Obama on fox sunday

The Judge

Pura Vida!
Forum Member
Aug 5, 2004
4,909
29
0
SJO
You might want to clarify that the post picked a specific time period 110th Congress for their their tabulation Gregg--

Here is list of top % of missed votes for entire senate career--just in case your curious

Missed Votes Representative
52% (220) Del. Eni Faleomavaega [D-AS] since Feb 8, 2007
30% (128) Res.Com. Luis Fortu?o [R-PR] since Feb 8, 2007
27% (114) Del. Madeleine Bordallo [D-GU] since Feb 8, 2007
22% (960) Rep. Jo Ann Davis [R-VA] since Jan 3, 2001
19% (230) Sen. Barack Obama [D-IL] since Jan 6, 2005
18% (1504) Rep. Barbara Cubin [R-WY] since Jan 4, 1995
18% (427) Rep. Bobby Jindal [R-LA] since Jan 4, 2005
16% (645) Sen. John McCain [R-AZ] since Feb 4, 1993
15% (584) Sen. John Kerry [D-MA] since Feb 4, 1993
14% (1000) Rep. Julia Carson [D-IN] since Jan 21, 1997
13% (1217) Rep. Donald Young [R-AK] since Jan 5, 1993
12% (170) Rep. Yvette Clarke [D-NY] since Jan 4, 2007
11% (671) Rep. Stephanie Jones [D-OH] since Jan 6, 1999
11% (1007) Rep. Luis Guti?rrez [D-IL] since Jan 5, 1993
Wayne, do you think that the numbers you put up showing Obama missing 19% and McCain missing 16% shows a great deal of difference?
There is a huge difference, just not the one that Wayne would have us believe.

I think that we can all understand that a Senator running for the Presidential nomination is going to miss some votes during his campaign and all three of the current candidates have missed many during this time. What is revealing is that McCain has missed 16% of his voting opportunities dating back 15 years and while Obama has missed a higher percentage (19%), all but SEVEN of his missed votes occurred during the 110th Congress which convened just 34 days prior to him declaring his candidacy for President on Feb. 10, 2007.

In contrast, prior to the 110th Congress, McCain had missed 321 votes and during the 110th Congress, missed 101 more votes than Obama.
 

The Judge

Pura Vida!
Forum Member
Aug 5, 2004
4,909
29
0
SJO
he vetoed the water boarding ban keeping interrogation techniques in the hands of those that know the issue...and out of the hands of clueless liberal hacks that also want to close guantanamo despite the fact that this would bring terrorists(who could give a big rat`s ass about the geneva convention not to mention your well being) to our shores and force us to give these monsters the same rights as u.s. citizens,not to mention access to quislings like the aclu........
That's one hell of a resume. :SIB
 

bleedingpurple

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 23, 2008
22,383
221
63
51
Where it is real F ing COLD
he vetoed the water boarding ban keeping interrogation techniques in the hands of those that know the issue...and out of the hands of clueless liberal hacks that also want to close guantanamo despite the fact that this would bring terrorists(who could give a big rat`s ass about the geneva convention not to mention your well being) to our shores and force us to give these monsters the same rights as u.s. citizens,not to mention access to quislings like the aclu........

which,btw,is the exact reason that guantanamo bay exists "offshore"....

:SIB


You got one. I agree with Bush on that one. Any more??
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,428
131
63
Bowling Green Ky
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/mikva-021608/index.html You & the Clintons should just drop the BS on this issue.

You can spin it all you want--he ducked the vote 130 times--

after he stated--

"You must vote yes or no on whatever bill comes up, with the knowledge that it's unlikely to be a compromise that either you or your supporters consider fair and or just."

Which one of the 3 words do you need clarification on --yes-no-or presnt??

Chad --give me your best shot of valid reason for O & H to duck Fox network--other than fear?

on Fox viewers --little I can do but put up the ratings--and per wikipedia--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News
The channel was created by Australian-American media magnate Rupert Murdoch, who hired Roger Ailes as its founding CEO. The network was launched on October 7, 1996[1] to 17 million cable subscribers. The network slowly rose to prominence in the late 1990s. In the United States, Fox News Channel is rated as the cable news network with the largest number of regular viewers, although CNN retains a larger number of unique viewers.[2]

However the other networks had more viewers on " Dem Debates" since Fox's dem debate was canceled when O&H refused to show up. :) Real commander and chief material--wouldn't you say ;)

now if you want an opinionated spin job you might want to revisted the Huffington Post-- They have all kinds of exaggerations to give their viewers "hope"
In fact got a good one for all the for Fox haters--Here--have a sip-I'm buying this round :)

Fox News Is 8th-Most-Watched Cable Network

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eat-the-press/2007/01/05/fox-news-is-8thmostwatc_e_37926.html
 
Last edited:

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Point was he was so bad for missing so many votes. And old John is no better. And in his carrer missed more.
Who said CNN has more viewers everday. Where that come from. We are told here it's fox. And both better watch out for MSNBC witch has showen steady growth. Some of fox biggest shows have been slipping per DTB numbers.
 

