Norman, Hilary and Media Silence - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-17-2007, 09:26 AM   #76
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 05:57 AM
Men are the only ones allowed to be calculating-women are not. At least not Democratic women.
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 09-26-2007, 03:18 PM   #77
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:57 AM

Questions for Hillary
By D. Morris

Even for her, Hillary Clinton showed tremendous skill at batting aside questions asked of her on the Sunday shows this past weekend and giving, instead, her standard talking points. Pinning this lady down is admittedly not easy. Two of the best interviewers on political TV -- Chris Wallace and Tim Russert -- asked tough questions but got scripted and memorized retorts for their pains. But here are some questions (along with follow-ups) that I suggest they ask during the next round of Sunday shows -- if she ever goes back on the circuit.

•Bill Clinton refused to accept political action committee (PAC) contributions in his campaigns of 1992 and 1996. Obama and Edwards are following his example. Why aren't you?

•After all the bad experiences you had with Johnnie Chung and Charlie Trie and their campaign donations in the 1996 election cycle, why were you not more careful in vetting the donations generated by Norman Hsu? Didn't you learn your lesson in 1996?

(As a follow-up to No. 2) After you found that you had to return almost a million dollars to the donors bundled by Hsu, you said you would be more vigilant in examining the backgrounds of donors. Why didn't you come to that conclusion before the Hsu scandal, based on your 1996 experiences?

•Norman Hsu was no ordinary donor. He was the biggest bundler in your campaign; he gave funds to the Clinton Global Initiative and the Clinton School of Government in Arkansas and took Patti Solis Doyle, your campaign manager, and other aides on an all-expense-paid trip to Las Vegas. He also donated to Democratic Gov. Tom Vilsack of Iowa, whose campaign debt you agreed to help repay. In view of his high profile in your campaign, why didn't you check him out more thoroughly, and what does this say about your ability to make quality appointments?

•You base your healthcare proposal on the need to cover 47 million "uninsured Americans." Since about a third of them are illegal immigrants and another third are eligible for Medicaid right now and just don't apply for it, aren't you overstating the problem?

(As a follow-up to No. 5) In 2005 you co-sponsored legislation to provide health insurance to the children of illegal immigrants who have lived in this country for five years. In other words, their children would get subsidized healthcare under the State Children's Health Insurance Program as a reward for dodging the cops for five years. Do you still support that proposal?

•You say that your healthcare proposal will leave alone those who are happy with their current insurance. But if you provide health benefits for close to 50 million new people, thereby generating huge new demand for medical care without any increase in the supply of doctors, nurses or hospitals, it will drive up prices radically. Won't that force you to institute cost controls by limiting the care those now on health insurance can receive?

•In Arkansas, you achieved fame by urging mandatory testing for teachers and demanded that those who failed the competency tests be dismissed. You and your husband did this and implemented this policy. As a result, he was denied the endorsement by the Arkansas Teachers Union during his time as governor. Do you still support your proposal of 1983 and 1984 for mandatory teacher competency tests for current teachers -- not just for new ones?

•In Arkansas, you pioneered the idea of testing students to ascertain their progress and holding schools accountable for any shortcomings in their test scores. Now California Democratic Congressman George Miller, chairman of the House Education Committee, wants to change the No Child Left Behind Act to substitute graduation rates for test scores as the measure of a school's performance. Opponents say this is injecting a non-objective standard and undercuts the whole purpose of the legislation. Do you support Miller's proposal?

There's more, but we've run out of time! I hope that the journalists who next have Clinton in their sights read this column, take notes and act on it. The answers to these questions would be nice to have before we elect her president.
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-10-2007, 11:32 PM   #78
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:57 AM

Peter Paul and Hilary.

Largest Campaign Fraud In History:

http://hillarytruth.blogspot.com/

Watch the Google Video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...019&pr=goog-sl


" I want to thank Peter Paul"

It's still in the courts much to the chagrin of the Clintons.
Could this be the "Truth Boat" that swiftly brings Hilary down?

dbs
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-10-2007, 11:39 PM   #79
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:57 AM
Here's better video explained by a very articulate and astute fellow:

__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-10-2007, 11:51 PM   #80
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:57 AM

One more:

http://www.peterfpaul.com/

Happy forth right and honest researching, my truth seeking liberal friends.


dbs
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-11-2007, 02:55 AM   #81
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 04:57 AM
This video was made in July... Not one Republican canidate has exposed it?



Good work Diamond...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-11-2007, 04:24 AM   #82
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 04:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond

Could this be the "Truth Boat" that swiftly brings Hilary down?

dbs
Heh. Truth.
At least we can take comfort in the fact that our most arduous believers will always seek the truth no matter how it suits their politics. I mean, right?

