^ That's what I heard, too! I guess the batshit dictators didn't get the memo and press release.

Oh, and there's this for all the FOCs (Friends of Chavez):

Israeli document: Venezuela sends uranium to Iran [2 days ago]

Quote :

"JERUSALEM (AP) — Venezuela and Bolivia are supplying Iran with uranium for its nuclear program, according to a secret Israeli government report obtained Monday by The Associated Press."

http://tinyurl.com/qsldmm

5/28/2009 11:37:38 AM

5/28/2009 11:43:18 AM

^ Would you mind seriously addressing the posts please.

5/28/2009 11:46:58 AM

^ i'll start when you start.

5/28/2009 11:48:20 AM

^ Please stop trolling. I have posted nothing but very serious news articles with no inflammatory commentary.

Obama is being tested on a number of fronts by some very bad people. You know, just like Joe "Rhetorical Flourishes" Biden said he would be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpiNfuG8YY8

5/28/2009 11:53:50 AM

Wait a minute, so Iran was not developing a nuclear program until 5 months ago?

Obama isn't being "tested" this is what Iran/NK has been doing the past couple of years. Yet another legacy of bush's we've inherited. What a great idea it was to attack the manufactured specter of terrorism in Iraq when real threats were brewing in NK and Iran, all while hooksaw cheers on.

And no one has ever said "If we just be nice and talk to the bad people, they won't be mean to us." You're attacking a position that you have made up in order to attack... guess what that's called?

5/28/2009 12:00:36 PM

^ It is not a strawman. Obama made clear that he believed talks without preconditions with dictators would be productive--yet, those same dictators have rejected talks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSFSUbMWenU

NEWFLASH: Bush is gone. When will Obama be held accountable for anything?

5/28/2009 12:10:12 PM

^ So are you against using diplomacy then? Because that's all Obama was saying there.

And guess what, if diplomacy fails, it gives you strong justification to use force if necessary, while maintaining the moral upper-hand.

5/28/2009 12:16:10 PM

^ Dude, the countries in question already have rejected talks, for God's sake! Unless they're lying about this like they lie about everything else.

Iran's president rejects nuclear talks with West

http://televisionwashington.com/floater_article1.aspx?lang=en&t=2&id=10703

North Korea quits six-party talks and threatens to restart nuclear programme
North Korea expelled nuclear inspectors on Tuesday night in a furious response to criticism from the United Nations.

http://tinyurl.com/qafz3c

5/28/2009 12:20:47 PM

^ I was talking about Obama's statement, which is what you appeared to be discussing.

Regarding NK/Iran, it's WAY too early to say they don't want to talk (at least for Iran) and give up.

In your opinion, should we just go ahead and start dropping bombs?

5/28/2009 12:23:02 PM

^ No, I think Israel is going to take care of that for us in Iran.

BTW, this is really productive "diplomatic" language from the Iranian dictator, don't you think?

Iran Threatens to Send U.S. Allies 'Into Hell'

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7015224536

5/28/2009 12:32:17 PM

We called them the "axis of evil" until recently... is that much better diplomacy?

5/28/2009 12:39:41 PM

Yes.

5/28/2009 12:41:17 PM

Nope.

I realize it may not be important to you, be we actually should (or at least strive to) be better than the people we claim to be better than.

5/28/2009 12:42:29 PM

So, how does not recognizing Holocaust deniers and mass murderers as "evil" make us better people again?

5/28/2009 12:47:33 PM

labels don't necessarily make us better or worse people. but to what end did the labels serve?

5/28/2009 12:48:41 PM

Perspective?

5/28/2009 12:50:38 PM

for whom?

