1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Fox News lies about Obama

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Popeye, Jul 3, 2008.

  1. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    It isn't the first time, and it won't be the last, but here is undeniable proof of Faux News lying about Obama's voting record when it comes to Moveon's Gen. Betrayus ad.

     
  2. Sihouette

    Sihouette Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Get used to it.

    As carefully as the GOP/BigMedia propped him up to win against their true unifying enemy H. Clinton, will be as ruthlessly as they tear him apart once they think she's fully out of the way.

    When Governor Ritter of CO. insures her final demise for his real cohorts (the GOP) in August, look for the treatment you see of Obama today in the press to look like a walk in the park.

    Don't say you weren't warned. You can say anything you like, just don't say you weren't warned in explicit detail exactly how it will all unfold...according to plan..

    The GOP/Obama Trap.
     
  3. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    Are you suggesting that, if Hillary Clinton were the candidate, the GOP smear machine wouldn't be doing the same thing? They certainly had no compunctions about going after any Democratic candidate in the past.
     
  4. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    Nice try, but your facts are off base.

    Obama did indeed vote for the Boxer Amendment, which condemned attacks from both sides of the aisle. Politically this is a no brainer.

    What Fox News was referring to was the vote that took place shortly after the Boxer vote. It was the vote to condemn moveon.org for their attack on the general. This vote took place right after the fact and Obama left and did not vote on this.

    This is what Fox News was talking about. Just talking about Obama's voting record of political expediency because the Boxer vote was a no brainer while the Moveon.org vote actually carried political implications.
     
  5. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state


    From the Boxer Amendment:

    In the video, the Fox News hosts specifically mention the Betrayus ad as does the Boxer amendment. The host's claim Obama never voted to condemn the ad, but in voting aye on the Boxer Amendment he did precisely what Fox claimed he didn't do. Therefore, the only logical conclusion to be reached here is that Fox News has been lying.
     
  6. Federal Farmer

    Federal Farmer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Popeye, this is just another Liberal attempt at "bait and switch" on the issue to make it appear as if someone is lying when they're not. FoxNews didn't lie, YOU'RE the one doing the lying.:mad:

    Fox News was talking about the Cornyn Amendment, which condemned Moron.org, and which Obama voted against, and you're Liberal buddies LIED in a highly edited YouTube presentation, to attempt to cover his butt by saying they were talking about the Boxer Amendment, which he voted in favor of. If you go back and look at the coverage in it's ENTIRETY, you'll quickly discover what the Fox people were talking about, and it's NOT what was presented by your Lying Liberal Loser.

    Maybe one day you'll discover that there's plenty to discuss about candidates without having to resort to lying, and especially resorting to lying by saying someone else was lying when you have to so blatantly and obviously doctor the "evidence" to support your lies. What's even more pathetic is that it took your buddy Jed almost a year (10 months) to put this slanderous garbage together.
     
  7. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    you guys want to get your facts strait? one persons its one vote, the other a diff vote that he did not vote on and left before it was voted on...now he voted against it.....


    How about a better question ?why are they voting on this crap anyway? We got alot bigger issues going on , stop wasting time and money on these worthless bills.
     
  8. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    We might have to agree to disagree here. However the facts are a bit different than this silly youtube video version. It reminds me a bit, of the cheezy and silly Repugs vote against Mothers-day thread, where just a few minutes of checking yields the truth. Are all liberals this lazy, that they can't fact check anything themselves? Let's look at the evidence:

    On September 20, 2007, there was in fact two separate votes.

    This is the first vote at 11:58 AM, as listed by Senate.gov, Boxer Amdt. No. 2947 with it's "statement of purpose":

    Now this Amdt, did include a reference to General Petraeus and an ad in the New York Times. However, this also linked together two ads against sitting Senators, and equally condemned them.

    This admt, Obama did vote for, and the amdt failed.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The second vote at 12:36 PM, as listed by Senate.gov, Cornyn Amdt. No. 2934 with it's "Statement of Purpose":

    As listed by GovTrack- This amdt is very direct:

    This bill, doesn't mention in passing, but rather directly confirms General Petraeus, directly contradicts the attacks on him with the facts and honor of his service, and specifically condemns the ad, and group behind the despicable ad, Moveon.org.

    This was passed even though Obama did NOT vote for this amdt, despite it being a mere 38 minutes later, and being debated at the same time as the first.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    So let's ask the question: Why?

    1. The first bill was a watered down, loosy goosey tit-for-tat amendment. It didn't respond to the attacks, but just said 'that was bad'. We attacked him, you attacked some of our people.
    2. Further it relegated attacks on general Petraeus, as being the same as attacks on a sitting Senator. Is that true? No, Petraeus is a soldier, doing the job he was given by our government, the best that he can. Senators are elected officials, and their record and history is, and should, be up for public scrutiny.
    3. Unlike the first bill, the second makes the specific point of what ad specifically are they referring to, and the horrible scummy group the created it.

