Soft on Iran?

factcheck.org

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Pearl Harbor @ 06/10/2008 12:48:14 AM

    MCCAIN SHOULD REALLY FEAR OBAMA. McCain's style is applicable only to traditional US politicians who still follow code of ethics. At least these bunch of politicians know fully their opponents. With Obama, you are facing a new kind of Demons. They are kind, sweet, and talk ordained principles that you can hardly find the flaw. They are Half-Truths... the most deadly of them all... because they are Devil's lies. They are very effective to innocent minds, like the American Youth of Today.
    OBAMA IS A CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYER. A formidable combination of talents. Fierce, Ultimately powerful... and knows the ins and outs of the American Law.
    OBAMA'S EXPERTISE: THE DIPLOMACY OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE WORLD. HIS STRONG BACKERS ARE THE ANTI-AMERICAN LOBBYISTS! His former organisation has ties with organisations like CODE PINKS and other environmental lobbyists. Before his Senate stints, he has strong experience in meeting with these kind of people... working underground to seek justice for the Arabs, Germans, and the like.
    Bill Clinton... despite American's loathing of him... is still patriotic... by stating what is TRUE: Obama's force are those FAR LEFT and FAR RIGHT... the main proponents who allied with Socialists in the Democrat Party to twist every words coming from Bush Administrations.... You know how successful they are..... their main outputs are.... YOU.

    Obama is protecting some international groups... some international activities... some international works.... some international meetings of the Minds..... TO DESTROY AMERICA.

    I will attach an article showing the premises of the Bush Administration and McCain's viewpoint on Iran.

  • Posted By: Pearl Harbor @ 06/10/2008 12:29:03 AM

    R_YOU_4REAL:

    You will never learn the real information from your much hated Bush/Cheney tandem. They are learned statemen and don't reveal information that will give you "specifics" to make you pee in your pants and all those with heart problems to cause "strokes".

    Your bunch of Unpatriotic American Democrats will disclose everything to win everything even putting the entire America into risk of being destroyed by Anti-American.

    REMOVE THE CURTAIN AND SEE THE REAL DIPLOMACY EXPERIENCE OF BARACK OBAMA:

    As a Civil Rights Lawyer, he has worked in 2002 with Organisations around the World promoting anti-American sentiments. He is in fact very popular in many far-left and far-right human rights organisations around the world, particularly Anti-American NGOs.

    Why he has a record of anti-WAR speech, which he claimed to be his credential against Clinton as "RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING" which was then published at his website? That was 2002 and everybody was chanting the poor Republican-held Government to go to War. The spirit of American Public is to make a clear statement NOT TO BE INTIMIDATED BY TERRORISM.

    These people supporting Obama's rise to Power are the ones enjoying when an American is kidnapped and killed outside his country but their lobbyists and NGOs here in America is CONDEMNING THE GOVERNMENT TO PRACTICE WATERBOARDING and all kind of torture-related means to get information. CODE PINK has many incidents CONDEMNING ALL THE AMERICAN SOLDIERS in all their rallies as MURDERERS. But their counterparts in Eastern Europe, Middle East, and East Asia are not torturing.... but blatant KILLING of Americans and its allies.

    Why can't the French Government admit that many of its French NGOs are ANTI-AMERICANs and funders of organisations giving moral support to Al Qaida and Saddam and the rest of Muslim Fundamentalists?

    BARAK... CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYER.... BLACK LIBERALIST.... BLACK SUPREMACY IN USA....

    THAT IS HIS REAL EXPERIENCE WHEN IT COMES FOREIGN DIPLOMACY.

    IN FACT THEIR GROUP'S MAJOR SUCCESS IS .... AMERICANS LIKE YOU.

    HOPE HE WINS TO SERVE YOU YOUR OWN MEDICINE. GOOD LUCK.

  • Posted By: Pearl Harbor @ 06/10/2008 12:23:40 AM

    FOR NIN AND EVERYONE ELSE:

    REMOVE THE CURTAIN AND SEE THE REAL DIPLOMACY EXPERIENCE OF BARACK OBAMA:

    As a Civil Rights Lawyer, he has worked in 2002 with Organisations around the World promoting anti-American sentiments. He is in fact very popular in many far-left and far-right human rights organisations around the world, particularly Anti-American NGOs.

    Why he has a record of anti-WAR speech, which he claimed to be his credential against Clinton as "RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING" which was then published at his website? That was 2002 and everybody was chanting the poor Republican-held Government to go to War. The spirit of American Public is to make a clear statement NOT TO BE INTIMIDATED BY TERRORISM.

