Obama is a liar. He is a politician. But I repeat myself (and Mark Twain).

What we have to decide is, which liar do we want to be President.

(there, I just saved everyone from continuing this conversation. you’re welcome.)

> How did you get that?

Like I said, intelligent people know this about Obama… Anyway, for those who don’t:

“CHARGE 14 – “I understand what it is to be an African American.”

EVIDENCE – Senator Obama is not African American according to U.S. Law. Senator Obama is an Arab-American according to U.S. Law. SOURCE 1, SOURCE 2, SOURCE 3

COUNTER CLAIM – Senator Obama’s father is from Kenya (Black African) and he (Obama) was born in America. How can you say he is not African American?

REBUTTAL – Senator Obama’s racial background consists of the following: 50% white (mother, both sides), 43.25% Arabic (father, both sides), and 6.25% African Negro (father, one side, 1 generation removed). 12.5% is the legal threshold one must prove to claim racial status under the law. In addition, Senator Obama cannot make a sociological claim as an African American either. He was not raised as an African American, was not raised by African Americans, and was not raised in an African American neighborhood.

VERDICT – SENATOR OBAMA, YOU ARE A LIAR”

(The above is taken from this page, http://savagepolitics.com/?page_id=326 which I highly recommend to anyone even REMOTELY considering supporting the lying, incompetent Obama:.)

The other states asked for and received permission from the DNC to move up their primaries. Florida and Michigan did not.

Michigan and Florida are great examples. Three OTHER states that more favored Obama were not punished at all for moving up their primaries. The rules everyone agreed to stated that they would comply with NOT campaigning in any state that moved up their primary. Obama DID campaign in Florida. When they signed all five states were on the document and I am sure it was thought at that time that any penalties would apply fairly to every state that went ahead. This was not the case and the most unfair and ridiculous penalties ensued. Obama took his name OFF the ballot in Michigan in a ploy to influence the outcome in Iowa and indeed the entire race.. and then he tried to get his name back on unsuccessfully. Brazile really over stepped things by “severely and harshly” punishing Florida beyond what the DNC rules allow for…fifty percent NOT one hundred. People need to go and really look into how this all happened and what it is that have everyone so up in arms. It’s the most unconstitutional gaming of the system besides all the caucus cheating that went on here. There are documents out there if you want the truth that tell exactly what happened and why..not “blogs” documents.

That’s what the protest is about. Not that everyone agreed to one certain set of rules and they were held all to the same standard. That’s not at all what happened. Just repeating in a hundred times doesn’t make it so. If the DNC is allowed to get away with this then it won’t matter in the future who the candidate is. I find it hilarious that Dean, Pelosi and Brazile all three screamed popular vote and then flipped it to another mantra about delegates when it suited their “cause”

All they care about is Soros money. It’s quite scary actually and has gone beyond personality and candidates “this” election. Howard Dean and his echo affect, and this mantra of ignoring the obvious. Pelosi, Dean, Brazile and the rest are a disgrace to the democratic process right now.

I’m not towing party line this time because the party has lost all the principles they said they stood for. It might favor you this time but, they might as well install their choice in every election. Not even bothering to investigate what happened in the caucuses?? How bizarre.

Something smells to high heaven here and people ARE looking into it with lawyers.

How did you get that?

Thanks for pointing out a good site for those supporting Hillary and not Obama to go give support.

For one thing, since any INTELLIGENT person knows that Barack Hussein Obama is not black, not half black, not a quarter black, but is actually 6.25% black, WHY would our “motto” include an anti-black statement?

For another, there are many…MANY…reasons not to support Obama, but the 6.25% part of him that’s black isn’t one of them. His utter lack of experience and accomplishments? Yes. His association with anti-Americans like Jeremiah Wright? Yes. His history of drug use and money laundering? Yes. His terrorist ties? Yes. His association with slumlords? Yes. His 6.25% blackness? A resounding no.

It’s a shame that you Obamabots can’t come up with anything more compelling than false accusations of racism, when you’re supporting one of the MOST racist people on the planet. Oh, yeah, he’s sexist, too.

I stumbled across this post today which contains dishonest information about the Hillary Clinton Forum (www.hillaryclintonforum.net). “Joe”, in the above post, listed that the motto of the forum is “vote mac, not black”. This is a blatant LIE and an absurd claim. The forum has no such motto and I have never seen this quote posted on the forum which has over 200,000 postings. Making these kinds of slanderous claims is exactly what Obama supporters have been doing for months in an attempt to cast Hillary supporters as “racist”. It’s digusting and unacceptable. The suggestion that white people who do not support Barack Obama are automatically “racist” is illogical and ridiculous. The reduction of the Clinton/Obama battle to an issue about “race” was just one of many exceptionally divisive strategies employed by the Obama campaign to tear apart the support base of the Democratic Party.

