Obama's Broken Promise

WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
edited January 2010 in A Moving Train
This shows just how deceitful this man is.
http://www.breitbart.tv/the-c-span-lie- ... otiations/



Then you have this.
.http://www.breitbart.tv/press-corps-gri ... n-promise/

How anybody can even trust this man or this congress is beyond me.Do we exist just to be manipulated ?
We are a represenative republic where the represenatives reject the public.IMO our represenatives are trying to destroy our republic and substitute with something else.

Im sure there are some of you on here that have no problem with this or you'll just point to something that Bush did so you can make excuses for this.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • brandon10brandon10 Posts: 1,114
    Oh my god?? A politician broke a campaign promise???? Tell me it isn't so.

    He also has not taken us out of Guantanamo or Iraq. Both far worse in my opinion.
  • well ... that's your opinion. I don't think you understand how important the healthcare issue is to a lot of people.It's going to effect evryone including you.
  • and more to come...
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • Cliffy6745Cliffy6745 Posts: 33,915
    Maybe he would have if the right was willing to actually negotiate.
  • g under pg under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
    prfctlefts wrote:
    This shows just how deceitful this man is.
    http://www.breitbart.tv/the-c-span-lie- ... otiations/



    Then you have this.
    .http://www.breitbart.tv/press-corps-gri ... n-promise/

    How anybody can even trust this man or this congress is beyond me.Do we exist just to be manipulated ?
    We are a represenative republic where the represenatives reject the public.IMO our represenatives are trying to destroy our republic and substitute with something else.

    Im sure there are some of you on here that have no problem with this or you'll just point to something that Bush did so you can make excuses for this.

    What politician do you know who isn't deceitful as you say? There in the business of POLITRICKS it's just that you don't particularly like THAT ONE!

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    prfctlefts wrote:
    This shows just how deceitful this man is.
    http://www.breitbart.tv/the-c-span-lie- ... otiations/



    Then you have this.
    .http://www.breitbart.tv/press-corps-gri ... n-promise/

    How anybody can even trust this man or this congress is beyond me.Do we exist just to be manipulated ?
    We are a represenative republic where the represenatives reject the public.IMO our represenatives are trying to destroy our republic and substitute with something else.

    Im sure there are some of you on here that have no problem with this or you'll just point to something that Bush did so you can make excuses for this.

    wow....this is terrible...
  • StarfallStarfall Posts: 548
    LOL. For someone who likes to dismiss other sites as left wing partisan sites regardless of the truth, I'm surprised you picked a right wing hack like Andrew Breitbart - who by the way is continually wrong.

    I mean seriously, not only was he proven wrong on the identity of a person visiting the White House as NOT being the head of ACORN, he had the temerity to place a bet... and lost again. :mrgreen:

    But to the substance of the argument - I'm not happy about Obama either. The guy for all practical purposes is governing like Bill Clinton and his Democratic Leadership Council - swing to the center, curry favor with big corporations, and tell your base to fuck off because they'll support you anyway no matter what.

    (EDIT) For the record, most of the hearings on healthcare were already televised, and had the Republicans not insisted on obstructionism the entire way, we'd have a real conference committee, that might have been televised, instead of the procedural method the Democrats are doing to bypass more GOP bullshit. The Republicans essentially took themselves out of the process because of their constant filibusters and delays, so fuck them, I'm glad the Democrats are getting this bill passed, even though I don't like it.
    "It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    yes, and he also broke his promise on the first thing he'd do was bring our troops home from Iraq

    and that if the white house ever met with any exec or lobbyist it would be broadcast on C-SPAN

    and that he'd renegotiate NAFTA

    and that we could import cheaper drugs from Canada

    and so on and so on.
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    brandon10 wrote:
    Oh my god?? A politician broke a campaign promise???? Tell me it isn't so.

    He also has not taken us out of Guantanamo or Iraq. Both far worse in my opinion.


    so much for change we can believe in, eh?
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    brandon10 wrote:
    Oh my god?? A politician broke a campaign promise???? Tell me it isn't so.

    He also has not taken us out of Guantanamo or Iraq. Both far worse in my opinion.


    So since it is business as usual we are just supposed to accept it? When does it stop? It is time to get these liars and phonies out, not to keep electing them.
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    JB811 wrote:
    brandon10 wrote:
    Oh my god?? A politician broke a campaign promise???? Tell me it isn't so.

    He also has not taken us out of Guantanamo or Iraq. Both far worse in my opinion.