Apparently it doesn't even have to be the truth to have an effect.
Those who repeat lies are still perpetrating lies.
Who would want to stand behind a group of disgusting liars?
Speaking of liars, I remember a particular thread about phony soldiers and a particular link posted by a particular poster.....

Who would would beleive these (below) partisan lies, even after notable Republicans and Conservatives like John McCain and Bill O'Reilly condmened them:


Alfred French was the first man who appeared in the first SBL ad.

French did his best to discredit Kerry in the ad.
Then French, in an interview told The Oregonian
"I was not a witness to these events but my friends were,"
after signing an affidavit to tell the truth, he said "I served with John Kerry. . . . He is lying about his record."
apparently he wasn't telling the truth. For shame.


George Elliot was the 3rd person seen in the first SBL ad.

In Dec 1969 he wrote :
"In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, LTJG Kerry was unsurpassed........(he was an)acknowledged leader in his peer group. His bearing and appearance are above reproach."

April 13, 2004, Elliott told USA Today
""This was an exemplary action," he said. "There's no question about."

Aug 2004, The Boston Globe
The Boston Globe, "It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here. ... I knew it was wrong. ... In a hurry I signed it and faxed it back. That was a mistake."


Louis Letson, 4th person in the first SBL ad.

Military records prove that he was lying when he said he treated Kerry for his wounds. He would go on later to say that it was what he had overheard, even after signing the affidavit.

William Schachte
Said he was with them on the boat, this was refuted by alll 3 men actually on the boat, he couldn't prove otherwise and wouldn't you know it? He never signed the affidavit, he is after all an attorney himself.

Adrian Lonsdale
In 1996 (Kerry Senatorial race) said to Massachussets reporters:
"It was because of the bravery and the courage of the young officers that ran boats ... the swift boats and the Coast Guard cutters, and Senator Kerry was no exception." 8 years later he has a change of heart...hmm, I wonder why?

Larry Thurlow
April 2004 told USA Today:
"was extremely brave, and I wouldn't argue that point."
Signed an affidavit a few months later and claimed they weren't even under fire that day.

The Washington Post got ahold of the citation for a Bronze Star that Thurlow won that very same day for actions on a boat that was right alongside Kerry's. The citation detailed how both his boat and Kerry's boat faced "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire." Liar

Roy Hoffmann
In 1969 he wrote:
That Kerry's actions were a "shining example of completely overwhelming the enemy."

June 2003, Boston Globe
on the actions: ''It took guts, and I admire that.''
"I am not going to say anything negative about him. He's a good man."

May 6, 2004, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Hoffman "acknowledged he had no first-hand knowledge to discredit Kerry's claims to valor and said that although Kerry was under his command, he really didn't know Kerry much personally." The next month, Hoffmann reiterated, "I did not know Kerry personally. I didn't ride the boat with him."

John O'Neill wrote the SBL book. He said 60 men contributed to it. 1 of them served directly with Kerry (Stephen Gardner). I could give you no less than 500 words discrediting this sack of garbage.

What about his absolute hack of a co-author, Jerome Corsi?
Who once posted on an online forum, that Islam was a "worthless, dangerous Satanic religion" and further ""RAGHEADS are Boy-Bumpers as clearly as they are Women-Haters -- it all goes together" implied that Kerry's Jewish ancestry was some sort of problem and also implied that Hillary Clinton must have been a lesbian because she couldn't keep Bill satisifed.

This is the type of crowd that those who believe the Swift Liars stand behind. It takes no more than a Google search to find any of this.

As for Partisan ties, if you still doubt that, wake up:

4 Bush campaign officials were linked to the group including Ken Cordier, who actually appeared in an ad. John O'Neill goes way back with the Bush family, Merrie Spaeth, the spokesperson for the SBL worked on the 2000 Bush campiagn, Bob Perry longtime associate of Karl Rove, Harlan Crow, trustee of the Bush Library, Margaret Wilson was counsel for Bush when was Governor of Texas.

And above all else, the dude Kerry pulled from the water, he's of course lying as well (right?) as the others in the same group. All but Stephen Gardner, who has to be telling the truth, I mean, for goodness sakes he got John O'Neill and 50 other people who weren't even there or witnessed it.

Anywhoo, just a SMALL sampling of these particular LIARS. This is an old issue meant to display a certain hypocrisy, I'll be glad to debate the veracity of that particular pack of lies any day of the week.

It's too bad there are posters who make garbage claims or random posts and then refuse to even debate the validity of them in any way. Worthless.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 10-11-2007, 01:51 PM   #83
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 04:57 AM
He might post a picture or two...