Toledo Prophet

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 5, 2005
2,384
2
0
52
Toledo, Ohio
DTB,

Good morning, brotha.

You wont get any ratings claims from me, but its not really a new network. Its a propaganda machine. They seem to specialize in skewering their opponents for something, but when their guys do the same thing, we either get crickets, fingers poiinted the other way, perverse jusifications and skewed facts.

You mock someone for posting something from the Huffington Post, but I submit that anything you post culled from Fox News carries the same, take-it-with-a-grain of salt consider the source type of doubt.

They are nothing more than government moutpieces at this point. Odd that conservatives such as yourself with your disdain for government would accept as fact and verse anything from the government's news outlet.

But, what I really wanted to clarify was the Bush gets canned questions comments. I was refering to candidate Bush in 2000 or 2004, since we are talking democrat candidates, not actual presidents. Of course, his pressers are a bit tense, they always are as president. But, his runs in 2000 and 2004 were all about keeping him in a bubble and in front of extremely pro-Bush arguments. It was pretty notorious and a lot of election historians said they had never seen a candidate go to such an extreme to avoid audiences that might be unfriendly or ask difficult questions. He had people sign loyalty oaths, fer gawds sake. Where are we? Moscow?

Part of what I believe has been key to Barry-O status as front runner has been he has done the opposite. He has gone into areas that Dems usually avoid, areas that Hillary will never appear in, and people recognize that, appreciate that and then when they hear him speak, they're kinda shocked that this skinny Dem is speaking about the issues that they care about to. Now, I have the same doubt you about whether he is just rhetoric and does he have legit ideas to move us forward. We will see what he offers in the ensuing months.

Lets play devils advocate, do you really think Bush's handlers in 2004 would have let him appear in a forum sponsored by, say, Daily Kos? No chance in hell. Basically Daily Kos has blossomed into a Internet alternative for liberals to Fox News.
Bush's guys would never let Markos and company anywhere near their man. Their fear would be his comments would be manipulated, taken out of context and so forth. Thats the Dems fear with something like a possible Fox news debate. I think it is justified (as would be the fears in my hypothetical situation outlined w/ Bush). You boy and our president bush is nothing more than a big fat pussy. Yet, I would advise him to never sit down for a live blog with Markos. Or Arrinana. Unless he thinks he has a chance to shag that Cougar.

Anyway, just wanted to clarify as I did not want anyone to think I was saying Bush gets nothing but canned questions and stuff at his current pressers. Also, you referenced his pressers after taks.

Man, it has been a long, busy week for me. As an example, my math skills completely fell apart on Friday at work. So help me out. I have spaced out what you meant by 'taks.'

Thanks in advance. Enjoy the golf today, whether you are watching or (hopefully) playing.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,428
131
63
Bowling Green Ky
Getting ready go practice some golf--

Don't see comparison to Daily KOS and FOX news--

I wouldn't blame any politician from any party from not appearing on some rag blog site-and give them any vague appearance of credibilty.

I was speaking of major news sources.

--and speaking of major news sources I see the NYT avoided attendence at the White House press correspondents' dinner last night. Was some funny shit on it.

My fav by GW- on absence of pres candidates from event.
on McCain
He probably wanted to distance himself from me a little bit. You know, he's not alone. Jenna's moving out too."
on H & O
"Hillary Clinton couldn't get in because of sniper fire and Senator Obama's at church."
:)
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,560
217
63
"the bunker"
DTB,

Good morning, brotha.

You wont get any ratings claims from me, but its not really a new network. Its a propaganda machine. They seem to specialize in skewering their opponents for something, but when their guys do the same thing, we either get crickets, fingers poiinted the other way, perverse jusifications and skewed facts.

You mock someone for posting something from the Huffington Post, but I submit that anything you post culled from Fox News carries the same, take-it-with-a-grain of salt consider the source type of doubt.

They are nothing more than government moutpieces at this point. Odd that conservatives such as yourself with your disdain for government would accept as fact and verse anything from the government's news outlet.

