David Corn

You've been better in political analysis than those you left behind at The Nation......we've been merciless on Nichols who has made wrong calls after wrong calls.

However, until Edwards drops out, I think "trench warfare" w/Obama won't do HRC much good!.

Obama supporters aren't likely to abandon him while he and Hillary bicker....as they see it as machine politics by the Clintons. If anything, those uncommitted Dems that may lean toward HRC, could be reminded time and again, why the Clintons aren't liked by so many and why they aren't committed to the "better-qualified candidate".

IF Edwards end where expected in SC, a distant 3rd w/not much more % than in NV, the pressure on him to withdrawal will mount exponentially. When he does, the `bickering' between Magic and HRC will be exciting!

Obama is getting a taste of what Republicans and women who've been sexually assaulted by Bill have been experiencing for years ~ the politics of personal destruction.

Nice to see Obama swinging back at the sleaze balls.

"to Clinton's advantage"

I wonder if such tactics will have a shelf-life. I think she could suffer a few self inflicted wounds too.

It also assumes her numbers are a direct result of that cynical part of her campaign. Who is to say her numbers wouldn't just soar through the roof if she cleaned up her act?

Obama does have a certain appeal to the right. He's their surrogate in fighting the Clinton's but not so after each party has their finalist, then he becomes a muslim terrorist.

I wonder if the RNC has more concern about losing to Clinton than to Obama or does the RNC think they'll be able to garner enough votes (through voter supression tactics, etc) to compete with either?

How would you like to see Obama and McCain in the finals?

I wonder if the RNC has more concern about [making the theft of the election believable winning against] Clinton or Obama or does the RNC think they'll be able to garner enough [cover] (through voter suppression tactics, etc) to [make the theft of the election] slightly believable with either?

I just don't see all these unitary presidential powers being handed over to a new administration chosen by a free and fair election.

As long as they can listen in on the phones and read all the emails - I can't imagine how the GOPhers could lose?

Voter supression? You guys are really living in a bubble.

The only voter suppression will be from conservative republicans who will stay home in the General.

According to Dennis Kuchinich and Obama, Hillary is the only one supressing votes. Kuchinich has paid for a recount in NH and Obama claims Hillary's people closed the polling places and hour early.

The best part is Hillary won the popular vote but Obama won the most delagates. Sound familiar?

Obama is a much better choice than Hillary for Repubs because he wants to work with us, Hillary doesn't. Hillary wants to take the Bush is a king to a new level~ Hillary the queen with sir jester Billy Bob.

The only problem for Obama is that the Dems are too bigoted to vote for a black president. It will never happen. Just as the Dems fought to keep slavery.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article

If anyone is interested in some follow-up after Monday's South Carolina Democratic debate, the above link to a November 5, 2006 article on the Chicago Sun Times web site - titled "Obama on Rezko deal: It was a mistake" - is pretty revealing. The reporters' second direct question to Barama asks him whether he or his wife ever did any legal work for Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a Chicago slum lord with whom Barama did a sweetheart real estate deal that resulted in a $1.65 million Georgian revival mansion for the junior senator from Illinois. Barama answered "no" at the time, but didn't he actually confirm that he had billed Rezko for five hours of his professional time during Monday's debate? Maybe Barama's South Carolina "Truth Squad" will clear up the discrepancy, but then again....

There are too many people who hate the Clinton's, who hate the thought of America being run by dynasties, and who hate the thought of America having to relive the sex life of Hillary's disgraced, red-faced, spouse. A vote for Hillary in the primaries is to guarantee a Republican victory in the Fall. It will mean a huge Republican turnout and a depressed Democratic one, denying the great Democratic sweep that would otherwise occur. It's unfathomable that Democrats ignore this central fact. Hillary can't be elected and it doesn't matter how qualified she is. No one wants Bill back in the oval office and they'll vote Republican just to keep him out. http://www.rakemucker.com

