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

New Keating Five website

Discussion in 'Elections & Political Parties' started by Popeye, Oct 6, 2008.

  1. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    The Obama campaign has put up a new website, complete with video, KeatingEconomics.com which is a reminder of McCain's role in the Keating Five scandal.

    Many don't remember or were too young to know of McCain's role in the scandal....everyone should check it out.
     
  2. robert hawkins

    robert hawkins New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    i agree with you totally. the right wing with palin at the lead is trying to deflect attention from the issues. atching the stock market today, it astounds me that their main talking points are about obama's relationships with wright and ayers. if the american people fall for these atwater-rovian tactics again, they will certainly deserve the dire circumstances that will result.
     
  3. Libsmasher

    Libsmasher New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Obama/Popeye slur machine going at full sewage flow.

    The facts:

    The keating five consisted of four DEMOCRATS and McCain. The senate ethics committee took action against three DEMOCRATS only, and cleared John McCain and democrat John Glenn. McCain was criticized ONLY for "creating an impression" of impropriety - very weak stuff. Beyond this, the reason why slurmeisters like Popeye and the Obamabots keep bringing up McCain and the Keating Five is because they want to associate blame for the S&L collapse of the eighties, and the current credit crisis, with McCain - of course he had nothing to do with either one. They are counting on the electorate being too lazy to investigate the facts, which show that from beginning to end, it was DEMOCRAT decisions, policy, and personnel who are responsible for both events.

    From wiki:

     
  4. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    There's more on the website Keatingeconomics...viewers can decide for themselves if McCain was involved. In the meantime, here's a short 90 second clip outlining what the Keating Five scandal was all about.

     
  5. Libsmasher

    Libsmasher New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    More slur sewage from you - careful viewers will see that the video from huffington post, the premier defamation site on the net, is loaded with insinuations and innuendo but devoid of relevent fact implicating McCain. And facts are stubborn things - the FACTS are that McCain was found INNOCENT of any illegality or ethics violation by the bipatisan ethics committee.
     
  6. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

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

     
  7. Mr. Carpenter

    Mr. Carpenter New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2008
    Messages:
    421
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's just too bad that you're not honest enough to post the facts when you post a link.

    FROM YOUR OWN SOURCE!!

    A lie of omission is still a lie Popeye, which puts you in the same catagory as Dawkins and the rest of the tin foil hatters.
     
  8. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    That's nice...are you suggesting McCain's actions were above reproach?

    McCain himself, in 1999, acknowledged his role in the scandal... "The fact is," he said, "it was the wrong thing to do, and it will be on my tombstone and deservedly so."

    http://www.sptimes.com/News/121299/Perspective/John_McCain_s_uphill_.shtml

     
  9. Libsmasher

    Libsmasher New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Illegal? Ethics violation? Noooooooooo

    Illegal? Ethics violation? Noooooooooo

    Illegal? Ethics violation? Noooooooooo.

    Illegal? Ethics violation? Noooooooooo

    Illegal? Ethics violation? Noooooooooo. This was the part that only gave the impression of impropriety.

    So what have you got? Nothing. McCain was cleared of any legal or ethics violations by the senate.

    Your slur posts actually provide an (unintended) public service: for those who are unfamiliar with defamation techniques, they are practically a textbook on the subject - use innuendo, implication, insinuation, and all to leave an impression of wrongdoing, without supplying any supporting fact.
     
  10. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    All those items that you call "slurs" came from the exact same Wikipedia link that you were more than happy to use here...http://houseofpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5094#3

    So what's it all about?...picking and choosing what you care to cite from a particular link?.....maybe a little hypocrisy? Oh excuse me, in your case it's a WHOLE LOT of hypocrisy.

    Lets take a look at another Wikipedia link, this about the Appearance of impropriety

    Fact: McCain received at least $112,000 in contributions from Charles Keating

    Fact: Cindy McCain and her father had private business dealings with Keating

    Fact: McCain and his family made nine trips at Keating's expense, sometimes aboard Keating's private jet. (three of the trips were to Keating's place in the Bahamas)

    Fact: McCain met with government regulators on Keating's behalf.

    Fact: McCain has admitted what he did was wrong.
     
  11. XCALIDEM

    XCALIDEM Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,052
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    It's amazing that only popeye keeps hammering this issue. Don't you think that the liberal media would be playing this issue every 30 seconds if it was true?
     
  12. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    Fact: McCain received at least $112,000 in contributions from Charles Keating

    Fact: Cindy McCain and her father had private business dealings with Keating

    Fact: McCain and his family made nine trips at Keating's expense, sometimes aboard Keating's private jet. (three of the trips were to Keating's place in the Bahamas)

    Fact: McCain met with government regulators on Keating's behalf.

    Fact: McCain has admitted what he did was wrong.

    Perhaps you can tell me which of the above isn't true?
     
  13. Libsmasher

    Libsmasher New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It doesn't matter that they are from the same link, and I guess just about everyone but YOU knows that anyone can edit wikipedia entries. :D The things YOU cite are just all the non-relevent insinuations that have been larded in there by the big army of paid Obamabot shills like you who spread all the disinformation, defamation, and (in this case) innuendo that has NOTHING to do with wrongdoing, but leaves the impression of wrongdoing to uncareful readers, which is what defamation operatives like you depend on.

    YOU quoting the BIBLE????? Have you no shame?

    FACT: McCain's use of the word was connected with the "appearance of impropriety", and McCain was completely absolved of any crime or unethical behavior by the senate. THAT is the stubborn fact that won't go away, no matter how much innuendo you puke up.
     
  14. Libsmasher

    Libsmasher New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Popeye and other defamation operatives know that quantity can trump fact. In a fast-paced country where people either don't have time or are too lazy to study the issues, or depend on the lib media for summaries, or every time they look at the net all they see is the fast sea of lies, slurs, distortions, and innuendo spread by the Obamabot army, it can have enough of a marginal effect to change the outcome of elections, and right now it looks like it's working for them.
     
  15. TVoffBrainOn

    TVoffBrainOn Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Messages:
    313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    wait... so what is the difference between Obama's association with Ayers and McCain's association with Keating? Both associates are criminals, both candidates showed poor judgement in associating with them.

    the only difference i can see is that McCain's association was during the committing of crimes against the American people.

    Looting the American people of 130 billion dollars is pretty radical too right?

    I don't really post here anymore, i just check in once in awhile to see which side is doing a better job of peddling their sides talking points. currently, the Hannity's are killing the Huffington's.

    ...back to your regular scheduled talking points.
     
Loading...

Share This Page