But, what I really wanted to clarify was the Bush gets canned questions comments. I was refering to candidate Bush in 2000 or 2004, since we are talking democrat candidates, not actual presidents. Of course, his pressers are a bit tense, they always are as president. But, his runs in 2000 and 2004 were all about keeping him in a bubble and in front of extremely pro-Bush arguments. It was pretty notorious and a lot of election historians said they had never seen a candidate go to such an extreme to avoid audiences that might be unfriendly or ask difficult questions. He had people sign loyalty oaths, fer gawds sake. Where are we? Moscow?

Part of what I believe has been key to Barry-O status as front runner has been he has done the opposite. He has gone into areas that Dems usually avoid, areas that Hillary will never appear in, and people recognize that, appreciate that and then when they hear him speak, they're kinda shocked that this skinny Dem is speaking about the issues that they care about to. Now, I have the same doubt you about whether he is just rhetoric and does he have legit ideas to move us forward. We will see what he offers in the ensuing months.

Lets play devils advocate, do you really think Bush's handlers in 2004 would have let him appear in a forum sponsored by, say, Daily Kos? No chance in hell. Basically Daily Kos has blossomed into a Internet alternative for liberals to Fox News.
Bush's guys would never let Markos and company anywhere near their man. Their fear would be his comments would be manipulated, taken out of context and so forth. Thats the Dems fear with something like a possible Fox news debate. I think it is justified (as would be the fears in my hypothetical situation outlined w/ Bush). You boy and our president bush is nothing more than a big fat pussy. Yet, I would advise him to never sit down for a live blog with Markos. Or Arrinana. Unless he thinks he has a chance to shag that Cougar.

Anyway, just wanted to clarify as I did not want anyone to think I was saying Bush gets nothing but canned questions and stuff at his current pressers. Also, you referenced his pressers after taks.

Man, it has been a long, busy week for me. As an example, my math skills completely fell apart on Friday at work. So help me out. I have spaced out what you meant by 'taks.'

Thanks in advance. Enjoy the golf today, whether you are watching or (hopefully) playing.

what are the really stark differences in hillary`s and bho`s platforms?....same platitudes...same liberal talking points...

free healthcare..tax the rich(redistribution of wealth,i.e. socialism)...penalize corporations...cut and run from iraq....hope and change....lol

their platforms are almost identical...

the reason i don`t like obama is
1)he lied about not knowing about rev. wright`s true colors...and the fact that he exposed his children to that tripe....
2)his wife`s very scary comments about america despite her attending elite colleges and earning 300k per year..tough life...
3)questionnable associations with anti-american types
4)his cowardice in debating clinton after finally getting some tough,controversial questions in the last debate on abc...guess it finally got a little too hot...you can`t handle that,you aren`t presidential material...

and his "audacity" to take offense just because people start looking closely at him and his associations..CLOSE associations.......there` a huge difference between bho`s relationship(father-like) with wright and mccain and hagge or any rightwing nutcase minister..but,you guys refuse to acknowledge what`s obvious...it`s apples and oranges...and you know it...


the reason obama`s popular is because the younger "white" voters have been more recently indoctrinated by leftwing wacademia....particularly regarding "white guilt"....

as far as the networks go,fox is the only right leaning news network...and they`re outnumbered like 5-1.....

that`s not "fair enough" for ya`?...lol

...republicans went on msnbc for a debate...and msnbc had the gall to try and pass off keith overbite and chris "the tingle' mathews as objective moderators?...running a debate?....that`s insane..

antbody ever seen sean hannity or bill o`reilly running a debate for fox?.....it`ll never happen...

and speaking of fox news?...they have numerous moonbats working at fox...shepard smith is a raving moonbat...greta van susteren...alan combs..geraldo rivera...

nbc : nothing but crap
msnbc : more stupid negative bombastic crap
pbs : propaganda belching shitbags....(just kidding...that was a joke,btw...you can laugh now:00x12 )...

onward toward the denver bloodbath!!!!...damn the torpedos and full speed ahead!!!!!!



:SIB
 

escarzamd

...abides.
Forum Member
Dec 26, 2003
1,266
1
0
56
5ft, pin high......
what are the really stark differences in hillary`s and bho`s platforms?....same platitudes...same liberal talking points...

free healthcare..tax the rich(redistribution of wealth,i.e. socialism)...penalize corporations...cut and run from iraq....hope and change....lol

their platforms are almost identical...

the reason i don`t like obama is
1)he lied about not knowing about rev. wright`s true colors...and the fact that he exposed his children to that tripe....
2)his wife`s very scary comments about america despite her attending elite colleges and earning 300k per year..tough life...
3)questionnable associations with anti-american types
4)his cowardice in debating clinton after finally getting some tough,controversial questions in the last debate on abc...guess it finally got a little too hot...you can`t handle that,you aren`t presidential material...