Political candidates should be fined each and every time they intentionally distort an opponent's records and held accountable for this kind of unethical behavior and slander. Example, Hillary's recent statement she made on Meet the Press in which she said: "Sen. Obama's chief strategist accuses me of playing a role in Benazir Bhutto's assassination.'' When in actuality David Axelrod never made such an accusation. He said former Prime Minister Bhutto's death will ''call into issue the judgment'' of ''taking the eye off the ball and making the wrong judgment in going into Iraq.'' That statement of her's is Outrageous and potentially Slanderous! After all, most of us teach our children to play fair -- not to lie, cheat and steal! The leaders we elect to office should be held to a higher standard and should be people of principal, high moral character, honest and forthright.

Second: There is a time to be silent and a time to speak. Unfortunately, Senator Obama had no choice other than to diplomatically confront the Clintons on their lies and misstatements. He cannot and could not allow them to paint a picture of him that is NOT TRUE. The Clintons' tactics are old time party politics and should be a thing of the past as we move towards the 21st Century, towards cleaner air, cleaner water, cleaner politics, towards a more holistic way of living. It is a greater duty and in the best interest of the country for Barack Obama to continue to stay positive and hopeful while attempting to clear his record from these misstatements -- as he continues to try to bring this country together and lift it up from fear and a distrust of one another -- and to continue to show the American people and the world there is another way to run for office other than smear and fear and tearing your opponent down with lies and slander -- Swiftboating! That is why Obama and Huckabee are so appealing. They are authentic and each in their own way are trying to lead the Americans away from dirty campaigning, lies and tricks. How can we as a country be blessed and be a beacon of light to others after all that ugly and dirty fighting (lies, distortions and slander) we can't be. There is a positive way -- honorable way to fight with dignity, honesty and truth and a dirty way to fight that is unethical and slanderous and without dignity.

And too, we have to ask ourselves as a people, why do we allow this unethical and negative way of campaigning to be acceptable and then reward this kind of behavior, with one of the highest offices in the land?

Bush told hundreds of lies about Iraq

Study finds endless stream of falsehoods from White House

A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The study concluded that the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

The study was posted Tuesday on the Web site of the Center for Public Integrity, which worked with the Fund for Independence in Journalism.

Darn it Capt, I was going to post that last night but was to tired. Here is a different source.
Study: False statements preceded war
Also, here is something about the ongoing mess in Gaza.
Tens of thousands flee Gaza for Egypt

Eye's,

The troll two step will just deny it.

We truly deserve a fact based troll. One will come by someday and the discussion will be interesting.

(Bush never lied - still a giggle)

Petraeus: I Need Another Six Months to Determine Whether "We’ve Reached a Turning Point"

Seems an odd statement to make if the "surge" actually worked?

Whatever happened to the November 2007 date certain that Bush declared would be?

Another lie in the string of non-stop lies.

UGH!

"Criticism of the Center [for Public Intgegrity] frequently addresses the source of its financial support. Despite its claims to be a nonpartisan news organization and profession of the Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics, the Center has been accused of bias towards left-wing political causes because it has accepted money from organizations and individuals that favor liberal policies and/or actively oppose right-wing political causes." - Wikipedia

So much for the source of the claims about lies on the Iraq war.

As far as the Clinton/Obama conflict, it is ironic that Senator Clinton has played a new, different race card - hispanic vs. black. She realizes she is rapidly losing the black vote - and must now do something to replace it. Hence her new appeal to hispanics.

Tom

"So much for the source of the claims about lies on the Iraq war."

So you really think Bush didn't lie?

Just curious

Center for Public Integrity Supporters.

The Center for Public Integrity extends its sincere thanks to our funders and members, without whom our work would not be possible.

The Center does not accept contributions from corporations, labor unions, governments or anonymous donors.

Um, which donors or funding is included in these accusations of bias?

You’ll have to do more homework than just a Reich-wing nut talking point.

Any specifics?

Oh wait a minute - SNAP!

This is not a lie - right?