    These people supporting Obama's rise to Power are the ones enjoying when an American is kidnapped and killed outside his country but their lobbyists and NGOs here in America is CONDEMNING THE GOVERNMENT TO PRACTICE WATERBOARDING and all kind of torture-related means to get information. CODE PINK has many incidents CONDEMNING ALL THE AMERICAN SOLDIERS in all their rallies as MURDERERS. But their counterparts in Eastern Europe, Middle East, and East Asia are not torturing.... but blatant KILLING of Americans and its allies.

    Why can't the French Government admit that many of its French NGOs are ANTI-AMERICANs and funders of organisations giving moral support to Al Qaida and Saddam and the rest of Muslim Fundamentalists?

    BARAK... CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYER.... BLACK LIBERALIST.... BLACK SUPREMACY IN USA....

    THAT IS HIS REAL EXPERIENCE WHEN IT COMES FOREIGN DIPLOMACY.

    IN FACT THEIR GROUP'S MAJOR SUCCESS IS .... AMERICANS LIKE YOU.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 06/06/2008 3:38:02 PM

    Johnsonium:They are right here.[and this is just a partial list]. Courtesy of the aformentioned CFRP,THE HILL,and the Internal Revenue Service.[sourced by the CFRP].

    Obama Indvidual Lobbyist Contributions To DSLC/Obama Campaign/DCCC,50,000$ level.[through ''bundling'']

    Alan Solomont:Solomont -Bailis Ventures

    Tom Reed-Kirkland & Ellis,Nanobusiness Alliance,CISCO Systems,Microsoft,DELL,Sprint-NEXTEL

    Frank Clark-Commonwealth Edison

    David Heller,Bruce Heyman[Obama Bundlers]-GOLDMAN-SACHS,DLA PIPER,Rich Feuer Group,Duberstein Group

    James Durbin[Obama Bundler]- York Capital Management

    John Schmidt [Obama Bundler. Refused to give vocation until investigation by THE HILL,found that he works as a lobbyist for the following firms]- CHEVRON,MOTOROLA,VERIZON,and seventy other clients.

    Heres one for you Michael Moore fans:

    Bill Kennard-THE CARLYLE GROUP.

    The point here is that Obama is playing fast and loose with the truth. The fanfare over '' No PAC contributions''does not hide the fact,as observed by the Los Angeles Times,Chicago Tribune,and Washington Post,that Obama will continue to rely upon individual lobbyist monies that are routed through the DLSC and DCCC to the DNC that thus far,have absolutely no oversight whatever by Congress to determine how much is being funneled into Obamas presidential campaign.[or,how much money to elect a certain Montana Democrat senator actually ends up in an Obama coffer?] The above lobbyists send money to any or all three Democrat leadership or election groups,and nearly all of them,are Obama ''bundlers''. While Obama trots out populist BS for public consumption,his campaign will continue to remain awash in lobbyist dough. Only two things remain. One,will the press act as watchdog or Obama sychophant and two,will Congress investigate how lobbyist money travels through the Democrat political machine,which brought us Chinagate in 1996,and TEAMSTERgate the same year,which nearly had DNC Chairman Terry McAulliffes neatly coiffed head on a FBI chopping block.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/06/2008 5:23:48 PM

      He doesn't accept money from lobbyists. Money to the DNC is different and now that Obama has taken over he's demanded that the DNC follow the same rules he set for his campaign.

      I was one of the 1.5 million plus people who directly contributed to his campaign. I gave $25. Obama didn't need giant donations from fat cats.

      • Posted By: Ezana @ 06/07/2008 4:24:46 PM

        I like it that you used the carlyle group. You know that same carlyle group that immediatly after 9/11 began padding pentagon contracts with weapons systems that didn't work while simultaniously contributing to the republican party. Actually they full of ex-office holders who use their connections to leach tax money into their own pockets. Great, you went to the most corrupt of sources!

