Stacking the Deck

Don't get duped by Newsweek. Go read the 2005 energy bill for yourself.
Google it.
Hillary hit the nail on the head. The taxes on energy industries were cursory -- placed there so those like Newsweek could make this claim.

This is a generic comment.

Do you remember that Bill Clinton gave up his free membership in Arkansas to an all white Golf club after media reporting in his 1992 presidential bid? I am quite shocked that it had bothered neither Bill nor Hillary that the only color in the Golf club was white.

Do you remember that Bill Clinton gave up his free membership in Arkansas to an all white Golf club after media reporting in his 1992 presidential bid? I am quite shocked that it had bothered neither Bill nor Hillary that the only color in the Golf club was white.

1. Exxon Mobil
The oil giant racked up $39.5 billion in earnings last year, the largest-ever profit in U.S. history. That figure topped the previous record of $36.1 billion, also set by Exxon Mobil, in 2005. Profits were up 9.3% from the previous year, while sales rose 2.2%. Got Gas ?

The bill exempts oil and gas industries from some clean-water laws, streamlines permits for oil wells and power lines on public lands, and helps the hydropower industry appeal environmental restrictions. For example, it exempts oil and gas companies from Safe Drinking Water Act requirements when they inject fluids -- including some carcinogens -- into the earth at high pressure, a process known as hydraulic fracturing. Betty Anthony, director for exploration and production at the American Petroleum Institute. "This bill will allow America's most profitable companies to pollute our water supplies," said David Alberswerth of the Wilderness Society. "They're the kings of Capitol Hill."

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) also managed to insert at least $500 million in subsidies over a 10-year period -- with the option to double the amount -- for research into deep-water oil and gas drilling, a grant that many lawmakers expect to go to the Texas Energy Center in DeLay's home town of Sugar Land. Source Washington Post

Of course, Clinton has to lie about the energy bill that Obama voted on. If Clinton had her way, there would be NO incentives for clean energy.

No bill is perfect; especially w/an a-hole Prez that will veto anything good. But for Clinton to suggest that Obama was pro-Dick Cheney and pro-big oil is nasty, dirty, and dishonest.

Who is this fact checker ? Sean Hannity ?

Who is this fact checker ? Sean Hannity ?

FACT FOR A FACT, IF THESE ARE THE ONLY LIES TOLD BY THE DEMS DURING THE DEBATES!! IT PALES IN COMPARASON, TO THE LIES WE HAVE HAD TO EAT ALLREADY, TOLD TO US BY THE GOP!! IN FACT FOR A FACT, I CAN'T SEE ANY PARTY TYING TO LIE AS MUCH AS THIS ADMIN EVER AGAIN, TO MANY EYES IN THE PIE, BUT FOR OUR BLACK BAG INDUSTRY! THE GOP LIES COST LIVES!! THE DEMS LIES DON'T COME CLOSE! SORRY FOR POOR SPELLING, I KILLED WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN HIGH SCHOOL!

--In fact, the law already requires, with few exceptions, that applicants for citizenship "must be able to read, write, speak, and understand words in ordinary usage in the English language."--

This is true, but it is not universally enforced. I personally know a number of individuals who gained citizenship despite their inability to meet the language requirements of the citizenship program. I've also assisted citizens in their responses to jury summonses because they were unable understand simple conversation in English, much less the intricacies of a legal case.

I think you'll find that Edwards and most others who find this issue troubling are more concerned about the practical issues facing immigrants and new citizens rather than the legal obligations. After all, Texas prints their ballots in both English and Spanish--a necessity to ensure that all citizens can participate in the process. Most places in the US don't make these accommodations, and logistically it would be impossible to make allowances for all languages.

Some would say that Dennis Kucinich lost in his failure to be included in this debate. In fact, democracy lost. We all lost. We are all diminished when a strong, courageous, compassionate voice such as the voice of Dennis Kucinich is silenced by corporate power and systemic blindness or corruption or whatever it is that causes those in positions of power (such as the Nevada Supreme Court) to allow a corporation (NBC) to change its rules merely to exclude an important though not terribly popular voice.

John Edwards says it well when he speaks to the fact that only a fraction of a percent of Americans have voted so far. And yet those of us who have not had an opportunity to vote are also being denied a full opportunity to hear all of the candidates debate. This is not merely sad for our democracy, it is tragic.

This "fact checking" was done as poorly as those the author would claim to be scrutinizing...

Quite simply, every "check" should have been checked, as the above relies either on very brief comments that indicate either no real understanding of cited circumstances, a need to push a political agenda, or the desire to produce a fast and semi-literate document to justify a position on the website staff.

This work should have been checked by a better editor.

Is this America if a qualified candidate is denied the right to speak along with other qualified candidates? Kucinich would have offered some contrasting opinions, which is what we need. Does a corporation have the right to determine what candidates the public hears? What about freedo of speech?

Is this still America if a candidate is denied the chance to have equal broadcast time with other candidates? Do we still have freedo of speech if a news corporation can deny a qualified candidate equal rights with other candidates? If Kucinich had been allowed to speak he would have offered some opinions in contrast to others. That's what we need and it shouldn't be squelched.

I used to get Newsweek Magazine but because of biased articles like this, I am glad I discontinued it!