"On May 29, 2003, in an interview with Polish TV, President Bush declared: "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories." But as journalist Bob Woodward reported in State of Denial, days earlier a team of civilian experts dispatched to examine the two mobile labs found in Iraq had concluded in a field report that the labs were not for biological weapons. The team's final report, completed the following month, concluded that the labs had probably been used to manufacture hydrogen for weather balloons. "

From the project:

http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/

"Honesty pays, but it doesn't seem to pay enough to suit some people."
~ Kin Hubbard (1868 - 1930)

Hey, Happy still comments on the Cornblog.

How's the stock market treating you these days, ol' buddy?

False Pretenses

On January 28, 2003, in his annual State of the Union address, Bush asserted: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." Two weeks earlier, an analyst with the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research sent an email to colleagues in the intelligence community laying out why he believed the uranium-purchase agreement "probably is a hoax."

*****

Facts are stupid things and believers never have to actually think if they can dismiss reality in favor of unfounded and false claims that the facts were collected and presented by a source sullied by accepting money. (I thought the GOP were pro-business?)

Get real.

Oh wait a minute - SNAP!

This is not a lie - right?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hey knuckle head, Bush isn't running for reelection. You Bush haters had your chance to impeach Bush if the evidence was so strong. Sorry, I guess it wasn't after all.

Why don't you pull your head out of the sand and focus on Queen Hillary's lies now. Oh wait, she's a Democrat so small minds can't be judgemental when it comes to there queen.

You can't change the past, but the future is in all our hands. God help you people.

Within 500 points of 12/1999 (DJIA 11,499) - bummer for the Bushites.

The best that side can muster is "it will rebound" - like no kidding.

I wonder what the excuse is this time? Still Bill Clinton's fault? Still the dot com bubble?

Maybe time to admit Bush cannot manage the economy unless you are a huge oil company, eh?

Nevermind, you asked for proof then say Bush isn't running - make your mind up.

False Pretenses

On January 28, 2003, in his annual State of the Union address, Bush asserted: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." Two weeks earlier, an analyst with the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research sent an email to colleagues in the intelligence community laying out why he believed the uranium-purchase agreement "probably is a hoax."

*****

Facts are stupid things and believers never have to actually think if they can dismiss reality in favor of unfounded and false claims that the facts were collected and presented by a source sullied by accepting money. (I thought the GOP were pro-business?)

******

Proof, eh?

President Bush, for example, made 232 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and another 28 false statements about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Secretary of State Powell had the second-highest total in the two-year period, with 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Rumsfeld and Fleischer each made 109 false statements, followed by Wolfowitz (with 85), Rice (with 56), Cheney (with 48), and McClellan (with 14).

*****

But Bush never lied, eh?

Face it - you don't care to have any credibility so why should I bother?

How's the stock market treating you these days, ol' buddy?

It's a great time to buy Green. It's called dollar cost averaging and were at wholesale prices right now. You lefties were screaming that the sky was falling after 911 only for us to have one of the greatest recoveries on record. I guess you missed out. Economies go in cycles and we are on a down cycle that will eventually come back up as it always has.

Tip: Buy happy stocks!

How ya doing, capt? I used to post on the old Cornblog under "Don." I'm glad this site is comment-enabled. See you around!

Always thought Happy and LBH were the same.

Nevermind, you asked for proof then say Bush isn't running - make your mind up.

Tomcat already debunked your Goerge Soros funded report. Anything coming from the AP is about as trustworthy as the National Enquirer.

So when is Bush going to get impeached for lying? Please facts only.

Always thought Happy and LBH were the same.

We do have successful, prozac free like minds, unlike you lefties.

Within 500 points of 12/1999 (DJIA 11,499) - bummer for the Bushites.

The best that side can muster is "it will rebound" - like no kidding.

Capt giving us advice on the stock market- He He He

That's all I could muster!