and his "audacity" to take offense just because people start looking closely at him and his associations..CLOSE associations.......there` a huge difference between bho`s relationship(father-like) with wright and mccain and hagge or any rightwing nutcase minister..but,you guys refuse to acknowledge what`s obvious...it`s apples and oranges...and you know it...


the reason obama`s popular is because the younger "white" voters have been more recently indoctrinated by leftwing wacademia....particularly regarding "white guilt"....

as far as the networks go,fox is the only right leaning news network...and they`re outnumbered like 5-1.....

that`s not "fair enough" for ya`?...lol

...republicans went on msnbc for a debate...and msnbc had the gall to try and pass off keith overbite and chris "the tingle' mathews as objective moderators?...running a debate?....that`s insane..

antbody ever seen sean hannity or bill o`reilly running a debate for fox?.....it`ll never happen...

and speaking of fox news?...they have numerous moonbats working at fox...shepard smith is a raving moonbat...greta van susteren...alan combs..geraldo rivera...

nbc : nothing but crap
msnbc : more stupid negative bombastic crap
pbs : propaganda belching shitbags....(just kidding...that was a joke,btw...you can laugh now:00x12 )...

onward toward the denver bloodbath!!!!...damn the torpedos and full speed ahead!!!!!!



:SIB

:mj07: :142smilie Hee Hee.....that was good stuff

Disagree w/point #4 on the "cowardice"...........I look at it as "high road." What's the point of a debate if its just dirty laundry? Why can't he pull some of her's out again? Its relevant if that Wacky Wevwend White's old sermons,.......if Billy Air's indiscretions,.......or if getting a discount on land in Hyde Park are relevant.

Sensationalism, ratings, what have you.......He's the front runner, so why tee himself up for this anti-intellectual clap-trap? That ABC debate was a farce. The issues have been covered between these two, so now its mud-slinging and bring on the lawyers! I wouldn't argue w/ a junkie either! 21 debates! Enough!

She's been playing the "fear" card for awhile now......that's all there is since getting outflanked by the caucuses........her fault, not his. So we get her "crafty" politics on the come........perfect! She needs runner/runner Q's all-in, and she likes her chances! The whole process can lik me until August.
 

Toledo Prophet

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 5, 2005
2,384
2
0
52
Toledo, Ohio
Wease,

Calm down, my friend.....i generally like your posts, but sometimes you need to just take a breath.

So, a company owned by GE, a defense contractor leans liberal. Thats funny. Dont Tucker and Scarbourough have shows on their networks as well. Please. During the prime time, weekday hours on any of the cable channels, there are more conservative opinion/spin outlets than liberal. It is not even close when you add in Beck, Kudlow and others.

Fact is, the amount of conservative opinion and "news" on our tv and radio ariwaves dwarfs anything else. They are the true media powers now. And, that evollution has done a huge disservice to the party you so unabashedly love. Since they turned themselves into governement spokesmen, rather than true jounralists, they refused to report facts, instead spent all their time either slurping Bush and Co and destroying any foes, that when it all started crumbling down, they lost all of their credibility. As did the party.

Listen, i really dislike both parties. Feel paritsan politcs is killing us. But, I know a ton about the media. If it has any across the board bias it is like, as Doc eluded to, towards the sensationalistic. If it bleeds it leads.

Otherwsie, I agree with your characterizations of the networks. I really feel news companies these days care more about the bottom line than being watchdogs of those in power. I feel that we here in these forums have more knowledge of these issues than the reporters do. Or, we are at least more in touch with what concerns people than the suits running our news companies. But, they are all too busy trying to ingratiate themselves into the power brokers circle. Matthews is a perfect example. He is a lightweight. He just wants to be people's friends. You claim he is this liberal. Maybe so, but is he killing the R candidates the way say the Foxies do to the Dems? Hardly, he slurps McCain all the time and his face might stilll be covered with cream from Rudy and Fred (who he said he has a man crush on because he just smells like a president, yeah thats hard hitting stuff there Tweety Bird!)

Personally, other than Fox and the radio pundits, I do not think--like others have professed in this forum--that it is a conservative widespread bias. I think some here talked about the biased corporate press, as an example. Yes, i agree it is corporate. But, overall our daily media is just too dumb to have a bias either way.

Like 6/5, I try to watch as little tv news as possible.