    So since it is business as usual we are just supposed to accept it? When does it stop? It is time to get these liars and phonies out, not to keep electing them.
    ...
    So... are you saying that you are disappointed that these negotiations are not taking place out in the open? Are you feeling betrayed because you believed that these negotiations will be conducted the way Congress has been operating since the 1800s? Are you heartbroken because you believed these promises?
    ...
    Part of the reason why they will be taken place behind closed doors is because Republicans don't want to be caught on tape compromising with the opposition... and I don't blame them. Scrutiny of their negotiations are no longer being examined by journalists... they are being scrutinized by the equivalent of TMZ style political pundits.
    Republicans are acting the same way as Democrats were acting during the run up to the Iraq War. In 2003, it would have been political suicide to oppose the war... in 2010, the same holds true for the Health Care debate. you are right... they are wusses that want to keep their jobs and will do anything to hang on to their seats. You'd do the same... Cadillac health care for you and your family for life... great retirement benefits and the ability to vote for your own pay increases.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    yes, and he also broke his promise on the first thing he'd do was bring our troops home from Iraq

    and that if the white house ever met with any exec or lobbyist it would be broadcast on C-SPAN

    and that he'd renegotiate NAFTA

    and that we could import cheaper drugs from Canada

    and so on and so on.
    typical washington tool




    do you think it the position or the desire that gets them to conform?
  • yes, and he also broke his promise on the first thing he'd do was bring our troops home from Iraq

    When exactly did he make that promise?
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    yes, and he also broke his promise on the first thing he'd do was bring our troops home from Iraq

    When exactly did he make that promise?

    he never said this...

    people want to hear what the what to hear...
  • MrMerkinballMrMerkinball Posts: 1,978
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    Maybe he would have if the right was willing to actually negotiate.
    +1
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    inmytree wrote:
    yes, and he also broke his promise on the first thing he'd do was bring our troops home from Iraq

    When exactly did he make that promise?

    he never said this...

    people want to hear what the what to hear...

    oh, reeeeeeaaaaaaally??

    i guess some people forget what is convenient for them to forget....

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LsSppYxSHk

    :roll:

    which bank should i take this to???
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • Cliffy6745 wrote:
    Maybe he would have if the right was willing to actually negotiate.

    How can they when they are doing everything in secrecy behind closed and locked doors ?
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    Commy wrote:
    yes, and he also broke his promise on the first thing he'd do was bring our troops home from Iraq

    and that if the white house ever met with any exec or lobbyist it would be broadcast on C-SPAN

    and that he'd renegotiate NAFTA

    and that we could import cheaper drugs from Canada

    and so on and so on.
    typical washington tool




    do you think it the position or the desire that gets them to conform?


    personally i don't think he ever intended to do a lot of these things. i guess it is just a coincidence that an aide said before the elections that Obama never really intended to renegotiate NAFTA...

    people like to blame the republicans. it's all their fault that Obama isn't getting the change he promised. what they are really saying is Obama was clueless about american politics, which i don't believe to be true. if it were really all the republicans fault why did Obama make all those promises? are they claiming he was under the impression the republicans would just give in and do whatever he wanted??? it was no secret they were against most of his policies!

    also, take a look at the clip i posted earlier where he promised to bring the troops home...yet his website ALWAYS said most of the troops from Iraq would be redeployed to Afghanistan, so he always knew he wasn't going to follow through on this promise!!

    he had a bad habit of talking to liberals and saying 1 thing then talking to conservatives and saying the opposite but most of the 'liberals' just didn't want to hear it. he told liberals he thought this was a stupid or dumb war then goes on conservative radio and says 1 of the main reason he was against Iraq was because we weren't finished in Afghanistan yet....but if he thought Iraq was a stupid war doesn't that make whether or not we were done in Afghanistan a moot point? it's like if someone said 'one of the main reasons i'm against molesting kids is because i have a girlfriend and get it pretty regular from her' most people would be like wtf, aren't you against it because it's wrong!?

    he had no problem lying during the primaries, like when a girl at a townhall asked about nuclear power and he claimed to have passes such a strong nuclear bill and it was so tough....not only did his bill NEVER PASS but after receiving campaign donations from the nuclear power industry he kept rewriting the bill making it more industry friendly, not very tough at all.

    he also had a bad habit of taking credit for bills he had no part in. some democrats even complained that Obama was nowhere to be found while they worked on the bill, he would only show up when the cameras were there and would go on about all the hard work put into it....

    many, even many here, have no problem with this. lying on your resume is just a simple fact of life. broken and empty campaign promises are just accepted. but WHY?? would you accept if if your girlfriend or wife constantly lied to you and made empty promises? but for some reason when it comes to who runs our government we just accept they will lie constantly to our faces and console ourselves by saying 'gee, at least that other guy didn't win!'

    so, why do we accept this? what other relationship would we allow this to continue??
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    prfctlefts wrote:
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    Maybe he would have if the right was willing to actually negotiate.