    So was Fox lying? Nope, not at all. They correctly pointed out that the bill that directly contradicted Moveon.org, and directly condemned the same, Obama was not willing to vote for. He was able to vote for the empty watered down bill that really didn't say much, but when push came to shove, he wasn't willing to possibly anger his leftist liberal support.

    Once again, simply using the ability to think, and fact check for yourself, reveals the truth.
     
  9. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I support this. To attack American servicemen, who are out there fighting the battles, for mere political fodder, is horrible, if not immoral. The government who gives the orders, should rightly defend the honorable servicemen.

    As far as I'm concerned, Obama voted against it by virtue of him choosing to leave before the vote, when the prior vote was just 30 minutes past. Everyone else voted, why didn't he? Because he was against voting on a bill that will alienate his moveon.org support, which is exactly what Fox News said, and they were dead on accurate.
     
  10. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Laughably false. Clinton was anything but unifying. Back in 2000, when she ran for Senate, here in Ohio, a neighbor put as sign in their front yard saying vote against Hillary.... in Ohio... Not exactly 'unifying' when people 3 states away are campaigning against you. Not only that, they were Democraps... which even I thought was odd... but clearly, not even close to 'unifying'.

    Also, pollsters for the DNC said they had just as many people saying they wouldn't vote for Hilliary if Obama lost the nomination, as people saying they wouldn't vote for Obama, if Hillary lost the nomination. So neither one would have been "unifying".

    And the GOP BigMedia thing is such a lame joke. If you don't know the media is dominated by Liberal DNC agents by now, you are smoking something strong AND have you head shoved down a hole at the same time. It's so obvious, saying that really makes me laugh. It's like saying producing more domestic oil won't help our imported oil problem. Laughable, just laughable.
     
  11. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    The Cornyn Amendment was nothing more than the Republican's attempting to rub Moveon's nose in it for the sake of political expedience.

    Anyway the Fox hosts, in the video, never specifically mention the Cornyn Amendment, what they do claim is Obama failed to vote to condemn the Betrayus ad. Since the Boxer Amendment also condemns the Moveon ad :

    and Obama voted for it... Obama, by any objective metric, has to be determined as voting to condemn the ad. This makes the OP correct in it's assertion that Fox News was and is lying.
     
  12. Federal Farmer

    Federal Farmer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, the Cornyn Amendment was an attempt by the CONGRESS to rub Moron.org's nose in $hit for pulling a stupid stunt, and as usual, the Libtards didn't have the guts to tell their cronies that they screwed the pooch. More hypocrisy from the Loony Left.

    Yes they did, but your Looney Leftist Libtard buddy carefully edited out the salient parts to make it appear as if they said something they never said. In other words, YOU LIED! You also lie when you say that the Boxer Amendment condemns the Moron.org ad, since the Boxer Amendment never mentions Moron.org, or their stupid ad.

    Obama voted for the Boxer Amendment, an amendment that doesn't mention Moron.org, so again you lie when you say "by any objective metric...ad". How can he be voting to condemn something that isn't mentioned anywhere in the Legislation, so your OP is a lie, and you lie when you continue to claim that FoxNews lied. Frankly, I'm beginning to wonder if your tongue would snap off if you spoke the whole, unadulterated truth about anything.
     
  13. Federal Farmer

    Federal Farmer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thank you! :D
     
  14. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Good. They should rub their dirty nose in it. They pooped that ad into the New York Times, and they should have their face rubbed through it. It was a sickening, disgusting, showing of leftist immorality.

    They were right to say it, right to vote for it, and it was right to make an issue that Obama didn't vote for it.

    Yeah but they had a watered down non-specific "it's all bad" covering. That resolution was as it says in it's statement of purpose:

    Sorry, close but not good enough.

    Nope, it's not. The main amendment that specifically states Moveon.org is a immoral garbage heap, and that it's statement of purpose is:

    This was the issue. Fox is 100% correct. Obama refused to show the courage to support General Petreaus in front of an evil group of scum bags, because they were his scum bags and they supported him. Instead he voted for a half-wit watered down, tit-for-tat amendment that didn't really exonerate Petreaus, nor condemn the bottom feeding worms that attacked him.

    Sorry, but your wasting your time here. Best to agree to disagree. Fox News is clearly more honorable than Obama supporters.
     
  15. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    The Cornyn Amendment was an attempt to embarrass an organization that has become a major thorn in the side of RW wackos. I can understand the Republican's motivation but why try to shroud it in a.. false patriotic I care about Gen. Patreaus routine? Talk about hypocrisy.



    How do you know if Jed edited out anything? I won't accuse you of lying, but unless you have some evidence, backing up your claim, your statement is akin to lying.

    Here's the Boxer Amendment in it's entirety:

    I have highlighted the relevant parts.The only ad in the NYT attacking Gen. Patreaus was by Moveon. You know what the Boxer Amendment was talking about, Obama knew when he voted for it, everybody knew what was being referred to.

    You just don't like the amendment because it refers to the equally unwarranted attacks on other undeserving victims (Kerry and Cleland) that don't match your political philosophy.

    Your continued attempt to defend Fox's blatant lying, despite evidence to the contrary, is a sorry spectacle.
     
Loading...

Share This Page