Anyway, here is a tip. The best news show on TV is hosted by Lou Dobbs. This guy kills both parties, refuses to buy into wedge issues and does not appear to care if any of the politicians like him or not. I know the crazies at Kos hate him. But, I also now my personal friends who are on the far right hate him too because of how critical he is of Bush. They say things like he used to be a good republican, but he's gone whacko.

Let's see......pissing off the people on each end of the fringe spectrum.......must be doing something right.


I find the reporting Dobbs does on illegal immigration, our broken borders and the best government money can buy is without peer on TV.

Example: How about the boondoogle that has been our virtual wall at the border. For two years, he has been calling the administration on the carpet about this. It is costly, not as effective as a real wall, or even just actually enforcing laws and that it is nothing for than band aid to make it look like something is being done to protect the borders. While Bush cronies at Fox and on radio have been touting this and claiming any opposition is just do-gooder liberalism, the rest of the media has not been covering the issue. Dobbs and his staff have been saying the whole time that the tech does not work. It cost us $20 mill. Guess what the government just announced last week? All the tech does not work and needs to be replaced. The cost? Another 20 mill.

Is anyone else even reporting this? Not really.

Let's see......pissing off the people on each end of the fringe spectrum.......must be doing something right.

Alright. I have rambled a lot now in between calls at work. Not sure if I made a coherent thought anywhere.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Well I waited for those real tough Wallace ??. I did'nt see Obama blink. And after he was done the 4 reb's sitting there didn't have nothing bad to say.That was shocking.
 

Toledo Prophet

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 5, 2005
2,384
2
0
52
Toledo, Ohio
I was actually just going to post that after all the commentary in this thread.......nobody is even talking about the actual interview.

I was too busy yesterday morning watching the NFL Draft, so I appreciate your insights.

Anybody else with thoughts on how the Q/A went. I know I crush Faux News a lot in my posts, but I actually like Chris Wallace as a newsman. If only he could channel the same hard nosed edge he has for the Dems he interviews to the Reps and this presidents, then he might even improve more in my eyes.

But, he is not all hot air like most on the network and actually has a real journalism background, unlike O'Reilly who ought to still be on Inside Edition. Trying to actually winning the Peabody he claimed he won. He is clueless.
 

Tenzing

Registered
Forum Member
Jun 14, 2002
274
0
0
55
Austin, Texas
Sigh, another thread hi-jacked by "Bush did this" and "Obama doesn't stand for that". The guy hates America. He said it himself, Americans have no right to think whichever way they do, if it doesn't congrue with his mindset. Leftists have a history of America-hating, and Obama is just one in a long line of America-haters that the liberal media push on the country like some sort of savior-from-beyond. But it's a moot point anyways; try as they might, the Democrat leadership cannot convince the average left-winger of this country in favor of Obama, for the everyday Democratic voter knows only Hillary stands a chance vs. McCain, and Hussein has a snowball in hells chance of getting elected.

I was actually just going to post that after all the commentary in this thread.......nobody is even talking about the actual interview.

I was too busy yesterday morning watching the NFL Draft, so I appreciate your insights.

Anybody else with thoughts on how the Q/A went. I know I crush Faux News a lot in my posts, but I actually like Chris Wallace as a newsman. If only he could channel the same hard nosed edge he has for the Dems he interviews to the Reps and this presidents, then he might even improve more in my eyes.

But, he is not all hot air like most on the network and actually has a real journalism background, unlike O'Reilly who ought to still be on Inside Edition. Trying to actually winning the Peabody he claimed he won. He is clueless.

Again, please go read contemporary English novels, for you might learn a semblage of grammar and style. It's like your post was on an atomic bomb test site, highly illiterate gobbledygook.
 
Last edited:

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,683
265
83
53
Belly of the Beast
Wtf does 'semblage' mean?

I couldn't even get to that part of the post. Too many pronounciation errors in the first paragraph to even get there. Outside of the horrible grammar, he makes the argument that Obama is leftist and then states that "the Democrat leadership cannot convince the average left-winger of this country in favor of Obama." It's just horrible.

This is a sad day for the political forum, but it is a strong indication that we need to pay more attention to our public schools.

"Si se puede!"
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,906
133
63
16
L.A.
Well I waited for those real tough Wallace ??. I did'nt see Obama blink. And after he was done the 4 reb's sitting there didn't have nothing bad to say.That was shocking.

It's on youtube divided into 6 parts.
 

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,683
265
83
53
Belly of the Beast
Isn't that a Phil Collins song?

It is, but I didn't want to point that out as some people here would try and make the connection of Phil's sexual preference to Obama since he's using that as a campaign slogan. And then we'd spend the next month defending what the real meaning is of "25 or 6 to 4" and how it's not really a terrorist's slogan.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top