5/28/2009 12:51:37 PM

Quote :

"Protecting Black Panthers The Obama administration ignores voter intimidation Imagine if Ku Klux Klan members had stood menacingly in military uniforms, with nightsticks, in front of a polling place. Add to it that they had hurled racial threats and insults at voters who tried to enter. Now suppose that the government, backed by a nationally televised video of the event, had won a court case against the Klansmen except for the perfunctory filing of a single, simple document - but that an incoming Republican administration had moved to voluntarily dismiss the already-won case. Surely that would have been front-page news, with a number of firings at the Justice Department. The flip side of this scenario is occurring right now. The culprits weren't Klansmen; they belonged to the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense. One of the defendants, Jerry Jackson, is an elected member of Philadelphia's 14th Ward Democratic Committee and was a credentialed poll watcher for Barack Obama and the Democratic Party when the violations occurred. Rather conveniently, the Obama administration has asked that the cases against Mr. Jackson, two other defendants and the party be dropped. "

[link]http://http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/protecting-black-panthers/?feat=article_related_stories[/link]

And another example of Obama's "Changing" how things are done in Washington....

Quote :

"Obama Offers Prime Posts to Those Who Helped Bankroll Campaign By Jonathan D. Salant and Julianna Goldman May 29 (Bloomberg) -- Louis Susman has one thing in common with many of his predecessors nominated to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Kingdom: money. Susman, 71, a retired Citigroup Inc. senior investment banker, raised between $200,000 and $500,000 for President Barack Obama’s presidential campaign and another $300,000 for his inauguration. On Wednesday, Obama nominated Susman to the post formally known as the Court of St. James. Like Andrew Mellon, Joseph Kennedy and Walter Annenberg before him, Susman’s credentials stem more from involvement in financing party politics than foreign policy experience. "

Yea..all presidents in the past have given these positions to big-donors. But a lot of people voted for Obama thinking he was going to be a different politician.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=adfv4RHV3Kmk

5/29/2009 10:33:33 AM

^ If that's the same case i'm thinking of, it was 1 single guy acting alone, who was removed by police, and was mostly just standing not really approaching people.

I really wouldn't have expected anything more than a slap on the wrist for anyone in that situation. It's funny in a sad way that the editorial is trying to blow it out of proportion.

Conservatives really like to whine about dumb things, don't they?

[Edited on May 29, 2009 at 11:09 AM. Reason : ]

5/29/2009 11:08:51 AM

^ The New Black Panther Party is considered a hate group by both the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League:

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/type.jsp?DT=3

http://tinyurl.com/8vo58

Quote :

"Charges brought against three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense under the Bush administration have been dropped by the Obama Justice Department, FOX News has learned."

Quote :

"The Obama administration won the case last month, but moved to dismiss the charges on May 15."

Quote :

"A poll watcher who provided an affidavit to prosecutors in the case noted that Bartle Bull, who worked as a civil rights lawyer in the south in the 1960's and is a former campaign manager for Robert Kennedy, said it was the most blatant form of voter intimidation he had ever seen. In his affidavit, obtained by FOX News, Bull wrote 'I watched the two uniformed men confront voters and attempt to intimidate voters. They were positioned in a location that forced every voter to pass in close proximity to them. The weapon was openly displayed and brandished in plain sight of voters.' He also said they tried to 'interfere with the work of other poll observers ... whom the uniformed men apparently believed did not share their preferences politically,' noting that one of the panthers turned toward the white poll observers and said 'you are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker.'"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/05/29/charges-black-panthers-dropped-obama/

Some liberals really like to defend dumb things, don't they?

[Edited on May 29, 2009 at 11:40 AM. Reason : .]

5/29/2009 11:40:00 AM

^ ... and?

Considering the facts of this situation, how big of a deal needs to be made do you think?

I question how organized the New Black Panther Party is period, let alone if they are even organizing behind this guy. He's just a 2-bit chump.

5/29/2009 1:01:33 PM

dude eats a 5 guys

that's gotta be worth something. he knows good burgers

5/29/2009 11:03:26 PM

good thing we have droves of ppl flocking to be black panthers

[Edited on May 29, 2009 at 11:11 PM. Reason : .]

5/29/2009 11:11:09 PM

Quote :

" how big of a deal needs to be made do you think? "

Voter intimidation by three guys, in front of a polling place, dressed in para-military clothing and brandishing police night-sticks is kind of a big deal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFpfQpuuVzI

[Edited on May 30, 2009 at 12:21 AM. Reason : .]

5/30/2009 12:15:25 AM

5/30/2009 1:10:08 AM

btw the black panther guys were all over drudge during the election

i'm glad they're being brought up again

cause here's what happened

cops (obviously on obama's payroll): hey you guys... you fuckin with people?

black panthers: hell yeah we are, we're keeping thousands of people from voting, much in the same way that jim crow kept whites from voting in the south... we're here to do the same... only now, it's the information age, so you guys can document it...and there's NOTHING you can do to stop it... we have bludgeoning devices

cops (still obviously on obama's payroll): no problem here

black panthers: HELL YEAH, THIS STUFF IS HAPPENING EVERYWHERE... we're organized with acorn, we've got this junk on block... there's graveyard voters rolling up in here... as a matter of fact, we've figured out a way to defraud most of the states obama's winning in

they ain't got shit on 2000 florida

it's straight up obvious the silent majority is being kept out of this one

cops: you should hit a couple ofpeople over the head with your irish-inspired shelaleighs

after all

fuck the irish

black panthers: it doesn't matter what obama is talking about, we got him...we just hope he doesn't pull some socialist shit like create an interstate... a government subsidized flight from internal systems that will eventually weaken our cities and force everyone on a reliance of cars to later complain about the costs of driving into the city!!!!1

5/30/2009 1:24:52 AM

later....

reporter guy: HEY, where's my flying cars and atomic power?

black panther: why should i know? i'm just an ignorant idiot

reporter guy: HEY LOOK BUDDY, I'VE BEEN PAYING MY TAXES.... I DIDN'T SIT HERE AND FUND VIETNAM AND DISCO ONLY TO COME OUT IGNORANT ON THE FUEL ISSUE AND IGNORE IT ONLY TO COME OUT IGNORANT ON THE FUEL ISSUE AGAIN... THERE MUST BE SOMETHING "YOU PEOPLE" DID WRONG

black panther: yeah we fucked up

reporter guy: i knew you did

black panther: yeah... we stopped caring sometime round the internet... cell phones for everyone? who could care about shit after that? I CAN GET BOOBS FOR FREE!!!!

5/30/2009 1:30:19 AM

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-05-30-obama-date_N.htm

Quote :

"His public schedule listed no official events, but that didn't stop President Obama from coming under fire after he and his wife hopped the presidential aircraft for a night on the town in Manhattan ... Even before the Obamas left Washington, the Republican National Committee issued a press release questioning the cost and appropriateness of the couple's trip in the midst of a recession. It was just a few months ago that auto executives were roundly criticized when they traveled to Washington for congressional hearings in pricey private planes. ... The White House refused to say how much the trip would cost. "

Do as I say, not as I do. Glad to see Obama is using taxpayer dollars wisely. If you're a CEO of a major corporation with a deficit? You can't fly a private jet to meet with lawmakers to try and save your company. If you're the President of a country suffering a major economic crisis and that has an almost unimaginable debt and spending deficit, you can fly you and your wife and your staff in three different jets to NYC to see a Broadway show. Nice. Change, I can believe in.

5/30/2009 5:45:17 PM

I thought they had already attacked the pres for flying around months ago...? They were doing this during the campaign, IIRC.

5/30/2009 5:58:23 PM

^^ it may not be "right" for the Obama's to go carousing in NYC at this time, but that story, and any ruckus made by the RNC over it, is pure partisan hackery just trying to gin-up mindless populist outrage.



on to actually important topics, Matt Taibbi (rabid Liberal, but in the mold of Glenn Greenwald and Bill Mahar, who is committed to the ideology, not to the person) is calling Obama out pretty hard for the mishandling of Guantanamo, and for Obama and the Democrats in general talking out of both sides of their mouths about ending the war
http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/05/30/the-end-of-the-obama-honeymoon-part-ii/

Quote :

"Now there’s this Gitmo business. This, folks, just isn’t that tough a call. The prison (and the much less publicized archipelago of hard sites in foreign countries where more terror suspects are held) was a symbol of everything wrong and stupid about the Bush administration. Snatching people up by force and dumping them in rocks on the middle of the ocean without due process is the kind of thing that was last done by “civilized” cultures back in the days of the Roman Empire; since then it’s been the exclusive province of sociopathic third-world dictators like Stalin and Mobutu Sese Seko. It was absolutely imperative, from a public relations standpoint if nothing else, that Obama immediately repudiate these practices, design some kind of due process to deal with the already incarcerated prisoners, and show the world that what happened during the Bush years was an insane aberration, a result of our having accidentally elected an emotionally retarded sadist to the White House. Instead, Obama is on his way to doing exactly the wrong thing. He’s going to make a show of closing the base, but retain the underlying idea by keeping some of the prisoners in indefinite legal purgatory. In some ways this is worse than what Bush did, because Bush at least took a clear stand — he was nuts and thought this was the right thing to do. No matter how you look at Obama’s decision, it’s weighed somewhere along the line by political calculation. Either he thinks indefinite decision is right and he’s bowing to public appeals by closing the base, or else he thinks it’s wrong and is bowing to opposition outcry by maintaining the old policy. It’s one thing to change your mind or play both sides of the fence on matters that don’t involve human lives, on theoretical/hypothetical campaign issues, but another thing to do it with actual incarcerated human beings as the key variable in the political equation. I still like Obama, in a lot of ways. Having a president with less ability to inspire public confidence at a time like this, with our economy in such a death spiral, would be a disaster; God knows where we’d be right now with a McCain or a Mike Huckabee at the helm. But this guy has to show some stones somewhere along the line. He has to just forget the DC game and just take a clear stand on an issue like this sometime. He’s kind of running out of time to rescue his all-important first impression."

5/30/2009 8:27:30 PM

Quote :

"it may not be "right" for the Obama's to go carousing in NYC at this time, but that story, and any ruckus made by the RNC over it, is pure partisan hackery just trying to gin-up mindless populist outrage."

Turn about is fair play, he's the one that drummed up populist outrage over corporations and their private jets.

It's also kind of funny that Taibbi is saying that Obama needs to forget the DC game, when it's pretty clear to anyone watching that the DC game is how he operates. Bush was wrong about a lot of things, but the one impression I always got from him was that he really and honestly believed in what he was doing. The people around him, not so much, and so he got dragged around by them. I don't get that impression from Obama. He doesn't strike me as believing what he says. The problem is, he's being led around like Bush was by the people around him, and so he's burning through his credibility faster than if he had a hand in controlling the game rather than just playing it.

[Edited on May 30, 2009 at 9:44 PM. Reason : sdf]

5/30/2009 9:43:39 PM

Quote :

"Turn about is fair play, he's the one that drummed up populist outrage over corporations and their private jets."

last I checked, it was sitting Congressmen who asked played the idiotic rhetorical game of "raise your hand if you flew here. Raise your hand if you plan to drive back. etc" to the auto execs, not Obama. He wasn't in the hearings, nor was he in the White House yet either.

5/30/2009 9:56:30 PM

Quote :

"he's burning through his credibility "

And he hasn't really hit the country yet with the new Cap-n-Trade Energy tax. A tax which will hit hard all the people making under $250K per year.

And, apparantly, Obama is doing away with the 1st amendment when it comes to criticising the Porkulus Bill...

Quote :

"White House moves to restrict criticism of stimulus projects By: Mark Tapscott, Editorial Page Editor Washington Examiner 05/30/09 A new White House policy on permissible lobbying on economic recovery and stimulus projects has taken a decidedly anti-First Amendment turn. It's a classic illustration of Big Government trying to control every aspect of a particular activity and in the process running up against civil liberty. Check out this passage from a post on the White House blog by Norm Eisen, Special Counsel to the President on Ethics and Government Reform (emphasis added): "First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program. "Second, we will focus the restriction on oral communications to target the scenario where concerns about merit-based decision-making are greatest –after competitive grant applications are submitted and before awards are made. Once such applications are on file, the competition should be strictly on the merits. To that end, comments (unless initiated by an agency official) must be in writing and will be posted on the Internet for every American to see. "Third, we will continue to require immediate internet disclosure of all other communications with registered lobbyists. If registered lobbyists have conversations or meetings before an application is filed, a form must be completed and posted to each agency’s website documenting the contact." The key passage is the reference to expanding regulation from registered lobbyists to "anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program." This is the Camel's nose under the tent, being poked because of special circumstances. Let government restrict political expression - i.e. lobbying of government officials regarding policy - in one small, supposedly specialized area and not long after the specialized area starts expanding. Eventually, all political expression regarding all policy will become subject to government regulation. More on this as it develops. And trust me, it will develop. UPDATE:Great minds thinking alike Carter Wood at Shopfloor sees the same threat to the First Amendment: "Lobbyists and organizations that lobby complained that the White House’s restrictions on lobbying on stimulus fund projects were discriminatory and unfair because the same restrictions didn’t apply to people like corporate executives or officials. So these memorandumly noted changes address that fairness issue by expanding the ban on orally petitioning the government or expressing one’s views through speech. In the interests of transparency the First Amendment must be sacrificed. "The restrictions are also ambiguous enough that a lobbyist or other petitioner won’t be sure how to fully comply. So if someone runs afoul of White House officials, a phone call to a news outlet or a friendly prosecutor can punish the offender. Ambiguous rules plus capricious application equals negative rule of law.""

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/White-House-moves-to-restrict-criticism-of-stimulus-projects--46540777.html

[Edited on May 30, 2009 at 10:52 PM. Reason : .]

5/30/2009 10:51:46 PM

^^ Please. Just because congress did the heavy questioning in november doesn't mean that Obama gets a pass for his own rabble rousing:

http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=6739364

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Politics/story?id=6740011&page=1

Quote :

"ABC News has learned that on Monday officials of the Obama administration called Citigroup about the company's new $50 million corporate jet and told execs to "fix it." Earlier on Monday, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said made it clear ABC News asked him about the jet that the president disapproved of the deal. "The president said this during the transition, as it related to the auto companies using private jets: [He] doesn't believe that's the best use of money at this point," Gibbs said."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7855554.stm

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/25/MNDI1648MD.DTL&hw=silences&sn=039&sc=099

Quote :

"He promised to do everything in his power to get the nation's banks lending again - including spending more taxpayer money - but vowed to ban bank executives from using the money to "pad their paychecks or buy fancy drapes or disappear on a private jet.""

http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/29/barack-obama-executive-pay-business-washington-0129_obama.html

Quote :

"The president said Geithner "already had to pull back one institution that had gone forward with a multimillion-dollar jet plane purchase" while receiving support from the government's Troubled Asset Relief Program. Citi, which has taken at least $45 billion in TARP money so far, was reportedly considering buying a $50 million corporate jet."

http://nbbusinessjournal.canadaeast.com/front/article/573523

Quote :

"President Obama has repeatedly urged Wall Street executives to show restraint if they expect government help. "You can't get corporate jets. You can't go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayer's dime, " Obama said at a town meeting this week in Elkhart, Ind."

5/31/2009 2:26:25 AM

^ Nice

5/31/2009 8:54:10 AM

mhum, that's rabble-rousing if I've ever heard it

5/31/2009 5:07:46 PM

nice job 1337. It is very hypocritical of him, however youll never get any lib to admit that.

5/31/2009 5:27:52 PM

still no birth certificate...

5/31/2009 6:23:31 PM

there, you fucking nut

5/31/2009 6:45:00 PM

Quote :

"mhum, that's rabble-rousing if I've ever heard it "

If the RNC questioning whether Obama flying to NYC on the tax payer dime to catch a Broadway show is, in your words, "pure partisan hackery just trying to gin-up mindless populist outrage.", then Obama's similar criticisms of corporate entities use and purchasing of private jets is the same thing. I realize that you really and truly seem to be personally vested in Obama, but you could at least pretend to have a measure of objectivity to you.

5/31/2009 6:48:42 PM

assuming you're not totally insane and you agree that the president should be able to take his wife out for a weekend in NYC, how do you propose he go about it, exactly?

5/31/2009 6:50:47 PM

just for those who don't know. purchase of more company jets >>>>>> use of air force one for one weekend

still goes against his theme of saving money but you got to have things in perspective.

5/31/2009 7:36:27 PM

^^ Close the roads from DC to manhattan so the president and his motorcade can drive the 4 hour trip there, and 4 hour trip back, because the president is not really busy at all and has that kind of time to waste, and road closings don't really inconvenience anyone and are easy to do.

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 7:48 PM. Reason : ]

5/31/2009 7:48:25 PM

that birth cert. looks fake as hell.

I actually like the idea that he should be able to go on dates with his wife.

However, dont call out businesses for going on trips, hell some of them to generate more business, on taxpayers' dime, then do the exact same thing.

5/31/2009 10:02:05 PM

yea, you can call me "a fucking nut" all you want, but I do not buy those documents.


And I do not deny that the president deserves a night out on the town with his wife. What pisses me off is knowing without a doubt that the media would have had a field day had it been Bush who did something similar.

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 10:26 PM. Reason : media sucking obamadick]

5/31/2009 10:20:53 PM

Quote :

"What pisses me off is knowing without a doubt that the media would have had a field day had it been Bush who did something similar."

that is retarded

5/31/2009 10:33:47 PM

The White House has a great chef, a movie theater, a bowling alley, a basketball court.

Find something there to entertain yourself Mr. Prez.

You can try to re-create Camelot after the country gets back off its ass.

5/31/2009 10:48:58 PM

^^^ well if the media or the DNC had a field day or not, it certainly didn't stop Bush from spending almost 1/5th of his time as President in Crawford, TX, or from answering questions about going to war from his golf cart while, literally, picking mud out of his cleats.

Quote :

"that birth cert. looks fake as hell."

that birth certificate is exactly what my California one looks like from 1979.

5/31/2009 10:54:31 PM

Quote :

"... as the Obamas departed, the respectful diners, who had been screened by Secret Service personnel before they could enter the eatery, erupted into a round of applause. Then it was up to Broadway, where they had tickets at the Belasco Theatre "I'm nervous, excited, honored," said Andre Holland, who plays character Jeremy Furlow, before the show. "It's like in Shakespearean times, when the king would come to the show." Taxpayers footed the bill for the big night on the town, which included a total of at least $24,000 for the three aircraft used to ferry the Obamas, aides and reporters to New York and back. Dinner costs and orchestra seat tickets -- at $96.50 apiece -- were paid by the Obamas. Obama's jet, a Gulfstream 500, served as a more modest Air Force One for the day in place of the customary presidential Boeing 747. The White House declined to say how much the trip was costing taxpayers."

What? What happened to "transparancy"? Oh that's right... the serfs are not allowed to know how much the King is spending on his entertainment.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05312009/news/nationalnews/obama_keeps_his_big_apple_pledge_171810.htm

5/31/2009 11:02:04 PM