Tuesday, April 01, 2008
Bele Obama Caught Lying Again...
But Wait...There's More!
This time, he recognizes his own handwriting after claiming he didn't recognize his own handwriting. Politico:
During his first run for elected office, Barack Obama played a greater role than his aides now acknowledge in crafting liberal stands on gun control, the death penalty and abortion — positions that appear at odds with the more moderate image he has projected during his presidential campaign.
The evidence comes from an amended version of an Illinois voter group’s detailed questionnaire, filed under his name during his 1996 bid for a state Senate seat.
Late last year, in response to a Politico story about Obama’s answers to the original questionnaire, his aides said he “never saw or approved” the questionnaire.
“Sen. Obama didn’t fill out these state Senate questionnaires — a staffer did — and there are several answers that didn't reflect his views then or now,” Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for Obama’s campaign, said in an e-mailed statement. “He may have jotted some notes on the front page of the questionnaire at the meeting, but that doesn't change the fact that some answers didn't reflect his views. [Sniff, sniff - I smell dog shit, do you? - Drake]
But a Politico examination determined that Obama was actually interviewed about the issues on the questionnaire by the liberal Chicago nonprofit group that issued it. And it found that Obama — the day after sitting for the interview — filed an amended version of the questionnaire, which appears to contain Obama’s own handwritten notes added to one answer.
Obama and his then-campaign manager, who Obama’s campaign asserts filled out the questionnaires, were familiar with the group, its members and its positions, since both were active in it before Obama's 1996 state Senate run.
Through an aide, Obama, who won the group’s endorsement as well as the statehouse seat, did not dispute that the handwriting was his. But he contended it doesn’t prove he completed, approved — or even read — the latter questionnaire.
Consider the question of whether minors should be required to get parental consent — or at least notify their parents — before having abortion.
The first version of Obama’s questionnaire responds with a simple “No.”
The amended version, though, answers less stridently: “Depends on how young — possibly for extremely young teens, i.e., 12- or 13-year-olds.”
By 2004, when his campaign filled out a similar questionnaire for the IVI-IPO during his campaign for U.S. Senate, the answer to a similar question contained still more nuance, but also more precision. “I would oppose any legislation that does not include a bypass provision for minors who have been victims of, or have reason to fear, physical or sexual abuse,” he wrote.
It could also provide ammunition for a line of attack quietly peddled for some time by Republicans. They allege Obama has a penchant for blaming his staff for gaffes ranging from missing a union event in New Hampshire to circulating opposition research highlighting the Clintons’ ties to India and Indian-Americans to underestimating the amount of cash bundled for his campaigns by his former fundraiser, indicted businessman Antoin “Tony” Rezko.
And it wasn't his handwriting...but then it was his handwriting...but wait, no, it was a "staffer's" handwriting - a staffer whose handwriting just happens to be exactly the same as Obama's handwriting. My, my, what an amazing coincidence!
And - most eye-popping of all, saying that "possibly" parents should be notified of their 12 or 13-year child receiving an abortion? Possibly? It's okay to require parental notification for tattoos or ear piercings for underage children, but not for a 12 or 13-year old seeking an abortion?
Wow - you Liberals and Progressive just kneel and worship - salivating - at the Altar of The Dead
Please, Obamaniacs, tell me - when are you going to come out of your coma and hold Obama responsible for his lies, his other lies, his other other lies and his penchant for telling tall, tall tales that are not true?
I bet Obama blames his farts on the family dog, too!
But wait...there's more!
The Clinton campaign today accused the Obama campaign of "false advertising," claiming that a recent ad Obama released in Pennsylvania was disngenous because Obama has been the recipient of more than $200,000 from the oil and gas industry.
In the ad, Obama says, "I'm Barack Obama, and I don't take money from oil companies or lobbyists, and I won't let them block change any more."
Obama has taken $213,884 from the oil and gas industry as of Feb. 29th, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Just last month, Obama took more than $11,000 from individuals at Exxon-Mobil, per the center. At least 12 of those contributions came from individuals who contributed $250 each, the lowest listed donation.
Obama spokesman Bill Burton, reiterated that Obama doesn't take PAC money or money from federal registered lobbyists, and "that includes oil companies and oil lobbyists."
"I don't take PAC money,” [Obama] said this evening. “I don't take money from federal registered lobbyists. I don't want those strings attached.”
Keep drinking the Kool Aid, Obamaniacs. Keep drinking. And while you do, Hillary will waltz away, stealing the Democrat Party Candidacy for president all because the Obamaniacs are too stupid to face the fact that their Poodle is a phony, a charlatan and a LIAR!
Let me ask you a question: Do you ever get sick and tired of the smell of feces from your head being permanently stuck in the depths of your colon?
Personally, when the Left holds accountable and responsible their Pols - and applies the same standard to themselves that they apply to others - that would be a good start. I won't hold my breath waiting for them.
What ideas do you have that you think might work?
So Jerry is trying to figure out a way to beat the polygraph/lie detector.
Costanza tells him: "remember Jerry, it's not a lie if you beleive that it's true."
The Libs operate on that same philosophy, don't they!
accordance and compliance with Fair Use Section 107 U.S. Copyright Code.
All other images and content © 2005-2009 David Drake.
Not responsible for content contained at linked sites.
Policy on commenting:
- Anonymous comments have little chance of being published.
- Comments made on posts 60 days old or older have little chance of being published.
- Published comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog author.
- Discretion of publishing or rejecting submitted comments rests solely with the owner and creator of this blog.
- Comments that egregiously "plug" (i.e. advertise or promote) another site or blog will be rejected. This doesn't mean you cannot include a link to your story, blog or to another site, but don't go overboard.
- Profanity is not a disqualifying factor, but profane rants solely for purposes of profanity are unlikely to be published.
- The owner and creator of this blog is not liable or responsible for the opinions of those who comment.