    How can they when they are doing everything in secrecy behind closed and locked doors ?


    apparently while Obama was making all these promises he was under the impression that the republicans would just roll over and do everything he asked.... :roll:

    i like watching the video of Obama campaigning and criticizing the previous administration for its secrecy and closed door meetings and promised full transparency and "no more secrecy, NO MORE SECRECY!!!!" to a lot of applause.....it must be the republicans fault that he can't follow through on HIS promise that if HIS white house met with execs or lobbyists it would be broadcast on C-SPAN and their fault he hasn't gotten that website up and running detailing all the pork and who requested it....
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • Starfall wrote:
    LOL. For someone who likes to dismiss other sites as left wing partisan sites regardless of the truth, I'm surprised you picked a right wing hack like Andrew Breitbart - who by the way is continually wrong.

    I mean seriously, not only was he proven wrong on the identity of a person visiting the White House as NOT being the head of ACORN, he had the temerity to place a bet... and lost again. :mrgreen:

    But to the substance of the argument - I'm not happy about Obama either. The guy for all practical purposes is governing like Bill Clinton and his Democratic Leadership Council - swing to the center, curry favor with big corporations, and tell your base to fuck off because they'll support you anyway no matter what.

    (EDIT) For the record, most of the hearings on healthcare were already televised, and had the Republicans not insisted on obstructionism the entire way, we'd have a real conference committee, that might have been televised, instead of the procedural method the Democrats are doing to bypass more GOP bullshit. The Republicans essentially took themselves out of the process because of their constant filibusters and delays, so fuck them, I'm glad the Democrats are getting this bill passed, even though I don't like it.

    First off I only used that link for video purposes. I try to do my best and only use links that aren't bias,but somtimes you can fimd accurate info whether they lean left or right. However Media Matters isn't one of them IMO. They aren't even suppose to talk about politics because they are funded by tax payer subsidies. So in other words they are a criminal organization.

    When were any of these proceedings televised ? I haven't seen any of them. Im not talking about debate. Im talking about what Obama PROMISED 8 DIFFERENT TIMES. So let me get this straight even though you don't like either of the 2 bills your still going to support it just to spite the GOP ?


    If you think Health Insurance is exspensive now
    just wait until it's FREE...
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    oh, reeeeeeaaaaaaally??

    i guess some people forget what is convenient for them to forget....

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LsSppYxSHk

    :roll:

    which bank should i take this to???

    perhaps the sperm bank, I really don't care...

    apparently you assumed he meant (pick one) yesterday, today, tomorrow...

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE50J4ZK20090120

    Obama to discuss Iraq troop drawdown on Wednesday
    WASHINGTON
    Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:33am EST
    A U.S. soldier stands guard during a police graduation ceremony at Al-Furat Iraqi Police Training Centre in Baghdad January 14, 2009. REUTERS/ Saad Shalash

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Barack Obama on Wednesday will meet top defense and military officials for the first time as president to discuss the possibility of accelerating the drawdown of U.S. troops from Iraq, officials said.

    Barack Obama

    Obama, who has pledged to pull U.S. combat forces out of Iraq within 16 months, was also expected to discuss the need for more forces in Afghanistan at the White House with a Pentagon delegation led by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, officials said.

    The United States currently has 142,000 troops in Iraq and 33,000 in Afghanistan.

    Obama made the 16-month Iraq withdrawal timetable a centerpiece of his presidential campaign despite misgivings among commanders who have advised a cautious approach to troop cuts.

    The president-elect also said he would confer with senior defense and military officials before reaching a final decision.

    Gen. David Petraeus, the former Iraq commander credited with pulling the country from the brink of civil war, was due to fly to the United States from Afghanistan to attend Wednesday's meeting in person, a senior military official said. Petraeus now oversees U.S. war efforts in both Iraq and Afghanistan as head of U.S. Central Command.

    U.S. Commander in Iraq, Gen. Ray Odierno, was expected to join the conversation via video-link from Iraq.

