Intresting Obama/binladen article
- Thread starter EddieS'04
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
Steve McKellop
Well-Known Member
Leon to Barry..............:smack::smack:
Robert Thomas
Well-Known Member
Interesting if it is true. Some of the actions of the President and Staff were odd it you think back on them. I saw a walking interview with Panetta shortly after the announcement and he made some statements that I thought were odd at the time.
Who knows?
Who knows?
Rick Kent
Well-Known Member
Sorta casts doubt on the "I ordered" part. Maybe that's why he felt the need to say it over and over.
"It's not a lie if you believe it", George Castanza.
"It's not a lie if you believe it", George Castanza.
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 1,878
- Reaction score
- 65
- What engine do you have?
- V8 engine
- What year is your Sport Trac?
- 2007
- What Generation is your Sport Trac?
- 2n Gen Owner
Yeah, I saw the article above and almost posted it here but couldn't seem to find a good second source. It wouldn't suprise me if it were true. Barry O looks like he's been told to "go sit down and watch the TV" in the photo that has been published of them all watching it in real time. Some look happy and some look concerned but BHO looks like it's an awful night IMO!
I see the article as just more anti-Obama propaganda, and unwilling to admit that bin Laden was killed on Obama's watch.
Nobody knows what went on in those meeting leading up to the raid on bin Laden's coompound. We may never know the true inside details of what went on during those classified strategy and planning meetings. I don't think the report is credible, nor does it make any difference in the fact that we did indeed get bin Laden.
I think the obvious political/campaign ads for Rand Paul and Donald Trump certainly make the website and article very obviously an anti-Obama site and attempting to jumpstart the 2012 Presidential Campaign with more unproven inuendo's like Obama's birth certificate feasco.
If the Tea Party and/or Republicans hope to get Obama out of office at the next election, they need to do it with Obama's debt/spending and with provable facts or they risk allienating a lot of people, including me.
I have previously said that I do not like a lot of what Obama has done, or at least tried to do since he has been in office, but I feel that those are the issues that he should be called out on not all this childish BS. All of this crap about his birth certificate, and unfounded rumors only serves to make Obama's opponents look like a bunch of pompus childish idiots in the eyes of the voting Americans, and that certainly applies to Donald Trump.
...Rich
Nobody knows what went on in those meeting leading up to the raid on bin Laden's coompound. We may never know the true inside details of what went on during those classified strategy and planning meetings. I don't think the report is credible, nor does it make any difference in the fact that we did indeed get bin Laden.
I think the obvious political/campaign ads for Rand Paul and Donald Trump certainly make the website and article very obviously an anti-Obama site and attempting to jumpstart the 2012 Presidential Campaign with more unproven inuendo's like Obama's birth certificate feasco.
If the Tea Party and/or Republicans hope to get Obama out of office at the next election, they need to do it with Obama's debt/spending and with provable facts or they risk allienating a lot of people, including me.
I have previously said that I do not like a lot of what Obama has done, or at least tried to do since he has been in office, but I feel that those are the issues that he should be called out on not all this childish BS. All of this crap about his birth certificate, and unfounded rumors only serves to make Obama's opponents look like a bunch of pompus childish idiots in the eyes of the voting Americans, and that certainly applies to Donald Trump.
...Rich
Last edited by a moderator:
Bud Williams
Well-Known Member
Interesting article, It seems very plausible considering Obamas past record of delaying.
Valerie Jarrett is a extreme leftist, he would do anything on her advice...I'd be willing to bet there are groups high up in this administration that are gathering info against Obama to either keep him in-line or impeach him...that puts Biden in charge and Hillary would be VP....
But Biden is such a dork, Hillary would order him around like a lap dog...:bwahaha:
Valerie Jarrett is a extreme leftist, he would do anything on her advice...I'd be willing to bet there are groups high up in this administration that are gathering info against Obama to either keep him in-line or impeach him...that puts Biden in charge and Hillary would be VP....