  • Posted By: r_you_4real@yahoo.com @ 06/06/2008 11:52:55 PM

    Se. McCain and his "Straight Talk Express" just keeps getting more and more like his crooked Engineer(s)
    Bush-Cheney. It does not fool me, but seriously what else can he talk about. I wonder when was the last
    time he put gas in his car or shopped for a loaf of bread. We need to get serious. I hope Sen. Obama does
    decide to take him up on a "Town Hall Meeting' I'd like to see a calm Obama rattle McSame's Cage and watch him blow up and Spew out some of his "Staight Fowl Talk" Obama '08

  • Posted By: ikez78 @ 06/05/2008 9:44:44 PM

    It's funny to see any story about Obama that comes up in Google with NEWSWEEK as the source because you KNOW it's going to be a puff piece or a story about how wrong his critics are or how great Obama is. I've NEVER seen any media outlet as in the tank for a candidate as this leftist rag, formerly a magazine, is for the most liberal candidate ever for president.

    • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 06/05/2008 11:45:25 PM

      A PUFF PIECE??? YOU DON'T READ THEM DO YOU?

      • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/06/2008 10:35:46 AM

        Have you read any of them that don't show Obama in a positive light? Don't you just dismiss them?

        • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/06/2008 12:21:50 PM

          Stupid zero. Next time they do a "Wright Stuff" followed by a "White Stuff", toss in a "Is He Electable" and a "Sister SoulJah" and top that off with a "Sharpton, Church" and "Too Ethic", and mix it all together with a "Is America Ready for Black President" - and drown yourself. Still the supreme liar, bigot and manipulator huh stupid? Thanks for not using the N-word. Idiot.

          • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/06/2008 7:30:17 PM

            Ah so I see you saw my downlow comment. ha ha. I knew it was true thanks for the heads up.

    • Posted By: Nins @ 06/06/2008 11:59:30 AM

      So what that Newsweek is pro-Obama? Big deal. Other media outlets are pro-McCain, or pro-Clinton or pro-Whatever they believe in.

      Objective journalism doesn't exist.

      It is up to the reader to see the bias and take what they need from the different information sources that are available. Just like life.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 06/06/2008 6:17:59 PM

    Johnsonium: Bull. This is precisely what Obama does. These guys are not cement mixers,brick layers,or ranch hands. They are lobbyists. And they give their money to Obama in order to influcence legislations on congressional panels upon which he sits. And they will give their money to him as candidate in order to influence him further as president if or when he gets there. What portion of what has been found by the following:..

    The Washington Post
    The Associated Press
    The PEW Center for People and the Press
    THE HILL
    POLITICO
    The Los Angeles Times
    TIME
    The Boston Globe
    The Dallas Morning Hearld
    The Sacramento Bee
    The Miami Herald
    NEWSWEEK
    REUTERS
    The Center for Responsive Politics
    PORKBUSTERS
    Citizens Against Government Waste

    ....do you not understand?

    You need to get with the program. As we speak,FACTCHECK is right now,on this website,dissecting Obamas current flipflop with regards to Jerusalem. I merely beat them to the punch. Here. Enjoy.

    www.newsweek.com June 06,2008: ''Obama And the Status Of Jerusalem''.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/06/2008 6:44:49 PM

      They don't give money to the Obama campaign. They may give money to the DCCC, but that is not for Obama.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 06/06/2008 4:59:20 PM

    ''Change'',for the better,is not forthcoming from an Obama that tacks leftwards. Obviously,''hypocrisy''has two heads,both of them,Democrat and GOP. ''Hypocrisy''now lay in the Obama camp insofar as ''lobbyists''are concerned. We await further ''factchecks''down the road that will more fully illiminate such hypocrisy,as well as their duty to report inaccuracies and outright falsehoods that eminate from both the McCain and Obama campaigns in an evenhanded fashion.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/06/2008 5:29:13 PM

      Do you proofread your own posts? I can't discern a point in that mess.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 06/06/2008 2:47:11 PM

    Obama Distorts His Own Views. An increasingly flipflopping Obama is now getting lessons on foreign policy. Before AIPAC,he sent down from his Olympus the unshakable conviction that ''Jerusalem will remain undivided''. Uh-oh. As expected this brought forth a torrent of abuse by the Palestinians,forcing Obama to check his hat at the flipflop desk,appearing on CNN yesterday to ''clarify''his earlier AIPAC statements. Now,its ''working it out between themselves'',which now has had the effect of merely angering both sides,in a true Carterian moment. Next,we find out that Obamas unveiling of ''no more lobbyist''dough turns out to be a sham.[Factcheck,needs to get on the stick with this if the ANNENBERG creature desires to remain ''nonpartisan'']. Individual lobbyist bankrolls will be funneled through the DCCC and the DSLC to Obama,in fact,are doing it right now.

    www.opensecrets.org The Center For Responsive Politics.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/06/2008 5:26:04 PM

      What flip-flop? You haven't shown where Obama said two different things.