But he will never back up anything.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-11-2007, 02:48 PM   #84
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 04:57 AM
context.

evolution.

clips and sound bites that are 13 years old.

for heaven's sake.

dbs
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-11-2007, 04:31 PM   #85
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 05:57 AM
I thought this was disproved when I found it a top story on practically every major news site.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 10-16-2007, 01:55 PM   #86
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:57 AM

More media silence:

Can You Hear Me Now, Hillary?
By David Knowles
Oct 16th 2007 9:02AM
Filed Under:Hillary Clinton, Democrats, Featured Stories, 2008 President


Prepare yourself for the next big Clinton scandal. As The Hill reports today, a new GOP strategy has metastasized which relies heavily on claims made in the book "Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton," by New York Times reporters Don Van Natta Jr. and Jeff Gerth.

The explosive accusation is that, back in 1992, staffers for the Clintons intercepted the frequency of a cell phone conversation in which political rivals were discussing the possibility of bringing forth another woman who had had "sexual relations" with Bill. Hillary is said to have listened to the conversation, which, by that time, was against the law.

From the Hill:


A GOP official said, "Hillary Clinton's campaign hypocrisy continues to know no bounds. It is rather unbelievable that Clinton would listen in to conversations being conducted by political opponents, but refuse to allow our intelligence agencies to listen in to our conversations being conducted by terrorists as they plot and plan to kill us. Team Clinton can expect to see and hear this over and over again over the course of the next year."


Oh joy. Of course, the timing of the release of this fifteen year-old-scandal, as anonymously sourced in a widely panned book, couldn't be worse for Mrs. Clinton. It coincides with the revelation that Verizon eagerly handed over phone records to the FBI without bothering to inquire whether doing so was legal. If you've ever wondered who that hipster guy in glasses in the television ads was talking to when he asks, "Can you hear me now?" now you have your answer. The boys at the bureau. Now that's a network!

But back to Hillary Clinton. If the allegation of listening in on an enemy's phone conversation was true, this would, indeed, make her something of a hypocrite. In fact, it would make her a criminal, just as Verizon may yet be found to have broken the law. So, the obvious question is, why hasn't law enforcement looked into the matter? Another intriguing aspect of the story is, why didn't we hear about the other woman named in the purported phone call? If she indeed existed, why wouldn't the Clintons' foes trot her out into the light of day as threatened? Tune in next week to "Unsolved Clinton Mysteries."

If you're thinking that something doesn't quite add up about this story, you may be right. Consider the review that "Her Way" received in Van Natta and Gerth's own paper by revered presidential historian Robert Dallek:


The book is almost uniformly negative and overly focused on what they consider the Clinton's scandalous past and darker aspects of Mrs. Clinton's personality. Her ambition, for example, is seen as an unattractive compulsion that, at times, has led her into untoward behavior. They assert that the Clintons had a longstanding deal to win the presidency, first for Bill and then for Hillary, a secret pact of ambition.

The evidence of such a pact-interviews that have already been challenged in the press-is less than convincing. Moreover, that the Clintons are ambitions and hunger for the public spotlight is obvious. But does this make them different from anyone else in politics, including two of our most notable presidents, Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt?

Whether or not we should believe the central claim, that Hillary herself listened to a recorded cell phone conversation, was taken up by none other than Hannity and Colmes when the authors appeared on their show to promote the book. The transcript can be read here.

So will this matter impact upon Mrs. Clinton's presidential aspirations? If the allegations could be proven, certainly, and deservedly so. But baring that iron-clad evidence, you can just add it to the pile of discarded scandals that failed to bring her down. This woman is more teflon than Ronald Reagan
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-16-2007, 02:12 PM   #87
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 05:57 AM
^ is that the best you can do?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 10-16-2007, 02:19 PM   #88
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
CTU2fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,366
Local Time: 06:57 AM
Am I wrong for not giving a rat's ass where Hillary's campaign financing comes from? If I think she'll be a good President (not sure, actually) then I could care less how dirty the money is, as long as she wins.

All this stuff is is grist for the partisan mill, nothing more or less.

And yes, that would be just as true if she were a Republican.
__________________
CTU2fan is offline  
Old 10-16-2007, 02:23 PM   #89
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
^ is that the best you can do?
"we" have a year to go still, sunshine.

dbs
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-16-2007, 02:29 PM   #90
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 05:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond


"we" have a year to go still, sunshine.

dbs


you've had since 1992 to get her, and you haven't done so yet.

what's going to change between Nov '07 and Nov '08?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com