Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 24 Dec '13 04:23 / 1 edit
    http://itmakessenseblog.com/2013/12/21/obamas-brother-presidents-life-a-lie/

    Well, well, now that Barak has won his last term, it seems his long lost half brother is coming out of the closet with a book saying that Obama lied about his past in the book he wrote.

    Shocking!!

    Does anyone really care at this point? Obama could have lied about everything since birth and I don't see how it changes anything or would make anyone care. Those who dislike him will still oppose him and his dead headed supporters will not back down.

    Besides, he is suppose to lie, he's a politician.
  2. 24 Dec '13 07:45
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://itmakessenseblog.com/2013/12/21/obamas-brother-presidents-life-a-lie/

    Well, well, now that Barak has won his last term, it seems his long lost half brother is coming out of the closet with a book saying that Obama lied about his past in the book he wrote.

    Shocking!!

    Does anyone really care at this point? Obama could have lied about everythi ...[text shortened]... d headed supporters will not back down.

    Besides, he is suppose to lie, he's a politician.
    Well, everybody pretty much knows Obama is a liar, a good many of us suspected it much earlier than most.

    My next "big surprise" will come as many Americans decide the fact they voted in the first woman will mean more than her record in actually getting the job done.. stayed tuned American..
  3. 24 Dec '13 09:42
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://itmakessenseblog.com/2013/12/21/obamas-brother-presidents-life-a-lie/

    Well, well, now that Barak has won his last term, it seems his long lost half brother is coming out of the closet with a book saying that Obama lied about his past in the book he wrote.

    Shocking!!

    Does anyone really care at this point? Obama could have lied about everythi ...[text shortened]... d headed supporters will not back down.

    Besides, he is suppose to lie, he's a politician.
    wow more footballers wife breaks a nail, goes on holiday for a month! read all about it!
  4. 25 Dec '13 11:43 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://itmakessenseblog.com/2013/12/21/obamas-brother-presidents-life-a-lie/

    Well, well, now that Barak has won his last term, it seems his long lost half brother is coming out of the closet with a book saying that Obama lied about his past in the book he wrote.

    Shocking!!

    Does anyone really care at this point? Obama could have lied about everythi ...[text shortened]... d headed supporters will not back down.

    Besides, he is suppose to lie, he's a politician.
    Has anyone actually read the book, and can comment on whether Obama's brother really accuses the president of systematically lying? I'm not going to believe that just because the conservative propaganda machine claims it, given how often they've lied to us before. In any case, at worst, Obama is a run-of-the-mill lying politician, and we already knew that anyway. This simply -doesn't- compare to lying about the Iraq war, or lying about Iran-Contra.
  5. 25 Dec '13 14:12
    Originally posted by karnachz
    Has anyone actually read the book, and can comment on whether Obama's brother really accuses the president of systematically lying? I'm not going to believe that just because the conservative propaganda machine claims it, given how often they've lied to us before. In any case, at worst, Obama is a run-of-the-mill lying politician, and we already knew that anyway. This simply -doesn't- compare to lying about the Iraq war, or lying about Iran-Contra.
    Well there is only one thing to do, run out and buy the book and make another Obama rich!!
  6. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    25 Dec '13 15:03
    Originally posted by karnachz
    Has anyone actually read the book, and can comment on whether Obama's brother really accuses the president of systematically lying? I'm not going to believe that just because the conservative propaganda machine claims it, given how often they've lied to us before. In any case, at worst, Obama is a run-of-the-mill lying politician, and we already knew that anyway. This simply -doesn't- compare to lying about the Iraq war, or lying about Iran-Contra.
    Ah, Karnachz, Obama's got the dual dishonors of the Four Pinnochios Award and the Lie Of The Year. So, while certainly there are some conservative groups that have not covered themselves in glory in terms of truth telling, none of them can lay claim to having lied to the American public over 30 times about their key legislative "achievement", and then lied about their lies.
  7. 26 Dec '13 02:31 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    Ah, Karnachz, Obama's got the dual dishonors of the Four Pinnochios Award and the Lie Of The Year. So, while certainly there are some conservative groups that have not covered themselves in glory in terms of truth telling, none of them can lay claim to having lied to the American public over 30 times about their key legislative "achievement", and then lied about their lies.
    I agree that Obama has given inconsistent information about the ACA, at times crossing the point into telling lies. I haven't paid close attention to what he has or hasn't said, but to me it looks mostly like he tries to reassure voters that something will be the case, and ends up backpedalling on it later. Overall, the ACA is a convoluted mess, and I'm mostly interested in whether it improves or worsens healthcare in the U.S. There have been some lies, but I don't think it's comparable to the systematic and wilfully manipulative deception used over the Iraq war or Iran-Contra, for specific unpatriotic ends.

