If you want to know where AL Qaeda lives, you want to know where bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me," Biden bragged to the National Guard Association. "Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at 10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are."

    But it turns out that inclement weather, not terrorists, prompted the chopper to land in an open field during Biden's visit to Afghanistan in February 2008. Fighter jets kept watch overhead while a convoy of security vehicles was dispatched to retrieve Biden and fellow Sens. Chuck Hagel and John Kerry.

    "We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn't have to," joked Kerry, a Democrat, to the AP. "Other than getting a little cold, it was fine."
    What I meant was....
    why can we not protect the unborn children first? Are they not as deserving as homeless, poor, etc.? That was my point. I do not see, nor do I ever expect to see, liberals exhorting us to take care of unborn children as a part of taking care of the least among us. I have seen Conservatives exhort to take care of the least among us, including unborn children. Conservatives just want to put a limit on it, and regulate it a little more closely (as far as welfare, etc.). I don't have a problem with that either. And I give privately to Christian organizations that DO take care of the least among us. It does not have to go through the government to be effective. I guess that is where we differ.
    What I meant was...

    He should have said "no comment" first thing when he addressed the American people - when he said the whole "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" thing.  At that point he was not obligated to comment, and he shouldn't have.


    I am not a "Clintonite" or whatever you said.  I just think he was a more intelligent person than Bush.  Although I despise Bush, I really do like his wife Laura.  I think she seems like a very caring, very genuine person.


    I do NOT plan to vote for Hilary.  I plan to vote for Barack Obama if he makes it that far.  I think he could really improve the health insurance crisis in America.  I never hear Republican candidates talking about making healthcare more affordable, and therefore I will probably vote for a Democrat.


    I meant
    In the last paragraph I meant to write posting "false" information, not "fall".
    Not quite sure if it is a pub or a dem who meant DNC....lol nm
    nm
    Sorry that was meant for OP nm
    x
    I think you meant that some
    or maybe even many Obama supporters are educated. Just like McCain supporters.
    Meant I wonder......
    .
    Her's what I meant
    Not true meant that I'm not a rabid Republican (I'm a conservative).  That's why the RINOS need to get the heck out of the RNC.  They've ruined it.  Also, they're frauds.
    yes, that is what I meant
    I have no idea why I typed Otis Small?? Good night GP
    Not what I meant.

    What I meant was that I hope he has the opportunity to serve out the full four years and/or that this election isn't contested for some reason resulting in the involvement of the Supreme Court.  For example, I see the GOP is filing a lawsuit against Obama, alleging he used campaign funds when he visited his grandmother for the last time.


    I hope we can all get along and not be as divided as we have been for the past few years, and I hope that nothing happens that would cause such division. 


    Again, I thought the post you wrote was very classy.  Thanks. 


    I meant...
    As O's father is Muslim and O's mother Christian, they had to decide how they were going to raise O.
    That what I meant.
    I am roman catholic.
    What? Oh, you must have MEANT to say
    nm
    I only meant where did it come from?
    WHY the OP posted it

    but aren't you classy

    obviously he meant that he wants
    to win over the moderates and fight the terrorists with his strategy.
    I believe what you meant to say was
    the hard working class of people that this entire country was founded on is going by the wayside, instead being replaced by an invasion of another country and their people to add to the already overwhelmed small population of people that work to pay for those who have spent generation after generation mooching off of the working class.

    If not being lazy makes me self righteous, then so be it.

    That is not what I meant.

    Out of all the earmarks in the bill 60% were dems and 40% were pubs.  I didn't mean the whole bill was 100% earmarks. 


    Meant what I put
    knew such smart people here (I) could just get ......

    still going at it, thanks for the snippy response.
    I meant to say..
    We already have laws in place that work to protect people from being harmed or killed.
    Yeah right. Served under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II
    x
    Stop bringing up Bush - this post was not about Bush
    I even said we have had some good presidents and some bad ones, but this post was not about Bush. It was about Obama. Yes Bush was one of the worst presidents I'm not arguing with you on that one, but everytime anyone brings up something about our current president they are shot back with Bush this or Bush that and on things that have nothing to do with what the current topic is about. Again, this was not about Bush. It was about Obama.
    Oh, more "blame Bush" - except Bush didn't send these out, now did he?
    Here's a news flash for you since you apparently haven't heard: BUSH IS NOT IN OFFICE and just today Gallup did a poll showing that THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS THINK OBAMA SHOULD START TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT HAPPENS ON HIS WATCH.