Facts are stupid things and believers never have to actually think if they can dismiss reality in favor of unfounded and false claims that the facts

Fact is Capt, I don't care if you are hung up on if Bush lied or not. I realize you can't get over the fact that he won the largest popular vote in the 04 elections and the Dems can't impeach him on weak evidence of lying even after his approval rating is at an all time low. I can see you're still very bitter over this. Before you can move on from this horrible pain you must forgive Bush for all his hurtfull lies that have shackled you in this prison of yours. I will pray for you!

I thought I remembered "green acres" but didn't want to make the jump.

Hi Don!

How are you doing - great to read ya again.

“Bush never lied! ~~
Still waiting for that proof!
Posted by: LBH | January 22, 2008 1:51 PM“

Then today:

“I don't care if you are hung up on if Bush lied or not.“

That is the best example of the “Trollian Two-step” I have ever seen!

Most excellent.

And as always your "A" game is just more about what I or others hate?

It is called Ad Hominem and it is always useless.

“I don't care if you are hung up on if Bush lied or not.“

Dude, your twisting my comment like Clinton twisted Obamas comments on the war.

The only liar is you!

I will ignore your silly lies from now on.

Snap!

'Two Pinocchios' for Hillary Clinton

(CNSNews.com) - A major, liberal-leaning newspaper is giving Sen. Hillary Clinton "two Pinocchios" for "significant omissions or exaggerations" at Monday's Democratic debate in South Carolina. And a former Senate leader - a Democrat - is part of a new South Carolina Truth Squad to counter the Bill and Hillary Clintons' "incredible distortions."

Capt liar of choice!

Capts Bush lied fact or fiction?

"It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida," according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members, writing an overview of the study. "In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003."

Two things here. First, few people now think Saddam had WMDs, of course. But nearly everyone thought he had them before we went into Iraq -- including the leadership of every nation on the planet as well as Saddam's own generals. So, it was not a "lie" if it was commonly thought to be true by nearly every head of state in the world. That saddam had WMDs may have been a mistaken notion, but it was not a lie before it was known for sure!

Secondly, it is interesting that this "study" claims that Bush "lied" about links with al-Qaida. Yet even they have to massage that claim of a lie into "meaningful ties to al-Qaida." This means that even they are admitting that there are ties with al-Qaida but that they aren't "meaningful."

Does that mean the "lie" is not that the ties exist but how "meaningful" they are? Instead of a lie we are squabbling over semantics. In essence, Bush DIDN'T lie about ties to al-Qaida, the is just a debate on how "meaningful" those ties are.

In these very first two instances, Bush's "lies" turn out not to be lies at all.

The New York Times also regurgitated this "study" without bothering to disclose that it was funded by some very left agenda pushing folks, but the Times does have one interesting line...

There is no startling new information in the archive, because all the documents have been published previously.

So, the question remains, why is this such big news, then? Why did the AP and the NYT rush to report a story that has "no startling new information" in it?

Was it just a new chance to say "Bush lied, people died"? It must be because there isn't any real news here.

Finally, it is also interesting to note that the database of "Bush lies" does not notate the context of those "lies." How many of them were widely believed by Democrats and Republicans alike at the time, but were proven later to be less than true? A statement given that is thought to be true (even if it turns out untrue later) is not a lie. It is just mistaken!

Regardless, that neither the AP nor the NYT revealed the leftwardly, partisan financial backers of the so-called "non-profit journalism organizations" behind this "study" is unforgivable.

Now let's look at the Democrats, including Clinton Secretary of State Albright and presidential contenders Sens. John Edwards (D-N.C.) and Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) expressed their belief before we went into Iraq that Saddam had WMDs and could use them:

So, where are the many stories that Clinton lied?

How bout it Capt?

I never claimed "Clinton never lied"

You have claimed Busn never lied.

So instead of changing the subject or calling me a liar, how about a little honesty - do you think Bush lied?

A simple yes or no without changing the subject.

The Clintons both lie, everybody lies - Bush lies.

Right or not?

I think Hillary Clinton is one of the most sexual women of our nation. It would be great if we saw her in Sexy Lingerie for women from Love-shop.biz.
Let yourself be amazingly attractive in Sensual Bodywear, Hillary!