    Has Obama BS'ed the public? Yes, and most significantly, over his larger framework promise to bring us a "new kind of politics". Granted, this was sabotaged by Republican obstructionism, but it was always an unrealistic false promise. I thought so at the time, when I voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2008 primary, and have never changed my opinion on that. The distinction between the two Democratic primary candidates in 2008 was nonsense, because the Clintons had always been constrained by the same institutional forces that Obama is now constrained by.

    Being able to inspire people emotionally, only to set them up and give us politics as usual, hasn't really achieved anything except getting Obama elected. Beyond that, though, I see Obama's presidency as centrist to center-left along with convoluted, along the same lines as Carter's and Clinton's presidencies. Basically, what I prefer about all these Democratic presidencies is the absence of Republican extremism and specific negative Republican policies, along with the fact that Democrats have balanced the budget much better than Republicans. In other words, "Lesser of Two Evils".

    Edit: I'd add that Obama was hoping for a "Morning in America" presidency, which is part of why he chose the uplifting tone during his 2008 election campaign. He probably underestimated the severity of the crisis and the negative trajectory of unemployment he inherited, then he didn't push hard enough for more jobs legislation to address it. Healthcare was the wrong issue to give priority to at the start of his presidency.
  8. Subscriber Wajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    26 Dec '13 03:53
    Originally posted by karnachz
    In other words, "Lesser of Two Evils".

    Typical principle-less, wishy washy, fence straddling crookedness.

    Try to figure the size of the lies and vote on that basis.

    How about this one:

    Stop voting for the lies.

    People get voted out, not voted in, it's an important distinction, there's a good reason pollies are at the bottom of the least trusted proffessions list.

    Obamas race didn't hurt, a lot of people voted for him based on his race, but the upshot is the Republicans got voted out.

    Same thing happened at the last Australian election, all the opposition had to do was shut up, Abbott continued to put his foot in it but it didn't matter as long as his lies were perceived to be less than Krudds lies.
  9. 26 Dec '13 05:40
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    Typical principle-less, wishy washy, fence straddling crookedness.

    Try to figure the size of the lies and vote on that basis.

    How about this one:

    [b]Stop voting for the lies.


    People get voted out, not voted in, it's an important distinction, there's a good reason pollies are at the bottom of the least trusted proffessions list.

    Obamas ...[text shortened]... foot in it but it didn't matter as long as his lies were perceived to be less than Krudds lies.[/b]
    Incumbents are voted out in some elections, e.g. 1932, 1968, 1976, 1980, 1992 and 2008 in the U.S. Incumbents are strongly voted in favor of in some elections, e.g. 1936, 1940, 1944, 1956, 1964, 1972 and 1984.

    If you notice an honest candidate in either the Democratic or Republican primary in 2016, please feel free to inform us. I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, I'll largely vote for the candidate with the best policies on the basis that they're all liars, some worse than others. Sadly, an honest politician wouldn't be electable. I'd rather not punish a relatively decent politician for lying, by instead voting for someone much worse.