      The DCCC is a separate body. It was asked by the Obama campaign to follow his fund raising rules and it declined.

  • Posted By: sunoverla @ 06/05/2008 6:29:07 PM

    So, Barack wasn't even in the senate for the vote. Isn't that like his 'present" votes in the IL state senate?

    LOOL!!

    Typical of BHO.

    --p.

    • Posted By: Change4TheBetter @ 06/06/2008 2:58:13 PM

      Before you throw any stones please kindly take a look at the two names that didn't vote...then look up the word hypocrite...you know what let me do that for you: a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrite).

      We are so ready for a change.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/05/2008 6:35:50 PM

      Either was McCain.

  • Posted By: techresmgt @ 06/06/2008 9:18:08 AM

    Why has the popular media been so favorable and slanted towards Oprahma. The root for him, they defend his every screwup, they act as his 'media defense attorney'. What is up with this practice? The media is supposed to repor the news, that's it. The 'Editiorial Page' is reserved for their opinions, supposedly. They did the same thing regarding Clinton vs. Oprahma. She was vilified at every turn, he was made out to be some kind of mantra from heaven.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/06/2008 2:38:41 PM

      Please provide examples.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/06/2008 2:01:08 PM

    Today McCain announced that he "hates war." If McCain hates war so much, why does he want to bomb Iran and stay in Iraq for 100 years? He knows the war is unpopular and is trying to make himself look like a dove. He is trying to re-write history. Everybody knows McCain is a hawk. Now he's pretending to hate war.

    At the same time, he tells you : "You should be very, very afraid. The world is full of terrorists and only hawks like me can keep you safe."

    Does anybody else see the irony of this? He's playing a double game.

    Besides, it was the hawks (like Cheney, et al) who got us into this mess, and it's the tough diplomats (like Obama) who will get us out. Hawks make you unsafe because they incite anger and war-like behavior by running around threatening people. Diplomats make you safe because they diffuse anger and open new ways for other people to express their greivances without war or terrorism. For example, look what Kennedy did with the Bay of Pigs incident. The Soviet Union had nuclear missiles in Cuba, aimed at Miami and Washington DC. Kennedy got them to remove their missiles, peacefully. He had lots of other options. He could have attacked Cuba or attacked Russia. He could have started WW III. But he didn't. He used TOUGH diplomacy, the same kind that Obama is advocating.

    It works.

  • Posted By: kunpether @ 06/05/2008 6:00:59 PM

    You say that it's true that Obama opposed the amendment that called for designating Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) a terrorist organization, but that McCain is wrong to suggest that Obama's opposition had anything to do with the IRGC's designation because he was for it but for the "saber rattling." Sounds like Obama was for it before he was against it.

    • Posted By: raddave @ 06/05/2008 6:36:32 PM

      You are wrong in the fact that Obama co-sponsored another bill that designated IRGC as a terrorist organization. He was against the Kyl Lieberman ammendment because of the Sabre rattling.

      • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/06/2008 12:25:39 PM

        Read the whole fact check dummy.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/05/2008 6:03:13 PM

      Wrong. The amendment labelled the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Obama opposed this, as he should have, and thus didn't support the amendment.

      • Posted By: kunpether @ 06/05/2008 6:29:55 PM

        I thought I correctly paraphrased Joe Miller saying that Obama was for an amendment labeling the IRGC a terrorist organization. How was I wrong?

        • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/05/2008 6:37:08 PM

          The amendment that Obama supported ONLY labelled IRGC as terorist. Kyl-Liebermann expanded that to include the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

          • Posted By: kunpether @ 06/05/2008 6:47:18 PM

            Is this a set-up to make Obama supporters look bad?

            • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/05/2008 6:52:07 PM

              They are two different amendments. That's the long and short of it, so your analogy was inapt.

  • Posted By: John Q. Public @ 06/05/2008 6:26:21 PM

    I'm not disputing facts. My point was, if you can read, Obama is never painted in a negative light by the media. he can do no wrong. You telling me he's our nations savior? Man please.

    • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 06/05/2008 7:58:15 PM

      THE MEDIA LEAVING OBAMA IN A BRIGHT LIGHT IS A JOKE TO! AS FROM DAY ONE HIS UNDERWEAR SIZE WAS OPEN TO PUBLIC DEBATE. OBAMA THAT, OBAMA THIS, OBAMA RESPOSABLE FOR WHO EVER WALKS INTO HIS CHURCH, BUT ONLY OBAMAS FAULT??? FREE RIDE MY EYE!!!

      • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/06/2008 12:24:51 PM

        The Newsweek brain trust even decided that a flag-pin was newsworthy because the mighty moral majority picked on the guy when he didn't have it on - neglecting the other candidate that didn't have it on.

        We are one dumb country.

  • Posted By: sunoverla @ 06/05/2008 6:35:20 PM

    John Q. Public: I agree with you. Can't remember the last time any MSM critically reviewed THEIR saviour. I wonder if they feel the same "electricity up the leg" like appeasement sympathizer Chris Matthews.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/05/2008 6:44:15 PM

      Saviour? Are they British/Canadian? Were you around for the Rev. Wright episode? The media follows stories that have legs.

      • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/06/2008 12:22:59 PM

        Dumb-asses like sunburn-lover generally have no ears or eyes.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/06/2008 10:54:47 AM

    Today McCain announced that he "hates war." If McCain hates war so much, why does he want to bomb Iran and stay in Iraq for 100 years?

    He is trying to re-write history. Everybody knows McCain is a hawk. Now he's pretending to "hate" war.

    At the same time, he tells you : "You should be very, very afraid. The world is full of terrorists and only hawks like me can keep you safe."

    Does anybody else see the irony of this? He's playing a double game.

    Besides, it was the hawks (like Cheney, et al) who got us into this mess, and it's the tough diplomats (like Obama) who will get us out. Hawks make you unsafe because they incite anger and war-like behavior by running around threatening people. Diplomats make you safe because they diffuse anger and open new ways for other people to express their greivances without war or terrorism. For example, look what Kennedy did with the Bay of Pigs incident. The Soviet Union had nuclear missiles in Cuba, aimed at Miami and Washington DC. Kennedy got them to remove their missiles, peacefully. He had lots of other options. He could have attacked Cuba or attacked Russia. He could have started WW III. But he didn't. He used TOUGH diplomacy, the same kind that Obama is advocating.

    It works.

  • Posted By: badlogic @ 06/06/2008 10:34:58 AM

    Wow techresmgt I would suggest taking a step back. They are fact checking something McCain said. The primary is over and bitterness will not help our country!

  • Posted By: SelmaG @ 06/05/2008 3:18:34 PM

    We were all deeply disappointed at Obama???s speech in AIPAC! He is molding himself into a Democratic version of Bush! He is seeking the support of the same groups that have pushed Bush to his extremisms! What is he trying to do end the Iraq War and start the Iran War? ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

    What happened to his comments that all countries, specifically those with strained relations such as Iran, Syria, etc??? have to be engaged in talks and negotiations, as opposed to saber rattling and bullying and insurmountable pressures, which has been Bush oriented policies. The policies supported by AIPAC???s of sorts that have caused a premature march to war in Iraq. The same groups who encourage a march to war in Iran.

    We all have supported, have donated to , and have encouraged others to donate and support Barrack Obama due to his different and refreshing approach to Washington politics and foreign policy.
    The election is not over yet! And we will not allow a candidate to deceive us into his march for the White House!

    The only reason and the only way that Obama has been different from Mc Cain is his peace loving and inclusive foreign policy approach, at least in his speeches! We are so sick and tired of the Bush Era and the ???Axis of Evil??? policies.

    We expect him to honor his original commitments to his constituents and do as he said he will, or else we will support NADER or Mc Cain!

    We hope that he doesn???t forget his original message in the quest for his ambitions! What we give we can always take back! What a super flake!

    • Posted By: CoffeeeCandy @ 06/05/2008 4:02:00 PM

      When will you learn how to read correctly THey are saying McCain was wrong in what he said against Obama Here we go again First HRC now McCain HRC lost .. and so will McCain get over it !

      • Posted By: Interested American @ 06/05/2008 4:14:57 PM

        CoffeeeCandy: Your confidence reminds me of when you first supported Howard Dean! It is adorable in its naivety. You might want to learn some history... basing a run for President on college students and minorities is not a winning solution (see McGovern).

        By the way, how is Obama going to unite the country if all he has done so far is tear the Democratic Party apart??

        • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 06/05/2008 10:57:37 PM

          Hillary and her camp damaged the party. Stop blaming an innocent man.

        • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/05/2008 5:02:42 PM

          Clinton is who did the damage. She kept going long after it was clear she could not win.

          Unlike Dean, Obama came through with his grass-roots approach. Millions did vote for him and support his campaign financially. Dean fizzled before the first primary. Obama's staying power has been proven over this long arduous primary season.