Hillary Clinton Forum (www.hillaryclintonforum.net) does indeed oppose the candidacy of Barack Obama for many valid reasons. But it is a very civilized forum which maintains high standards of conduct which are often not adhered to at many other political forums and websites. Any posts or topics which do not meet the guidelines of appropriate conduct are removed. The forum is maintained by a group of volunteer moderators and is funded through donations from members. As such, it is a collective effort by supporters of Hillary Clinton. The forum was originally set up independently in February 2008 as a place for supporters to discuss Hillary’s candidacy and campaign. Since the DNC subsequently persisted on “installing” Barack Obama as the nominee, however, the forum has necessarily shifted focus.

Hillary Clinton Forum (www.hillaryclintonforum.net) is not affiliated with “Just Say No Deal” and had nothing to do with its establishment. This is another false claim by “Joe”. The forum’s address (www.hillaryclintonforum.net) is listed as being part of the coalition but HCF had nothing at all to do with the establishment of “Just Say No Deal” nor is it involved in its ongoing operations. The forum does, however, support the general purpose of the “Just Say No Deal” coalition which is to oppose the anti-democratic nature in which the 2008 presumptive nominee for the Democratic Nominee has been determined.

Murray Lipp – Administrator of HCF (www.hillaryclintonforum.net)

The stated concern from many Republicans is that it would cost too much. I doubt it wll. Many people are in the military because they are not college material, either educationally or tempermentally. Providing a benefit they will not use won’t cost anything.

The other concern is that it will make leaving the military more enticing. It may, but it may also attract more college-inclined people to consider spending three years in the military to pay for college, improving the enlisted ranks. Some might even return as officers after college. Some of the finest officers I have known were enlisted first.

I am pleased to announce that yesterday the 21st Century GI Bill that I introduced 17 months ago passed in the House of Representatives. The bill was included in the war supplemental spending bill. The Senate will likely vote on the spending bill next week. I am confident that President Bush will sign this bill into law in order to secure educational benefits for those who have served so faithfully and well since September 11th.

To read the Daily Press article, “House OKs Webb’s GI bill as part of 2-party deal,” please visit: http://webb.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=299503&

My understanding is that this is NOT the same GI Bill. (If it were, why would they need a new bill?) Without the bill number, I cannot see exactly what amendments McCain voted for or against.

Please read your Daily Press today. It seems George is about to sign Senator Webb’s GI Bill – you know the one McCain voted against. If you really still need the number it is in the funding for the Iraqi war bill and was passed yesterday by the House on a vote of 268-155. So as you see it used to be a stand alone bill but was incorporated into the Iraqi funding bill. I really don’t however see the need for a bill number – just answer the simple question if our troops nowadays deserve the same GI Bill as those who have served in past years. Your patriotism is being tested.

P.S. Anon I was not speaking of McCain having a rich wife, more power to him for that. I was speaking of him commiting adultery with his first wife and seeing Cindy on the side. So goes any morality advantage over Obama.

2000 years ago, many people believed in Zeus. Did he exist?

’cause the voters said so, Mouse. And they will find McCain less qualified, too.

That’s disgusting.

And that was Obama for the Democrats? Right. Tell me again, how is Obama more qualified than Richardson, Kucinich, Dodd, or Biden? Not even all of them, just pick ONE, the one you think is the least qualified, and tell me how Obama is MORE qualified than that one.

Gene, you can hardly fault McCain for having a rich wife when Kerry had TWO.

Now, can you please provide the billl number for the Webb’s GI bill, so that I can properly address your question? I do not want to make the mistake of dealing with the wrong bill. Thank you.

“Just say no deal” is a spinoff of Hillaryclintonforum.net (Their motto: “VOTE MAC NOT BLACK”).

Hillaryclintonforum.net is owned by Murray Lipp, a 20 something Australian who recently relocated to NYC.

He has no credentials as a supporter of the Democratic Party, does not have any known history of voting for democrats, and had turned hcf.net into an attack site of the DNC and the Democratic Nominee for President. Their entire goal at this point is to elect John McCain in November.

Remember what happens when you lie down with dogs….

CZ – sorry but Taylor Marsh and No Quarter are not the DNC.

Well, of course not, but I’ll still use it as a quasi-scientific barometer of the mindset of the constituency.