But Biden is such a dork, Hillary would order him around like a lap dog...:bwahaha:
Mark K 2
Well-Known Member
I think we're reaching the point where the anti-Obama bitching will start turning off moderates and those on the fence to the anti-Obama cause. Personally, I know of two moderates who are so sick of the anti-Obama rhetoric that they don't even listen anymore. In fact, their conversations indicate they may actually be more inclined to support his re-election, which was not their leanings a few months ago.
Mark K,
That's exactly what I am saying, and you said it very well.
I don't object to anyone's criticisim of Obama for thinks that are factual, but when people start making up crap or starting rumors about someithing that are just BS rumors I have to draw the line. Those untruths are only going to galvanize his supporters and an make the people who really don't support Obama as a bunch of cry babies who will make up any BS lies to make him look bad..
I thought Bushes performance as POTUS in his last term was for the most part pathetic, but it was mostly his doing. The lies and crap about Obama serves no useful purpose and in the end will most likely guarantee his reelection as more people recognize that they are lies, the less they will be drawn to other candidates supported by the liars.
...Rich
That's exactly what I am saying, and you said it very well.
I don't object to anyone's criticisim of Obama for thinks that are factual, but when people start making up crap or starting rumors about someithing that are just BS rumors I have to draw the line. Those untruths are only going to galvanize his supporters and an make the people who really don't support Obama as a bunch of cry babies who will make up any BS lies to make him look bad..
I thought Bushes performance as POTUS in his last term was for the most part pathetic, but it was mostly his doing. The lies and crap about Obama serves no useful purpose and in the end will most likely guarantee his reelection as more people recognize that they are lies, the less they will be drawn to other candidates supported by the liars.
...Rich
Robert Thomas
Well-Known Member
The answer to anything adverse about President Obama is always: Tea Party/and or any Republican, Bush, Rand Paul, and now Donald Trump.
The article says nothing about Bin Laden not being killed on Obama's watch, nor have I heard anyone express that view. The article is about how the decision came about. It says that the President gave Panetta the go ahead for a raid.
No doubt that presidents throughout time have made possible politically dangerous decisions in this manner. We win I win, we lose you lose. I may not like this, but, I understand it. As a independent I didn't think the article was "bashing", just a realistic possibility of how the events happened.
I can't believe any knowledgeable voter would be swayed to not vote for who they thought was the best candidate.
The article says nothing about Bin Laden not being killed on Obama's watch, nor have I heard anyone express that view. The article is about how the decision came about. It says that the President gave Panetta the go ahead for a raid.
No doubt that presidents throughout time have made possible politically dangerous decisions in this manner. We win I win, we lose you lose. I may not like this, but, I understand it. As a independent I didn't think the article was "bashing", just a realistic possibility of how the events happened.
I can't believe any knowledgeable voter would be swayed to not vote for who they thought was the best candidate.
Les
Well-Known Member
This article leaves us with more questions, than answers.
Redfish,
I think you might be amazed at how many people believe Obams was not born in the USA, or is a Muslim not Christian, etc.. That only makes gullible people beleive these lies.
It's nice to think that the American voter is smart enough to vote for the best qualified candidate for President, but the real truth is that most American voters are simply only interested in their own agenda, and do not look at the real issues facing America.
That is also aided by the fact that the candidates running for office only want to talk about what they "Think" are the issue that put them in the best light. Most of the candidates spend most of their time and money slinging mud, lies and half truths about their opponents, and very little time discussing the real issues.
Most American voters vote for a candidate based on such things like charisma, looks, stirs up emotions in his speeches or because he appears to be one of them.
Look back to 2000 and the voters in Broward county Florida who could not figure out how to punch the ballot and then cried foul, claiming it was a Republican conspiracy to rig the election for Bush.
Nixon lost to Kennedy because he looked sinister with his 5 Oclock shadow and his "Tricky Dick" nick name.