    G E T A C L U E.
    You never meant a socialist Jew! sm
    What do you think they come up to you and say hi, I am a socialist Jew.  Do you know Noam Chomsky?  How about David Horowitz's parents?  How about the Rosenbergs?  Shall I go on.  Do you wonder why almost all the actors blacklisted in Hollywood way back when were almost all JEWS?!? 
    I meant... NOW shoe...nm
    But I know you'll stay because you need us to validate yourself. You're not at your best unless you are in your leftist/lib basher mode, eh. Keep it up, and people like you will expose the right brotherhood for what it's worth.
    That isn't what he meant but there is no use debating you.

    Maybe logical thought escapes you.


    Wow, did I say Liar. I really meant sm
    deluded liar.  Yes, that's much better.  
    It was not meant as an attack, I
    that it might not be the wisest idea to go to a *liberal* board and call yourself something that runs counter to their belief system, and then expect to be treated like a long-lost son.

    Further, I said the Democrats frustrate me to no end, and it is precisely for the very reasons you stated. They were too afraid of being branded as **unpatriotic** and **unsupportive of the troops**, blah,blah,blah. In their defense, however, sometimes they simply have not had the votes to over ride the president's agenda. Thank goodness for people like Murtha.

    I apologize if you felt I was attacking you, as I think we have found some common ground. I think the other thing that happens is that sometimes words, if not chosen extra carefully, can come off sounding what they are not.
    I meant I felt like it was an act....
    I believe it was theatrics. The Hollywood reference was meant to say they would be proud of the acting job...nothing to do with all of Hollywood being amoral, though I believe a good portion of it is. But that could be said for other areas as well. I am also aware of staunch conservatives in Hollywood and I think God for them.
    I never meant to infer that
    W should NOT have gone to VT. If that is how you read it, then you misread or I mistyped. Of course he should have been there; it is just that there was SO much publicity about this tragedy and it does not appear (to me) that there is much of that for the American soldiers in Iraq; nothing on a national level.

    I also never said that conservatives did not care about the war. What I meant was that in a country where only 50% of eligible voters turn out it is not unusual that so many Americans are disconnected from this war. I remember hearing people talk about WWII and seeing movies (not valid verification but nonetheless) and it seemed that the entire country was aligned behind **the cause.** I don't see that now. I bet you the family farm that I could go down to one of the city high schools or middle schools and ask a group of teenagers what they know about this war, what do they think we should or should not do and I feel certain I would get pretty much blank stares. That is what I mean about Americans not caring...maybe that is not the correct term. Most Americans are not engaged and don't feel a connection or much of an allegiance to **the cause.** No one sacrifices anything for this war but then that is one definition of secularism I have heard **Secularism is a life without sacrifice.

    You see staying in Iraq as creating some kind of democracy where the people will live a better life. I don't. I see that the longer we stay, the more people die, both Americans and Iraqis. Altho I did not agree with this war, or any war for that matter, the possibility that Iraq could have been changed for the better did probably exist 4 years ago, but not now. I really believe our being there will make no difference, aside from more death, than us not being there. It is not cut and run to me. It is cut your losses and in my opinion that would be loss of life.

    As far as Clinton and Somalia; I don't know much about the details of that situation. He was concerned about bin Laden; a lot of people were for a long time. I don't think this country would have supported a war in the middle east before 9/11 happened and that played a part as well. There is quite enough blame to go around for not foreseeing (sp) 9/11.


    Knew what you meant
    Isn't it awful when your own relatives treat you like dirt. My sister is mormon and she actually thinks I'm on the same level with manson, dahmer, hitler, etc because I'm not mormon (we both grew up going to methodist services with 12 years of sunday school). Inlaws treated us like garbage cos we didn't go to their church when we lived near them. I am a deeply spiritual person but I am not a Christian and I count myself blessed not to be in their crowd.
    Nope, exactly how I meant it
    Pretty self explanatory.
    You Meant to Say McCain, Right?
    Obviously you've confused the 2 candidates.  It's poor Senator McCain who can't think/talk at the same time.