    Pentagon leaders were expected to provide Obama with a menu of withdrawal options and their respective inherent risks, including one for a 16-month drawdown.

    A 16-month withdrawal would have combat forces out of Iraq in May 2010. The United States recently reached an agreement with Iraq that would require all U.S. forces to leave by the end of 2011.

    The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that the new president would instruct the Pentagon to prepare for a stepped-up withdrawal of combat troops and hear proposals for addressing a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan.

    The Post also said Obama has indicated he would move ahead with proposed plans to send as many as 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan.
  • personally i don't think he ever intended to do a lot of these things. i guess it is just a coincidence that an aide said before the elections that Obama never really intended to renegotiate NAFTA...

    people like to blame the republicans. it's all their fault that Obama isn't getting the change he promised. what they are really saying is Obama was clueless about american politics, which i don't believe to be true. if it were really all the republicans fault why did Obama make all those promises? are they claiming he was under the impression the republicans would just give in and do whatever he wanted??? it was no secret they were against most of his policies!

    also, take a look at the clip i posted earlier where he promised to bring the troops home...yet his website ALWAYS said most of the troops from Iraq would be redeployed to Afghanistan, so he always knew he wasn't going to follow through on this promise!!

    he had a bad habit of talking to liberals and saying 1 thing then talking to conservatives and saying the opposite but most of the 'liberals' just didn't want to hear it. he told liberals he thought this was a stupid or dumb war then goes on conservative radio and says 1 of the main reason he was against Iraq was because we weren't finished in Afghanistan yet....but if he thought Iraq was a stupid war doesn't that make whether or not we were done in Afghanistan a moot point? it's like if someone said 'one of the main reasons i'm against molesting kids is because i have a girlfriend and get it pretty regular from her' most people would be like wtf, aren't you against it because it's wrong!?

    he had no problem lying during the primaries, like when a girl at a townhall asked about nuclear power and he claimed to have passes such a strong nuclear bill and it was so tough....not only did his bill NEVER PASS but after receiving campaign donations from the nuclear power industry he kept rewriting the bill making it more industry friendly, not very tough at all.

    he also had a bad habit of taking credit for bills he had no part in. some democrats even complained that Obama was nowhere to be found while they worked on the bill, he would only show up when the cameras were there and would go on about all the hard work put into it....

    many, even many here, have no problem with this. lying on your resume is just a simple fact of life. broken and empty campaign promises are just accepted. but WHY?? would you accept if if your girlfriend or wife constantly lied to you and made empty promises? but for some reason when it comes to who runs our government we just accept they will lie constantly to our faces and console ourselves by saying 'gee, at least that other guy didn't win!'

    so, why do we accept this? what other relationship would we allow this to continue??
    :thumbup:
  • OffHeGoes29OffHeGoes29 Posts: 1,240
    I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you on this one, I think hes done a good job in the last year. Its still kind of early but if he continues to do what hes been doing, I'll vote for him in 2012. (and I voted for McCain last time).
    BRING BACK THE WHALE
  • I think hes done a good job in the last year.

    Really ? Like what ?

    I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you on this one

    Sure is nice to see a little civility around here for a change.
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    inmytree wrote:
    oh, reeeeeeaaaaaaally??

    i guess some people forget what is convenient for them to forget....

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LsSppYxSHk

    :roll:

    which bank should i take this to???

    perhaps the sperm bank, I really don't care...

    apparently you assumed he meant (pick one) yesterday, today, tomorrow...

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE50J4ZK20090120

    Obama to discuss Iraq troop drawdown on Wednesday
    WASHINGTON
    Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:33am EST
    A U.S. soldier stands guard during a police graduation ceremony at Al-Furat Iraqi Police Training Centre in Baghdad January 14, 2009. REUTERS/ Saad Shalash

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Barack Obama on Wednesday will meet top defense and military officials for the first time as president to discuss the possibility of accelerating the drawdown of U.S. troops from Iraq, officials said.

    Barack Obama

    Obama, who has pledged to pull U.S. combat forces out of Iraq within 16 months, was also expected to discuss the need for more forces in Afghanistan at the White House with a Pentagon delegation led by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, officials said.

    The United States currently has 142,000 troops in Iraq and 33,000 in Afghanistan.

    Obama made the 16-month Iraq withdrawal timetable a centerpiece of his presidential campaign despite misgivings among commanders who have advised a cautious approach to troop cuts.