Ford lost to Carter because his wife was an alcoholic and he was clumsy and kept falling down.
Clinton was a womanizer draft dodger and reported to have a Bubba mentality...but he won because he was charismatic.
George W. Bush was regarded as dumb and a draft dodger, but he won because many people felt he was like the guy next door.
Obama was elected because he has the same kind of charisma as Clinton, but not the womanizer, and not the Bubba mentality.
Of course, all the winning candidates will tell you that they won simply because they all had a better plan for America...even though they never actually revealed this plan in any detail while they were candidates. It's only after the election that we find out their plans are just empty promises, or way too costly.
No, I'm sorry but I don't see your vision of American voter intelligence.
...Rich
I think you might be amazed at how many people believe Obams was not born in the USA, or is a Muslim not Christian, etc.. That only makes gullible people beleive these lies.
It's nice to think that the American voter is smart enough to vote for the best qualified candidate for President, but the real truth is that most American voters are simply only interested in their own agenda, and do not look at the real issues facing America.
That is also aided by the fact that the candidates running for office only want to talk about what they "Think" are the issue that put them in the best light. Most of the candidates spend most of their time and money slinging mud, lies and half truths about their opponents, and very little time discussing the real issues.
Most American voters vote for a candidate based on such things like charisma, looks, stirs up emotions in his speeches or because he appears to be one of them.
Look back to 2000 and the voters in Broward county Florida who could not figure out how to punch the ballot and then cried foul, claiming it was a Republican conspiracy to rig the election for Bush.
Nixon lost to Kennedy because he looked sinister with his 5 Oclock shadow and his "Tricky Dick" nick name.
Ford lost to Carter because his wife was an alcoholic and he was clumsy and kept falling down.
Clinton was a womanizer draft dodger and reported to have a Bubba mentality...but he won because he was charismatic.
George W. Bush was regarded as dumb and a draft dodger, but he won because many people felt he was like the guy next door.
Obama was elected because he has the same kind of charisma as Clinton, but not the womanizer, and not the Bubba mentality.
Of course, all the winning candidates will tell you that they won simply because they all had a better plan for America...even though they never actually revealed this plan in any detail while they were candidates. It's only after the election that we find out their plans are just empty promises, or way too costly.
No, I'm sorry but I don't see your vision of American voter intelligence.
...Rich
Robert Thomas
Well-Known Member
"Knowledgeable Voter" (Don't have a vision of overall American voter) (Does not include anyone in Broward Co Florida)
"Who they thought was the best candidate" (Never said most qualified or smartest candidate. I have no problem with voting for their own agenda. Jobs , Union Support, Security. or my personal favorite Free Ice cream for Seniors.
Nixon was Sinister - Ford was clumsy and a bad golfer - Clinton "it's the economy stupid -
Bush ran against Gore - Obama promised everything to everyone.
Don't care if Obama was born on the moon or is a Buddhist. He is the President. The true argument was never about was the birth certificate, it is about the wording in the Constitution and the writing of the founding fathers regarding the natural born citizen clause. Only the Court can decide that argument.
"Who they thought was the best candidate" (Never said most qualified or smartest candidate. I have no problem with voting for their own agenda. Jobs , Union Support, Security. or my personal favorite Free Ice cream for Seniors.
Nixon was Sinister - Ford was clumsy and a bad golfer - Clinton "it's the economy stupid -
Bush ran against Gore - Obama promised everything to everyone.
Don't care if Obama was born on the moon or is a Buddhist. He is the President. The true argument was never about was the birth certificate, it is about the wording in the Constitution and the writing of the founding fathers regarding the natural born citizen clause. Only the Court can decide that argument.
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
People would renege on their beliefs and vote for someone they don't like just because they're fed up with protests against that person they don't like?
