Reply With Quote
"depends on whose ox is getting gored"
aka, double standard
book banning is a standard procedure in .... Islamic theocracies.
But it's OK if Palin does it.
Why is it that Obama is supposed to answer for everything in his past yet you are very quiet about the Dems digging in Plain's past? All I have heard from your mouth pieces is that the 'Dems are attacking Plain' when they are simply trying to get into her backround. Her past deserves as much scrutiny as does Obama's right?
"depends on whose ox is getting gored"
aka, double standard
book banning is a standard procedure in .... Islamic theocracies.
But it's OK if Palin does it.
Double standard applies for Dems too.
hey, i'm all for digging for something that's there if it's there. i'm not a blind follower like a lot of people are. one thing that should stand out in this discussion is that at least palin, or mccain for that matter,(gee, i thought mccain was running for office) isn't threatening litigation for these or any other accusations. how come we don't see any of obamessiahs old friends? how come there is always hesitation when anyone questions obamessiah about his associates?
The right wing mouth pieces have been questioning Obama's associations going on 3 or 4 months. He has answered them but this doesn't seem to placate any of those asking. How many questions is enough? The immediate answer would be to most is to explain them and move on. It's obvious that the people questioning him aren't trying to 'vet' him rather they are trying to tarnish hin in anyway they can. Seems to me that if this is fair to do towards Obama then it is most certainly fair game for Palin.
"hesitation when anyone questions obamessiah about his associates"
Who's hesitating?
"isn't threatening litigation for these or any other accusations"
what accusations? The dug up on Palin are facts, not accusations.
you could very easily ask........
......as well.
HUSSEIN has been well vetted and is a known quan y. Nothing really there, so the McSame/Palin/fear-and-smear machine is telling lies about HUSSEIN.
Palin is being vetted, and the known, factual stuff is pretty ing scary, so McSame/Palin are telling lies about themselves to hide their .
Last edited by boutons_; 09-09-2008 at 09:57 AM.
There is very little factual out there, there are, however, a bunch of rumors and lies made up by the left:
NewsWeek Fact Check
No lies. Palin is a ing nutjob and her record is atrocious. If you thought Kerry was a flip-flopper, this woman takes the cake.
If the media questioned Obama as much as they are digging into Palin's past, he would get massacred on T.V.
Alas, he isn't.
They are all s , they are politicians, but it is obvious what is going on.
I love how they haven't told you what the pet name for Palin is so you actually have to use it instead of something else like you do for "McSame"
I've been referring to her as an evil , mostly. Not so much a nickname I guess, as it is an apt description.
I don't like the slime from either direction. Calling Obama the Anti-Christ who is trying to implement Sharia Law is just as bad as calling Palin a who is covering up all sorts of things.
I'm down for rational debate, but we live in big world.
Start digging, as if Obama Bin Biden havent already sent an Army of lawyers and investigators into Alaska to find out when she had her last period, if it was painful what she eats. I am sure she will be well researched, searched,re-re-searched and any and all rocks and tundra turned over and over and over and over...........
While you are at it, google Obama and Acorn.
you mean like dumbass huffers and puffers.
Yeah, since when does the Agent of Change, the new breed, young blood politician send his army of lawyers to go TMZ blitzkrieg Alaska...
Problem is, nearly everything the left has attacked Palin with so far are outright lies and distortion of the truth. Maybe if you guys found some real problems with govorner Palin, us conservatives and republicans might listen to you guys instead of thinking "there's another dumb lib ." Obama does have real issues that should be discussed, but are entirely ignored by the alphabet news networks. They are so blatantly biased, we can call them:
ABC: All Barack Collaborators
NBC: Normal Barack Communicators
CBS: Clearly Barack Sponsors
CNN: Communist News Network
MSNBC: Most Sincere National Barack Cosponsors
I'm sure there's better ones, I just made most of those up.
It just shows how dumb you are. You should check the facts instead of blindly believeing what other people of dark hearts lie about her.
SHe's a flip flopper and has questionable judgement.
The media is gobbling McCain's and loves them some Palin.
They helped elect Bush twice. Not surprising they're in the tank again.
Since when did the right wingers become such hypersensitive sissies?
Hey it is fair game for the media to dig into Palin's past. I just thiink that Obama's religious left buddies and his Marxist friends will make life miserable for we and our families by providing everything out of Washington at our expense.
"It is not to much to say that the Cons ution is gone."
Justice James McReynolds 1936
Spare me.
When has Obama ever had to answer for like Ayers? All he's said is "I don't agree with he did, but he's a friend."
Howabout Rezko? When is the press going to get to ask the hard questions? All I see is Obama ducking the issue, and the media doing nothing to call him on it.
Spare me the whining.
None of the alleged scandals involving Obama have gotten any in-depth exposure by the media. They take his explanation at face value and then, he throws the unsavory character to whom he's been connected under the bus...from his bigoted grandmother to Rezko to Wright.
Ayers is another story. An unrepetent terrorist that Obama still considers a friend. I think that would warrant some pretty detailed explanation. But, the media can't be bothered with that now...no, they're North to Alaska.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