    The president-elect also said he would confer with senior defense and military officials before reaching a final decision.

    Gen. David Petraeus, the former Iraq commander credited with pulling the country from the brink of civil war, was due to fly to the United States from Afghanistan to attend Wednesday's meeting in person, a senior military official said. Petraeus now oversees U.S. war efforts in both Iraq and Afghanistan as head of U.S. Central Command.

    U.S. Commander in Iraq, Gen. Ray Odierno, was expected to join the conversation via video-link from Iraq.

    Pentagon leaders were expected to provide Obama with a menu of withdrawal options and their respective inherent risks, including one for a 16-month drawdown.

    A 16-month withdrawal would have combat forces out of Iraq in May 2010. The United States recently reached an agreement with Iraq that would require all U.S. forces to leave by the end of 2011.

    The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that the new president would instruct the Pentagon to prepare for a stepped-up withdrawal of combat troops and hear proposals for addressing a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan.

    The Post also said Obama has indicated he would move ahead with proposed plans to send as many as 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan.


    sperm bank, nice, so are you saying he said that or not? am i still just hearing what i want to hear or do you accept he made the promise?

    will it happen? it is 1 out of a "menu of options"

    it's odd you go from saying i basically made it up to posting an article i assume to prove he is doing what you claimed he never said....?
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741

    sperm bank, nice, so are you saying he said that or not? am i still just hearing what i want to hear or do you accept he made the promise?

    will it happen? it is 1 out of a "menu of options"

    it's odd you go from saying i basically made it up to posting an article i assume to prove he is doing what you claimed he never said....?

    :?

    don't take it personal, lady...you said he "broke a promise"...I wrongly assumed you were basing this on the fact the troops are "not home yet"...therefore I said never promised to bring the troops home...I made an error...let me correct...he never said he would bring the troops home yesterday or today...

    thanks for pointing out my ommision...

    I'm guessing you now know you're wrong by making the statement that he "broke a promise"...
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    inmytree wrote:

    sperm bank, nice, so are you saying he said that or not? am i still just hearing what i want to hear or do you accept he made the promise?

    will it happen? it is 1 out of a "menu of options"

    it's odd you go from saying i basically made it up to posting an article i assume to prove he is doing what you claimed he never said....?

    :?

    don't take it personal, lady...you said he "broke a promise"...I wrongly assumed you were basing this on the fact the troops are "not home yet"...therefore I said never promised to bring the troops home...I made an error...let me correct...he never said he would bring the troops home yesterday or today...

    thanks for pointing out my ommision...

    I'm guessing you now know you're wrong by making the statement that he "broke a promise"...


    "it is the first thing I will do....."

    i guess it takes 17 months to get around to the first thing he will do?

    when it starts to happen i will believe it and will say i was wrong, until then.....
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    inmytree wrote:

    sperm bank, nice, so are you saying he said that or not? am i still just hearing what i want to hear or do you accept he made the promise?

    will it happen? it is 1 out of a "menu of options"

    it's odd you go from saying i basically made it up to posting an article i assume to prove he is doing what you claimed he never said....?

    :?

    don't take it personal, lady...you said he "broke a promise"...I wrongly assumed you were basing this on the fact the troops are "not home yet"...therefore I said never promised to bring the troops home...I made an error...let me correct...he never said he would bring the troops home yesterday or today...

    thanks for pointing out my ommision...

    I'm guessing you now know you're wrong by making the statement that he "broke a promise"...


    also, let's take a look back at this....i said:
    yes, and he also broke his promise on the first thing he'd do was bring our troops home from Iraq

    blackredyellow asked:
    When exactly did he make that promise?

    to which you replied:
    he never said this...

    people want to hear what the what to hear...



    maybe you need to edit more than the last omission on when it would be? what are you saying he never said he'd do??
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • StarfallStarfall Posts: 548
    prfctlefts wrote:
    Starfall wrote:
    LOL. For someone who likes to dismiss other sites as left wing partisan sites regardless of the truth, I'm surprised you picked a right wing hack like Andrew Breitbart - who by the way is continually wrong.

    I mean seriously, not only was he proven wrong on the identity of a person visiting the White House as NOT being the head of ACORN, he had the temerity to place a bet... and lost again. :mrgreen:

    But to the substance of the argument - I'm not happy about Obama either. The guy for all practical purposes is governing like Bill Clinton and his Democratic Leadership Council - swing to the center, curry favor with big corporations, and tell your base to fuck off because they'll support you anyway no matter what.

    (EDIT) For the record, most of the hearings on healthcare were already televised, and had the Republicans not insisted on obstructionism the entire way, we'd have a real conference committee, that might have been televised, instead of the procedural method the Democrats are doing to bypass more GOP bullshit. The Republicans essentially took themselves out of the process because of their constant filibusters and delays, so fuck them, I'm glad the Democrats are getting this bill passed, even though I don't like it.

    First off I only used that link for video purposes. I try to do my best and only use links that aren't bias,but somtimes you can fimd accurate info whether they lean left or right. However Media Matters isn't one of them IMO. They aren't even suppose to talk about politics because they are funded by tax payer subsidies. So in other words they are a criminal organization.

    When were any of these proceedings televised ? I haven't seen any of them. Im not talking about debate. Im talking about what Obama PROMISED 8 DIFFERENT TIMES. So let me get this straight even though you don't like either of the 2 bills your still going to support it just to spite the GOP ?


    If you think Health Insurance is exspensive now
    just wait until it's FREE...

    Well that's the problem - the video itself really doesn't tell us a lot. So Gibbs was grilled. Big deal, so was Perrino, so was Snow, so was every WH spokesperson. It's their job to take the heat.
    Breitbart is a known shill who twists the truth to serve his ends. The incident with the two wingnuts who illegally recorded ACORN offices, for instance, was part of a scheme to discredit the organization, and Breitbart helped front those two.
    Media Matters is not a political entity - they're a news media monitoring outlet. Whether or not you agree with Media Matters' politics, at least they properly document and source their entries, which is more than I can say for Breitbart and FOX. And if you really think they're a criminal organization, you might as well indict the Catholic and the Mormon churches for their involvement in politics too.

    And BTW, the entirety of the health care debate was televised. All you have to do is look at C-SPAN's archives to see them. I'm not sure what they're aiming for with their recent request for televising the non-conference. I mean, what's going to be televised since there isn't going to be a real conference committee? Individual senators grandstanding? Whoopee, more Joe "Droopy Dog" Lieberman. :roll:

    Besides, pretty much all of the work has already been done - what's going to happen is a process called ping-pong : the House will OK the Senate bill, with maybe a few minor adjustments, then send it back to the Senate for the final passage, then to the President for signature. They're having informal discussions to make sure the bill gets through without being subject to more GOP obstructionism.

    As I pointed out before, the Republicans took themselves out of the process by virtue (LOL) of their obstructionism. The only one interested in any real discussion was Olympia Snowe and she still marched in lockstep to filibuster. And it'll only get worse from here on out - recently Senator Judd Gregg circulated a memo pointing out all the ways to delay and obstruct legislation. I mean, is THIS what we sent these buffoons to DC for, to NOT legislate? How long have we debated health care reform now, 60 years?

    As far as the final bill, (and it looks like the Senate bill is going to be passed - I prefer the House bill in substance) there's a difference between me not liking it on policy matters, and not liking it "just to spite the GOP". I don't like this bill in substance. No public option, no Medicare buy-in, no negotiation of lower drug prices, a tax on really good health insurance plans that will affect primarily the middle class, no real enforcement, mandating people to buy private insurance or else there's a tax penalty.
    There are some really good things in it, however - Senator Bernie Sanders' Community Medical Centers project, for instance, will open up health care to a lot of rural areas - and as we're not going to get anything better thanks to cocksuckers like Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, Max Baucus, Mary Landrieu and Blanche Lincoln, it's time to just pass it and improve on it later on down the road. There's a lot more things that need to be done.

    But yeah, we could have done SO much better.



    And if this bill gets passed, Obama will absolutely break a campaign promise. He said he would not raise taxes on the middle class. Well, the tax on the so called "cadillac plans" is just that - a tax on the middle class. It's especially heinous because most of those are union negotiated plans - better benefits were negotiated instead of better wages. What's going to happen now is that employers and workers will start opting for the more insidious high-deductible and more limited coverage plans because of costs.
    "It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    also, let's take a look back at this....i said:
    yes, and he also broke his promise on the first thing he'd do was bring our troops home from Iraq

    blackredyellow asked:
    When exactly did he make that promise?

    to which you replied:
    he never said this...

    people want to hear what the what to hear...



    maybe you need to edit more than the last omission on when it would be? what are you saying he never said he'd do??

    um...a...um...

    no...

    I still contend, people hear what the want to hear...
Sign In or Register to comment.