Isn't that partially how Obama obtained the highest office in the land? I'm sure we recall that at least one influential group had the "game plan" of getting Obama into office, letting him "run amok", as so to have an uncontested field for their chosen candidate in 2012.
Sigh..and these people are the voting public? :banghead: "Vanity of vanities" comes to mind here.
Wow, we actually agree. There might even be a nugget of truth in your observations on the habits of the voting public, unlike that faux pas you had with the nationality and number of foreigners in Japan :grin:
In terms of the article, it's not as though there isn't an established track record of Obama's course of action to be inaction, and vacillation to be his normal state when a decision is called for. How many times did he vote "present" in the Senate again? He also missed 24% of the roll call votes during his time as a Senator, rounding up that means he wasn't even there a quarter of the time. Though I'm not evaluating the veracity of the article here, for the record.
EddieS'04
In Memoriam 1950-2022
Anyone ever notice, on this board? When some things get posted, that some others disagree with. A few get a little deeper than disagreeing. They tend go into auto pilot :soap: of calling articles propaganda. In a very diplomatic way calling the oppsing view, dumb or gullible.
I personaly feel as if they are trying to create menticide, with their beliefs snd inteligence. I hope Im wrong. It sure looks that way alot. If I tell someone enough times, thier opinion is wrong and what they read is all propaganda. I might be able to make them think like me. It is belittleing and undermining Aright to, the others opposing view.. Maybe those that do this need to step up and call out the names of those thay disagree with. And be specific about where in the article the koolaid is. instead of dismissing the whole thing. Then having the same old thing to say, to a mixed belief audience. Some never comeback to the conversation afterwards. I know I have steped out.
I personaly feel as if they are trying to create menticide, with their beliefs snd inteligence. I hope Im wrong. It sure looks that way alot. If I tell someone enough times, thier opinion is wrong and what they read is all propaganda. I might be able to make them think like me. It is belittleing and undermining Aright to, the others opposing view.. Maybe those that do this need to step up and call out the names of those thay disagree with. And be specific about where in the article the koolaid is. instead of dismissing the whole thing. Then having the same old thing to say, to a mixed belief audience. Some never comeback to the conversation afterwards. I know I have steped out.
Andy Chase
Well-Known Member
When I first saw that photo in the newspaper I was questioning why the president is sitting in a folding chair in the corner and not in a big chair at the table... It's almost like he's voting "Present" like when he was a senator.
KL and Eddie,
I agree with you in part, but only to the extent that too many people are finding fault with Obama based on rumors and inuendos that have not been proven to be factual.
He was born in Hawaii and has presented a birth certificate to prove it, yet people still won't accept it and claim there is a conspiracy to hide his true birth place??
He graduated from Harvard, yet Trump questions that he did not really earn his degree??
He is accused of being a Muslim, even while his Christian pastor (Rev Wright) was on a rampage, and he was getting all the blame for what Rev. Wright was saying??
Now he gets bin Laden after a 10 year manhunt, but people what to armchair quarterback his decisions and imply that others made the decision...not him? Does it really matter if we got bin Laden on May 1st or April 1st??
If you want to call Obama out about the Economy, Jobs, Healthcare, the huge deficeit and other important issues that he has failed to produce results, than I will agree with you 100%.
Those are the issues that are going to get him thrown out of office.
Black voters tend to support black candidates. Even when the politician has been shown to have betrayed the public's trust they are often reelected, simply because many blacks feel that the charges were racially motivated. Crying "Wolf" everytime Obama says or does anything is likely to lead to his reelection because people will feel it's a smear campaign and his opponents are racists.
I know everybody will now plead innocent, but look at the things that Obama is being accused of when there is absolutely no proof, or evidence...just someone who starts a rumor.
I don't want to see Obama get reelected just because of a voter backlash.
...Rich
I agree with you in part, but only to the extent that too many people are finding fault with Obama based on rumors and inuendos that have not been proven to be factual.
He was born in Hawaii and has presented a birth certificate to prove it, yet people still won't accept it and claim there is a conspiracy to hide his true birth place??
He graduated from Harvard, yet Trump questions that he did not really earn his degree??
He is accused of being a Muslim, even while his Christian pastor (Rev Wright) was on a rampage, and he was getting all the blame for what Rev. Wright was saying??
Now he gets bin Laden after a 10 year manhunt, but people what to armchair quarterback his decisions and imply that others made the decision...not him? Does it really matter if we got bin Laden on May 1st or April 1st??
If you want to call Obama out about the Economy, Jobs, Healthcare, the huge deficeit and other important issues that he has failed to produce results, than I will agree with you 100%.
Those are the issues that are going to get him thrown out of office.
Black voters tend to support black candidates. Even when the politician has been shown to have betrayed the public's trust they are often reelected, simply because many blacks feel that the charges were racially motivated. Crying "Wolf" everytime Obama says or does anything is likely to lead to his reelection because people will feel it's a smear campaign and his opponents are racists.
I know everybody will now plead innocent, but look at the things that Obama is being accused of when there is absolutely no proof, or evidence...just someone who starts a rumor.
I don't want to see Obama get reelected just because of a voter backlash.
...Rich
Last edited by a moderator:
Mark K 2
Well-Known Member
It's easy to do if you're a voter on the fence.
I have a pair of neighbors who supported Scott Walker in his bid for the governorship of Wisconsin... yard signs, rallies, the whole works. All it took was one certain bill proposal to change their minds about him to the extent that they're signed up to be crew leaders in his recall petition drive.
Mark K,
Thanks for your opinion and support on this issue.
As I previously stated, people are bashing Obama for mostly rumors and statements claiming to be on the inside yet remain nameless??
Even the article posted by Eddie cast deep concerns about Obama's ability to make a decision, but it comes from an "Unnamed source?". The article takes on the illusion of an interview with someone who was present and knew all the details?? Are we supposed to accept this article as fact when it comes for questionable source completely covered with anti-Obama ads.
Only a handful of top Obama administration personell ever knew that we had a possible fix on bin Laden, and only they attended those strategy and planning meetings. Considering they were primarily Obama's hand picked staff, who was there that would be so critical of Obama's decision making. Even if it was true, they were all his appointees and trusted friends. Does anybody actually believe anything in in that fake interview??
...Rich
Thanks for your opinion and support on this issue.
As I previously stated, people are bashing Obama for mostly rumors and statements claiming to be on the inside yet remain nameless??
Even the article posted by Eddie cast deep concerns about Obama's ability to make a decision, but it comes from an "Unnamed source?". The article takes on the illusion of an interview with someone who was present and knew all the details?? Are we supposed to accept this article as fact when it comes for questionable source completely covered with anti-Obama ads.
Only a handful of top Obama administration personell ever knew that we had a possible fix on bin Laden, and only they attended those strategy and planning meetings. Considering they were primarily Obama's hand picked staff, who was there that would be so critical of Obama's decision making. Even if it was true, they were all his appointees and trusted friends. Does anybody actually believe anything in in that fake interview??
...Rich
Bill V
Well-Known Member
I don't think anyone's saying that people are being swayed to vote for someone other than who they think is/was the best candidate. Instead, they're saying that it's incredible how easily someone's opinion of who is/was the best candidate can be changed--either because they were bamboozled in their prior opinion, or they're being bamboozled in their new opinion, or (most likely) both.
As a fellow independent, I thought the article was completely right-wing propaganda bashing. There appeared to be very few facts given (and because of the anonymity of the source, how "factual" they were is suspect), and then there was a lot of anti-Obama conjecture regarding what Obama's or anyone else's reasoning was for the actions taken. What a right-winger assumes to be indecisive stalling, a left-winger would assume to be time for well-thought-out consideration and planning. And likely neither one is right. And pretty much everything in this article falls into that category.