          • Posted By: jimreedy @ 06/05/2008 5:23:26 PM

            You have it backawards, again. Obama has torn the Democractic party in two, and he will go down in flames this November. You will not win the GE with college kids and the black vote. Obama nees the core Democrats and he has demonstrated so poorly for this segment of the Democratic Party that he has gain their trust and their vote. If he wants to win this GE, he will need Clinton more than she will need him.

            • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 06/05/2008 10:56:29 PM

              Wrong.

            • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/05/2008 5:28:15 PM

              I'm neither black nor a college kid. Yet I do recall voting for him in our caucus. In fact, he won our precinct by a vote of 32-2. There were no black people at all in our precinct, though there was some sort of immigrant fellow. I guess you can call him off-black. Of the 34 people, almost all were 30+, with a few younger folks as well.

              Barack divided the party how? By daring to challenge the Clintons? If you can show me where Obama was mathematically eliminated from the race but yet continued on to the detriment of the leader, then you'd have a point.

          • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 06/05/2008 10:56:05 PM

            Second.

    • Posted By: Marinegrunti39 @ 06/05/2008 4:17:54 PM

      I was totally disappointed by Obama speech to the Zionist organization AIPAC it sound just like Bush, blaming the Palestinians for their suffering from their 40+ years under Israel oppressive occupation. I and my family voted and cheered for Obama based on that he will have the courage to bring change to Washington. His speech to the AIPAC proved to me that he is another spineless politician just like the rest that cowed to the Zionist in this country

  • Posted By: John Q. Public @ 06/05/2008 6:08:01 PM

    I guess this is a prime example of the media sucking up to an ultra liberal. This jackass wrote a nice article on proving how true the media loves a democrat. Why don't you talk about how Obama has been able to skirt around his muslim and racist elite modes of thinking and his superiority to "White folk".

    • Posted By: raddave @ 06/05/2008 7:10:17 PM

      Because maybe Obama doesn't have a "Muslim mode" and as for the elitest attack, I believe McCain is alot more elite than Obama. After all Obama's wife is not worth a reported 100 million dollars.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/05/2008 6:14:01 PM

      Facts are facts. Do you dispute them? Or are you here to just spread Fox News nonsense far and wide?

  • Posted By: ara9557 @ 06/05/2008 5:25:16 PM

    The media are so far up Obama's behind... They should be wearing snorkles. I don't mind the media picking sides, but before they start their diatribe, they (the media) should make it clear to the reader that their leanings are either left or right. To say they are unbiased, is a bunch of croc! Obama is a wimp and I do not want a Jimmy Carter wannabe as my President. We have been there and done that.

    • Posted By: raddave @ 06/05/2008 6:17:24 PM

      Mayve the media is up Obama's behind as you say because they are reporting the truth? McCain has already started the Republican mantra about how democrats want to raise the taxes on the middle class, have a larger Governement, Government controled health inssurance (socialized medicine). Dems are anti-miltary, dems are weak on defense, etc...

    • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 06/05/2008 5:39:22 PM


      A WINP? GUESS WHO PUT AMERICAN FEET ON THE GROUND IN AFGAN WHEN THE RUSSIANS CAME MARCHING IN? CARTER! REPLACED BY REAGAN! WHO WISHED TO BANKRUPT RUSSIA, AND KEPT AMERICAN FEET,MONEY AND ARMS, IN THE AFGAN/RUSSIAN CONFLICT AS WANTED! STARTED BY CARTER. WHY DO WE NEED ARNOLD AS PRESIDENT? WHEN WAS IT NOT F.D.R. WHO SAID "TALK SOFT AND CARRY A BIG STICK" WELL THEUSA CARRIES THE BIGGEST STICK IN THE WORLD!!! SO WHY TALK HARSH? UNLESS WAR IS YOUR GOAL!

      • Posted By: raddave @ 06/05/2008 5:42:03 PM

        Actually it was Theodore Roosevelt who said that.

        • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 06/05/2008 5:44:59 PM

          SORRY YOUR RIGHT AGAIN I APOLGIZE.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/05/2008 5:32:21 PM

      Carter and Obama have nothing in common aside from their religion and political party. Your comments make no sense. I don't mind people scrutinizing Barack. However, it's telling that a vast majority of the criticism simply doesn't make any sense. "Because he gives you the willies" may be the reason you're not supporting a candidate but it certainly doesn't make a rational case for others doing likewise.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse