Counting the lies.....

Enigma · 09-13-2008, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Sarah Palin's visit to Iraq in 2007 consisted of a brief stop at a border crossing between Iraq and Kuwait, the vice presidential candidate's campaign said yesterday, in the second official revision of her only trip outside North America.
Following her selection last month as John McCain's running mate, aides said Palin had traveled to Ireland, Germany, Kuwait, and Iraq to meet with members of the Alaska National Guard. During that trip she was said to have visited a "military outpost" inside Iraq. The campaign has since repeated that Palin's foreign travel included an excursion into the Iraq battle zone.

But in response to queries about the details of her trip, campaign aides and National Guard officials in Alaska said by telephone yesterday that she did not venture beyond the Kuwait-Iraq border when she visited Khabari Alawazem Crossing, also known as "K-Crossing," on July 25, 2007.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar..._of_iraq_trip/

Quote:

Sept. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Senator John McCain has drawn some of the biggest crowds of his presidential campaign since adding Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to his ticket on Aug. 29. Now officials say they can't substantiate the figures McCain's aides are claiming.

McCain aide Kimmie Lipscomb told reporters on Sept. 10 that an outdoor rally in Fairfax City, Virginia, drew 23,000 people, attributing the crowd estimate to a fire marshal.

Fairfax City Fire Marshal Andrew Wilson said his office did not supply that number to the campaign and could not confirm it. Wilson, in an interview, said the fire department does not monitor attendance at outdoor events.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...refer=politics

Quote:

GIBSON: You have said continually, since he chose you as his vice-presidential nominee, that I said to Congress, thanks but not thanks. If we're going to build that bridge, we'll build it ourselves.
PALIN: Right.

GIBSON: But it's now pretty clearly documented. You supported that bridge before you opposed it. You were wearing a t-shirt in the 2006 campaign, showed your support for the bridge to nowhere.

PALIN: I was wearing a t-shirt with the zip code of the community that was asking for that bridge. Not all the people in that community even were asking for a $400 million or $300 million bridge.

GIBSON: But you turned against it after Congress had basically pulled the plug on it; after it became apparent that the state was going to have to pay for it, not the Congress; and after it became a national embarrassment to the state of Alaska. So do you want to revise and extend your remarks.

PALIN: It has always been an embarrassment that abuse of the ear form -- earmark process has been accepted in Congress. And that's what John McCain has fought. And that's what I joined him in fighting. It's been an embarrassment, not just Alaska's projects. But McCain gives example after example after example. I mean, every state has their embarrassment.

GIBSON: But you were for it before you were against it. You were solidly for it for quite some period of time...

PALIN: I was...

GIBSON: ... until Congress pulled the plug.

PALIN: I was for infrastructure being built in the state. And it's not inappropriate for a mayor or for a governor to request and to work with their Congress and their congressmen, their congresswomen, to plug into the federal budget along with every other state a share of the federal budget for infrastructure.

GIBSON: Right.

PALIN: What I supported was the link between a community and its airport. And we have found that link now.

LYING MCCAIN
It's become pathological. John McCain just claimed on TV that Sarah Palin has never requested an earmark for her state -- when actually her state gets more earmarks than any other state in the country. And this year she asked for $197 million worth of them herself.

Even the AP couldn't ignore his lying -- even though they phrased it in their own anemic way. "When pressed about Palin's record of requesting and accepting such money for Alaska, McCain ignored the record and said: "Not as governor she didn't."

For the record Palin requested $197 million this year and $256 million last year. Per capita, that's $288 this year and $376 last year.

To give you some perspective, Palin herself requested at least ten times the dollar value of earmarks as most states get total every year.
TPM.com

The question is, is there anything McCain/Palin Haven't lied about? We all know politicians of any stripe tend to massage the truth, but this pair are two of the biggest lying liars in the history of the game. I'll be updating this thread with repeated lies on a regular basis. This is merely an appetizer....

SUBMAN1 · 09-13-2008, 12:32 PM

Don't even make me start in on Obama, such as not being a Muslim, etc.

-S

Frame57 · 09-13-2008, 12:37 PM

Right! Like Slick Willy never having sex with that woman...Lying to congress...You think that Barak never heard Jeremiah Wrong's racist anti-american sermons after going to that church for 20 years? The bilge rat sold those sermons in the church lobby...How about the Clintons and Biden just 2 montha ago claiming that this junior seneator was not qualified to handle the presidency? Now all of a sudden he is? The Pinocchio's here are the dems!

Task Force · 09-13-2008, 12:38 PM

Seems the only truthful thing they have said is there name.

(possiably)

August · 09-13-2008, 01:48 PM

I don't always agree with Krauthammer but I think his review of the Palin interview is spot on:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...d=opinionsbox1

Quote:

Charlie Gibson's Gaffe

By Charles Krauthammer
Saturday, September 13, 2008; Page A17

"At times visibly nervous . . . Ms. Palin most visibly stumbled when she was asked by Mr. Gibson if she agreed with the Bush doctrine. Ms. Palin did not seem to know what he was talking about. Mr. Gibson, sounding like an impatient teacher, informed her that it meant the right of 'anticipatory self-defense.' "

-- New York Times, Sept. 12

Informed her? Rubbish.

The New York Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.

There is no single meaning of the Bush Doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration -- and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different.

He asked Palin, "Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?"

She responded, quite sensibly to a question that is ambiguous, "In what respect, Charlie?"

Sensing his "gotcha" moment, Gibson refused to tell her. After making her fish for the answer, Gibson grudgingly explained to the moose-hunting rube that the Bush doctrine "is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense."
ad_icon

Wrong.

I know something about the subject because, as the Wikipedia entry on the Bush Doctrine notes, I was the first to use the term. In the cover essay of the June 4, 2001, issue of the Weekly Standard entitled, "The Bush Doctrine: ABM, Kyoto, and the New American Unilateralism," I suggested that the Bush administration policies of unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty and rejecting the Kyoto protocol, together with others, amounted to a radical change in foreign policy that should be called the Bush Doctrine.

It's not. It's the third in a series and was superseded by the fourth and current definition of the Bush doctrine, the most sweeping formulation of the Bush approach to foreign policy and the one that most clearly and distinctively defines the Bush years: the idea that the fundamental mission of American foreign policy is to spread democracy throughout the world. It was most dramatically enunciated in Bush's second inaugural address: "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world."

This declaration of a sweeping, universal American freedom agenda was consciously meant to echo John Kennedy's pledge in his inaugural address that the United States "shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." It draws also from the Truman doctrine of March 1947 and from Wilson's 14 points.

If I were in any public foreign policy debate today, and my adversary were to raise the Bush doctrine, both I and the audience would assume -- unless my interlocutor annotated the reference otherwise -- that he was speaking about the grandly proclaimed (and widely attacked) freedom agenda of the Bush administration.

Not the Gibson doctrine of preemption.

Not the "with us or against us" no-neutrality-is-permitted policy of the immediate post-9/11 days.

Not the unilateralism that characterized the pre-9/11 first year of the Bush administration.

Presidential doctrines are inherently malleable and difficult to define. The only fixed "doctrines" in American history are the Monroe and the Truman doctrines which come out of single presidential statements during administrations where there were few other contradictory or conflicting foreign policy crosscurrents.

Such is not the case with the Bush Doctrine.

Yes, Sarah Palin didn't know what it is. But neither does Charlie Gibson. And at least she didn't pretend to know -- while he looked down his nose and over his glasses with weary disdain, sighing and "sounding like an impatient teacher," as the Times noted. In doing so, he captured perfectly the establishment snobbery and intellectual condescension that has characterized the chattering classes' reaction to the mother of five who presumes to play on their stage.

Kapt Z · 09-13-2008, 02:05 PM

Such is not the case with the Bush Doctrine.

Yes, Sarah Palin didn't know what it is. But neither does Charlie Gibson.

I would feel better about that if I thought, for a minute, Bush knew either.

August · 09-13-2008, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

Such is not the case with the Bush Doctrine.

Yes, Sarah Palin didn't know what it is. But neither does Charlie Gibson.

I would feel better about that if I thought, for a minute, Bush knew either.

Do ya think Monroe knew he was making a "doctrine" back in 1823?

sunvalleyslim · 09-13-2008, 03:43 PM

[quote=SUBMAN1]Don't even make me start in on Obama, such as not being a Muslim, etc.

Right On Subman1.......................The campaigns all throw out B.S. t That's what U.S. politics is about........what a shame.................

Skybird · 09-13-2008, 04:13 PM

One thing is certain. Watergate does not matter. Iran-Contra-affair is of no concern. Failed wars being launched - who cares.

A Democrat's president putting his Willy where it did not belong, and trying to hide that from the public while the other party tries to parade him through the streets over that like a trophy - that is the all important issue american history is made of! Hallelujah!

Who needs real world politics? Hypocritic "values" is what we need!

"We train young men to drop fire on people - but their commanders won't allow them to write FU CK! on their aeroplane, because: it's "obscene". (Kurtz in "Apoicalyse Now")

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

Campaigns sell BS because people buy BS more than anything else

That's why the masses stink. Intelligence eventually I only see in the single person. The greater the crowd, the more intelligence dies. Stupidity and intelligence - are social phenomenons before anything else.

fatty · 09-13-2008, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

One thing is certain. Watergate does not matter. Iran-Contra-affair is of no concern. Failed wars being launched - who cares.

A Democrat's president putting his Willy where it did not belong, and trying to hide that from the public while the other party tries to parade him through the streets over that like a trophy - that is the all important issue american history is made of! Hallelujah!

Who needs real world politics? Hypocritic "values" is what we need!

"We train young men to drop fire on people - but their commanders won't allow them to write FU CK! on their aeroplane, because: it's "obscene". (Kurtz in "Apoicalyse Now")

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

Campaigns sell BS because people buy BS more than anything else

That's why the masses stink. Intelligence eventually I only see in the single person. The greater the crowd, the more intelligence dies. Stupidity and intelligence - are social phenomenons before anything else.

You have in a few short paragraphs summarized while I will never ever go into politics, at least maybe beyond the municipal level. To the majority, policy means nothing. Your haircut or who you're dating are much more interesting.

Monica Lewinsky · 09-13-2008, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatty

Your haircut or who you're dating are much more interesting.

More interesting -

http://www.peteyandpetunia.com/VoteHere/VoteHere.htm

Platapus · 09-13-2008, 06:16 PM

Is this not called misdirection?

When a thread is written about one issue and people come along and try to nullify the discussion by hijacking it on to another issue?

Whether Senator Obama has, is, or will lie is totally independent to the issue whether McCain/Palin has, is, or will lie.

Skybird · 09-13-2008, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

Is this not called misdirection?

When a thread is written about one issue and people come along and try to nullify the discussion by hijacking it on to another issue?

Whether Senator Obama has, is, or will lie is totally independent to the issue whether McCain/Palin has, is, or will lie.

Has MacCain's campaigns manager not proudly boasted that he is not about issues?

It's all about show and playing con tricks. Very serious stuff. The world stops revolving in reverence. Panem et circensis. The conventions are the best evidence - directed propaganda shows from A to Z, planned to the last detail and most minor gesture. It has to be as perfect like ten fish sticks in the paclkage - eleven are too much, and nine or one too few.

Buy it, people, buy the shiny shine!

Monica Lewinsky · 09-13-2008, 07:11 PM

the self appointed Messiah … will loose ... I Hope. He's from our state and we can not stand him anymore, or any of his B.S along with our WORTHLESS govenor. The sight or hearing him, makes most of us puke in Illinois. To prove the point, notice how the DNC gave NO TIME to our JERK HEAD govenor to be in the nomination process - that is a FIRST since 1900!

If you believe his crap, then shame on you. For 143 Days as a senator from Illinois, before announcing he is a running, he accomplished NOTHING in the Senate which is his MAIN job ... Absolutely ... NOTHING other than saying "present" for a vote or two.

The guy is a GREAT con-artist for the young - don't fall for it.

I do NOT like EITHER party canidates. Was for the first time going to vote third party, but there is no one there. :p

Platapus · 09-13-2008, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monica Lewinsky

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]If you believe his crap, then shame on you. For 143 Days as a senator from Illinois he accomplished NOTHING ... before running for office ... Absolutely ... NOTHING other than saying "present" for a vote or two.

Well I can see you are getting confused here.

Obama spent 143 days in the Federal Senate where he did introduce/sponsor/cosponsor some pretty handy bills. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._States_Senate

Secondly, when he voted "present" it was when he was on the State Senate not the Federal Senate. In Illinois State Senators are allowed to vote present when they wish to object to some part of the legislation. Senator Obama voted Present 130 times out of over 4,000 votes in just under six years, so he voted present only 3% of the time.

Since you don't seem to know the Legislative history of Senator Obama from your own state, your opinion lacks credibility.

09-13-2008, 12:32 PM	#2
SUBMAN1 Rear Admiral Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 12,858 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Don't even make me start in on Obama, such as not being a Muslim, etc. -S __________________

09-13-2008, 12:38 PM	#4
Task Force Rear Admiral Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: SPACE!!!! Posts: 10,128 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	Seems the only truthful thing they have said is there name. (possiably) __________________ Task Force industries "Taking control of the world, one mind at a time"

09-13-2008, 03:43 PM	#8
sunvalleyslim Ace of the Deep Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Los Angeles, Ca Posts: 1,146 Downloads: 267 Uploads: 0	[quote=SUBMAN1]Don't even make me start in on Obama, such as not being a Muslim, etc. Right On Subman1.......................The campaigns all throw out B.S. t That's what U.S. politics is about........what a shame................. __________________ Crew member/ decommission member TM2(SS)(SD) 3/68-7/70 DIESEL BOATS FOREVER USS SEGUNDO (SS398)

09-13-2008, 06:16 PM	#12
Platapus Rear Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 11,165 Downloads: 54 Uploads: 0	Is this not called misdirection? When a thread is written about one issue and people come along and try to nullify the discussion by hijacking it on to another issue? Whether Senator Obama has, is, or will lie is totally independent to the issue whether McCain/Palin has, is, or will lie. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

09-13-2008, 07:11 PM	#14
Monica Lewinsky Grey Wolf Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 850 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	the self appointed Messiah … will loose ... I Hope. He's from our state and we can not stand him anymore, or any of his B.S along with our WORTHLESS govenor. The sight or hearing him, makes most of us puke in Illinois. To prove the point, notice how the DNC gave NO TIME to our JERK HEAD govenor to be in the nomination process - that is a FIRST since 1900! If you believe his crap, then shame on you. For 143 Days as a senator from Illinois, before announcing he is a running, he accomplished NOTHING in the Senate which is his MAIN job ... Absolutely ... NOTHING other than saying "present" for a vote or two. The guy is a GREAT con-artist for the young - don't fall for it. I do NOT like EITHER party canidates. Was for the first time going to vote third party, but there is no one there. :p __________________ Sink them all! Last edited by Monica Lewinsky; 09-13-2008 at 07:38 PM.

09-13-2008, 12:37 PM	#3
Frame57 Sea Lord Join Date: May 2008 Location: 1300 feet on the crapper Posts: 1,872 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Right! Like Slick Willy never having sex with that woman...Lying to congress...You think that Barak never heard Jeremiah Wrong's racist anti-american sermons after going to that church for 20 years? The bilge rat sold those sermons in the church lobby...How about the Clintons and Biden just 2 montha ago claiming that this junior seneator was not qualified to handle the presidency? Now all of a sudden he is? The Pinocchio's here are the dems!

09-13-2008, 02:05 PM	#6
Kapt Z Grey Wolf Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 810 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	Such is not the case with the Bush Doctrine. Yes, Sarah Palin didn't know what it is. But neither does Charlie Gibson. I would feel better about that if I thought, for a minute, Bush knew either.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode