PoliticalGroove Forums

Welcome to the PoliticalGroove Forums

We offer discussion, social groups and blogs in an open and free environment. Our free community you will have access to post topics, post blogs, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!



Go Back   PoliticalGroove Forums > Site Discussion > Election Center 2008
Share PG Forum Register Blogs FAQ Members List Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Sponsors
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-23-2008, 09:02 PM   #11 (permalink)
Sassy Lipstick Maverick
Points: 20,103, Level: 89 Points: 20,103, Level: 89 Points: 20,103, Level: 89
Activity: 7% Activity: 7% Activity: 7%
 
julia's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,812
Blog Entries: 7
Thanks: 275
Thanked 273 Times in 165 Posts
julia is a famous PG member
Quote:
Iran

* The Problem: Iran has sought nuclear weapons, supports militias inside Iraq and terror across the region, and its leaders threaten Israel and deny the Holocaust. But Obama believes that we have not exhausted our non-military options in confronting this threat; in many ways, we have yet to try them. That's why Obama stood up to the Bush administration's warnings of war, just like he stood up to the war in Iraq.
* Opposed Bush-Cheney Saber Rattling: Obama opposed the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which says we should use our military presence in Iraq to counter the threat from Iran. Obama believes that it was reckless for Congress to give George Bush any justification to extend the Iraq War or to attack Iran. Obama also introduced a resolution in the Senate declaring that no act of Congress – including Kyl-Lieberman – gives the Bush administration authorization to attack Iran.
* Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.
Barack Obama | Change We Can Believe In | Foreign Policy
__________________
The candidate does not speak for the campaign.
julia is offline   Top
Old 05-23-2008, 09:09 PM   #12 (permalink)
Truth Lion
Points: 6,748, Level: 53 Points: 6,748, Level: 53 Points: 6,748, Level: 53
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Jonesy's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,554
Thanks: 10
Thanked 32 Times in 23 Posts
Jonesy is a famous PG member
We can continue killing each other over some baseless power-struggle. Or, we can stop killing each other and figure out something else.

It is a detriment/benefit ratio. If someone attacks/invades the U.S., they will receive heavy casualties. If they do not attack/invade, we can organize some kind of economic or other arrangement. The moment an attack/invasion occurs, all economic or other arrangements are nullified indefinitely.

While using this strategy over hundreds of years, lasting peace and prosperity can be sewn impeccably.
Jonesy is offline   Top
Old 05-23-2008, 09:39 PM   #13 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 950, Level: 16 Points: 950, Level: 16 Points: 950, Level: 16
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 119
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
centrino is a normal PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by julia View Post
You shillers need to get your facts straight!!

Time's Joe Klein has double-checked this so you fools that keep posting these lies are being used by the right-wingers and mouthing their talking points.

(Talking points-thinking optional, right? )

What a pity you can't think for yourselves.

Get a freakin clue.

Joe Klein, May 20
[quote=julia;188542]
Quote:

Really?!
You cite a Robert Novak Opinion piece as a source?

Many would trust the TIME research department over a Rove water carrier.

When questioned specifically about Ahmandinejad of course he will answer about Ahmandinejad...?

When asked about Ahmadinejad he answers about Ahmadinejad...
Is that a crime? So he should not be answering questions?
Honestly, I don't think Ahmandinejad is named in Obama's platform but the right wingers would love to give the impression Obama has a problem with Jews, which you would know if you had bothered to read the first post of the thread.

While you candidate has no qualms to "obliterate Iran"? When during a debate she has previously chided Wolf Blitzer for asking her a hypothetical question, about Iran?

The last I checked is a comparison.

Please forgive me for putting "talk" instead of "negotiate" in the thread title.
I always try to keep thread titles simple.

Nice parsing, there.

Did you answer about Hrc invoking the RFK assassination, yet?

Or are you happy enough to parse and pick on the frontrunner?

Be happy I don't troll over on Hrc web sites, because I could very easily start to do so.

They would surely rip someone to shreds that cited Novak...!

Or whose side are you on, anyways?
Why trust either Novak or Time? Did you make any attempt to research this yourself? See the video link.

ABC News

Joe Klein's statement is false.

As to your statement that Obama was being "questioned" - and????? Klein's statement remains false - Obama's answer would be the point. He's said it. You've accused another poster of taking a talking point- without looking for the answer yourself.

To accuse me of parsing is out of line. You've done exactly that. Rather than stand corrected, you try to change the subject by turning this into a Clinton rant.

This isn't about Clinton. I am not a supporter- yet you were very quick to assume that I am. Why?

Last edited by centrino; 05-23-2008 at 09:45 PM.
centrino is offline   Top
Old 05-24-2008, 12:56 AM   #14 (permalink)
Sassy Lipstick Maverick
Points: 20,103, Level: 89 Points: 20,103, Level: 89 Points: 20,103, Level: 89
Activity: 7% Activity: 7% Activity: 7%
 
julia's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,812
Blog Entries: 7
Thanks: 275
Thanked 273 Times in 165 Posts
julia is a famous PG member
Link was invalid.

I do not know you so I'm not using anymore of your links. Use text. Everyone else here can seem to handle posting text.

Abc news is not very newsworthy since that "despicable" (Wa Po) debate in Philly last month.

Try and have a stronger argument than mistaking opinion for fact.
(e.g. Novak vs. Time research staff)

I posted Obama's platform which does not mention Ahmandinejad. You posted parsed answers to questions so gotcha arguments don't work.
Was Obama supposed to respond to Ahmandinejad Qs by talking about Bullwinkle? Cmon.

No, I was contrasting Obama to the other Dem candidate. Is that comparison too much of a stretch for you? They were competing for the same job except one is losing miserably.
__________________
The candidate does not speak for the campaign.
julia is offline   Top
Old 05-24-2008, 08:07 AM   #15 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 950, Level: 16 Points: 950, Level: 16 Points: 950, Level: 16
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 119
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
centrino is a normal PG member
duplicate post....sorry.

Last edited by centrino; 05-24-2008 at 08:11 AM. Reason: duplicate post...sorry
centrino is offline   Top
Old 05-24-2008, 08:10 AM   #16 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 950, Level: 16 Points: 950, Level: 16 Points: 950, Level: 16
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 119
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
centrino is a normal PG member
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by julia View Post
Link was invalid.
The link works fine for me.

Quote:
I do not know you so I'm not using anymore of your links. Use text. Everyone else here can seem to handle posting text.
I supplied text- which you have dismissed. I posted video of Obama making the statement directly during the press conference at Columbia University (Obama Supporting Columbia On Ahmadinejad Speech). If you don't trust links from a stranger, go to youtube and search Obama Supports Columbia On Ahmadinejad Speech. I'll provide the link there since most people would trust youtube.

Did you miss it in the news at the time?

Quote:
Abc news is not very newsworthy since that "despicable" (Wa Po) debate in Philly last month.
These are Obama's statements verbatim via video. This isn't ABC commenting on Obama's statements.

Quote:
Try and have a stronger argument than mistaking opinion for fact.
(e.g. Novak vs. Time research staff)
Obama's words speak for them self. Novak was correct. The fact that you still have not made any attempt to find this yourself shows you are not interested in the truth.

Quote:
I posted Obama's platform which does not mention Ahmandinejad. You posted parsed answers to questions so gotcha arguments don't work.
Was Obama supposed to respond to Ahmandinejad Qs by talking about Bullwinkle? Cmon.
What you posted does not negate his direct statements.They are not in conflict - his direct statement on the vidoe is more specific. Obama's answer directly addresses the statement that Klein said he did not make. He did. You took Klein's research as accurate without ever bothering too look for it on your own. If you're going to accuse posters of being shills that are lying, you aught to have you're facts in order first. You were flat out wrong and rather than stand corrected you continue to float this nonsense.

Quote:
No, I was contrasting Obama to the other Dem candidate. Is that comparison too much of a stretch for you? They were competing for the same job except one is losing miserably.
Irrelevant to the topic our your thread ("Time: Obama Never said Talk to Amandinejad). Obama either said it or he did not. My information proves you were mistaken.
centrino is offline   Top
Old 05-24-2008, 11:56 AM   #17 (permalink)
Sassy Lipstick Maverick
Points: 20,103, Level: 89 Points: 20,103, Level: 89 Points: 20,103, Level: 89
Activity: 7% Activity: 7% Activity: 7%
 
julia's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,812
Blog Entries: 7
Thanks: 275
Thanked 273 Times in 165 Posts
julia is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by julia View Post

Quote:
Iran

* The Problem: Iran has sought nuclear weapons, supports militias inside Iraq and terror across the region, and its leaders threaten Israel and deny the Holocaust. But Obama believes that we have not exhausted our non-military options in confronting this threat; in many ways, we have yet to try them. That's why Obama stood up to the Bush administration's warnings of war, just like he stood up to the war in Iraq.
* Opposed Bush-Cheney Saber Rattling: Obama opposed the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which says we should use our military presence in Iraq to counter the threat from Iran. Obama believes that it was reckless for Congress to give George Bush any justification to extend the Iraq War or to attack Iran. Obama also introduced a resolution in the Senate declaring that no act of Congress – including Kyl-Lieberman – gives the Bush administration authorization to attack Iran.
* Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.
Barack Obama | Change We Can Believe In | Foreign Policy
Barack Obama | Change We Can Believe In | Foreign Policy
What do you not understand that Ahmadinejad is not a part of Obama's platform, that right-wingers gleefully bring up to try to create a wedge issue by citing an anti-Semite to try to whip up fears of Jewish voters.

Some fall for it; others don't.

Others do no favors by pushing right wing talking points.

Why do you let them frame your thinking?

I am calling out a falsehood.

Nice selective reading, there.
__________________
The candidate does not speak for the campaign.

Last edited by julia; 05-24-2008 at 12:00 PM.
julia is offline   Top
Old 05-24-2008, 12:17 PM   #18 (permalink)
Sassy Lipstick Maverick
Points: 20,103, Level: 89 Points: 20,103, Level: 89 Points: 20,103, Level: 89
Activity: 7% Activity: 7% Activity: 7%
 
julia's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,812
Blog Entries: 7
Thanks: 275
Thanked 273 Times in 165 Posts
julia is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by centrino View Post
Irrelevant to the topic our your thread ("Time: Obama Never said Talk to Amandinejad). Obama either said it or he did not. My information proves you were mistaken.
Here is the second time I explain this to you:

I shortened the words for the thread title.

Obama has never said: "I will meet unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad."

If it bothers you sooo much, should I ask the mods to change the thread title so you don't get so confused?

Or are you going to continue to jump on the McCain/ Novak bandwagon of talking points and hissy fits?

Quote:
May 22, 2008
Against Accuracy, For Trivia
Joe Klein
I'm mentioned in two columns today with similar themes: that people like me--the liberal elite media, we're called--are playing into Obama's hands by insisting on accuracy from John McCain (according to Bob Novak) and by hoping that, given the mess we're in, this can be an election about big issues (Steven Stark).

Novak writes:

Quote:
McCain's strategists are infuriated by prestigious political reporters and commentators whom they see supporting Obama's position.
He goes on to misrepresent (a) my questioning of McCain this week and (b)Obama's position on talking to Ahmadinejad, which is muddy, to say the least, but has never included the following statement, "I will meet unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad." The fact is that McCain--or, at least, his top aides--seem to have adopted a simple attitude toward the press: Either you come to the barbecue or you're cast into the outer darkness.
In fact, more than a few of McCain's Senate colleagues, from both parties (and not just Chuck Hagel), are wondering what's gotten into him: where did he deposit his civility? Does he really not know who the has the power in Iran? Does he really want to run a Roveian campaign of disinformation--or have the actual debate on the issues that he claims to want?
...
__________________
The candidate does not speak for the campaign.
julia is offline   Top
Old 05-24-2008, 12:37 PM   #19 (permalink)
Sassy Lipstick Maverick
Points: 20,103, Level: 89 Points: 20,103, Level: 89 Points: 20,103, Level: 89
Activity: 7% Activity: 7% Activity: 7%
 
julia's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,812
Blog Entries: 7
Thanks: 275
Thanked 273 Times in 165 Posts
julia is a famous PG member
Robert Novak? Who blew Valerie Plame's cover? Who gushed over W's flight suit moment?

Seriously?

That's funny.

__________________
The candidate does not speak for the campaign.
julia is offline   Top
Old 05-24-2008, 01:17 PM   #20 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 950, Level: 16 Points: 950, Level: 16 Points: 950, Level: 16
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 119
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
centrino is a normal PG member
Quote:
Here is the second time I explain this to you:

I shortened the words for the thread title.

Obama has never said: "I will meet unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad."
Now you are changing Klein's statement??? That is not what Klein said- as you are aware (you posted it). Why would you create a thread title that misrepresented Klein's statement (your source), anyway? That would be dishonest- you were using Klein's statement to support your original claim, after all. You used that source as evidence to accuse another poster of lying. But you got it wrong.

Here is the statement you posted:"On Friday, I promised to check into whether Obama had ever said that he would negotiate--specifically, by name -- with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Indeed, according to the crack Time Magazine research department and the Obama campaign, he never has. He did say that he would negotiate with the Iranian leadership -- but, on matters of foreign policy and Iran's nuclear program, the guy in charge is the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. As of today, John McCain was still accusing Obama of wanting to negotiate with Ahmadinejad."

About Klein's statement you made the following comment:

Julia: "You shillers need to get your facts straight!!

Time's Joe Klein has double-checked this so you fools that keep posting these lies are being used by the right-wingers and mouthing their talking points.

(Talking points-thinking optional, right? )

What a pity you can't think for yourselves.

Get a freakin clue.

Joe Klein, May 20" end quote

Will you not concede that you got it wrong? Come on - be honest.


Quote:
If it bothers you sooo much, should I ask the mods to change the thread title so you don't get so confused?
It would not help your argument because your (inaccurate) source never made that statement that mentions conditions.

Quote:
Or are you going to continue to jump on the McCain/ Novak bandwagon of talking points and hissy fits?
You still have not listened to Obama directly stating that he would negotiate with Ahmadinejad? Novak and McCain's statements are accurate- Klein got it wrong (your source) and you believed it. Now you're changing the statement because you've been corrected. Obama said he would negotiate with Ahmadinejad. Obama's video shows this clearly. Your first attempt at changing the thread title was from "talk" to "negotiate". That didn't work out (since Obama said he would negotiate with Ahmadinejad- sourced by the video ). Now your bringing in conditions - which were never a part of Klein's statement quoted, as you are perfectly aware.

Damn...

Edit- I just saw your post with Klein's update. I now understand why you are backtracking- Klein is too.

After asserting that "I've done some research" and "also checked with the Obama campaign," Klein said Obama "never mentioned Ahmadinejad directly by name. He did say he would negotiate with the leaders."

In fact, Obama has repeatedly been questioned specifically about Ahmadinejad. At a press conference in New York last September, Obama was asked whether he still would meet with Ahmadinejad. He replied: "Yeah ... I find many of President Ahmadinejad's statements odious. ... But we should never fear to negotiate." In November on NBC's "Meet the Press," he defended "a conversation with somebody like Ahmadinejad."

Last edited by centrino; 05-24-2008 at 01:27 PM.
centrino is offline   Top
 

Tags
ahmaninejad, hillary clinton, negotiate, obama, time magazine

Sponsors

Thread Tools
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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC8
PoliticalGroove.com General political and social discussion