It should also be noted that, with the exceptions of his captivity and the short transition period between his Navy retirement and election to Congress, McCain has had lifetime health care courtesy of the federal government. If it’s good enough for him, why not the rest of us?

We choose the President by votes, Mouse, and the voters will decide who’s the most qualified.

It won’t be McCain, who, despite all his alleged experience, was wrong on Iraq, and remains wrong on Iraq.

He’s out of touch and wrong, and that will be evident soon enough.

Oh and evidently Barack has way higher moral standards than McCain or do you not know exactly when, how, and the circumstances under which he met his millioneress he currently resides with.

I apologize Vivian but I had to go there. wont happen again, promise

And that minimum is all you want from a candidate? If anyone born on U.S. soil and over the age 0f 35 will do, why not have choose the president by lot?

“[Obama] also has way more experience than McCain in realizing what the middle class and poor class have to go through on a daily basis.”
Right. Barack and Michelle are so poor. McCain didn’t exactly come from a rich family, either. Military officers didn’t make a whole lot of money. They still don’t.

“voting against giving the new troops the same benefits he had…”

Could you tell me which bill and vote you’re talking about? (S numbers, please.)

Anon,
the constitution clearly wanted the president to be a civilian and not need or have military experience for a reason. You ever heard of dictatorship. Barack is just as qualified as McCain under the Constitution and also has way more experience than McCain in realizing what the middle class and poor class have to go through on a daily basis. P.S. You still have not answered why him and George do not want to give our injured and current soldiers the same GI bill they had.

Furthermore, FDR was not elected during a time of war. He was first elected President in 1932. Pearl Harbor was attacked in 1941.

FDR did nothing about the U.S. isolationist movement that preceded WWII. If a Republican President had been in office for more than two terms, and we were subsequently attacked by a nation that had been expanding its territory for years, you would not hesitate to lay at his feet the blame for getting us into a war.

Was FDR unqualified to be President during a time of economic turmoil and war?

Yes, having been a Naval Academy graduate, a Captain in the Navy, a POW tortured to the breaking point, commander of the largest squadron in the Navy, and in Congress for 25 years, makes McCain far more qualified than Obama. McCain has spent his career working with the Democrats to get things done.

That is why Obama must have someone like Richardson on the ticket.

Which is why I think this whole “it’s a slap in the face” thing is ridiculous. On the one hand, we apparently want party unity and we want Obama to reach out to Clinton supporters and we want Clinton supporters to come around on him, but God friggin’ forbid his campaign attempt something to organizationally facilitate that goal.

wickle – it sure seems that way.

John – you need to catch up. I’ve provided info elsewhere on this site that debunks the whole”Hillary & her supporters only wanted FL/MI counted after she got behind” thing.

Gene – can you provide definitive info that they are Republican? If not, then it is just rumor, right?

Bottom line is that the DNC is supposed to represent all Democrats. By not doing the ceremonial first ballot, they are encouraging the behavior of the fringe Clinton supporters while doing nothing to get the rest of us moving towards unity.

Can you please state for the audience exactly the criteria is to be qualified to be president. I thought this was specifically drawn up in the constitution. Of course if you wish to bring up new rules for being qualified such as being a prisoner -of- war, stiffing the middle class,protecting corporations, sending our defense contracts overseas, voting against giving the new troops the same benefits he had and Georgy Porgy had and taxing our employer based health care I propose you start a constitutional amendment to list these things as qualifications. McCain is no more qualified than you are anon. Read the rules.

And if they had put up someone even half as qualified as McCain, they would be.

I would like to know exactly how one knows this splinter group you speak of is not a bunch of Republicans helping to keep us divided. The reality of the situation is that one never knows. Do you recognize any names within this group that positively identifies them as Democrats? Are you in the voting booth with them when they vote or have voted in the past? I will not say Joe is wrong, and I will not say you are wrong, however you dismissed the idea out of hand. That part I do not get.

As for hiring Ms. Doyle, personally I wouldn’t have hired any of those in a position of making decisions for Hillary’s campaign. No offense but all of them were a catastrophe. They never even seen the hurricane coming.

Thirdly, I agree with you that the first ballot should be cast as delegates were committed. No argument.

Is George Bush running the DNC these days?

You should check out the NO QUARTER and Taylor Marsh blogs. Not a lot of unity goin’ on, to say the least.

Mouse – we’ll have to see, won’t we?

AIAW- yep.

Joe – that’s not true. Don’t you think there are enough false rumors out there already?