Did Obama LIE?

[mantis]

Or as ABC puts it: "forgets".

"ABC News' Teddy Davis and Talal Al-Khatib Report: Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., maintained at Wednesday's ABC News debate in Philadelphia that his handwriting does not appear on a 1996 questionnaire stating support for a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of handguns. The Democratic presidential frontrunner made this claim even though a copy of the original document suggests otherwise."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/04/obama-forgets-w.html

Once again, imagine if this came from Hillary's mouth. would be breaking news for 3 days. Anyway.

[democrattotheend]

1. It was a dumb answer, but in fairness

Candidates fill out dozens of questionnaires like that every election cycle. Every interest group has a questionnaire that they want candidates to fill out. So it's possible he could have confused which of many questionnaires he filled out ten years ago and which his staff did. But yeah, it was kind of a lame answer.

[mantis]

3. Yes, BUT

My point really isn't about the accuracy of the answer...I used the title to draw attention to be honest. My point is the reaction from the media. Simply put, if Clinton made this mistake EVERYONE would know about it...it would be everywhere right now and stay there for a few days.

[TwilightGardener]

10. Um, no. Hillary admitted last night that she knowingly lied (not misspoke

out of fatigue, etc.), and you haven't heard a peep about it in the media. A stupid questionnaire from 12 years ago (before his political career even began) that Obama may or may not have written on is trivial shit--he probably doesn't know for sure what he did with it. Besides, what about Hillary's lie about the Rose law firm billing records? Heard anything about that? There's a double standard: people give Hillary a pass for lying. Obama is expected to be perfect.

[Hepburn]

60. ....

...:eyes: what bullshit, IMO

[cliffordu]

62. After she quits, are you going to leave right away, or do you think

you'll wait for the General to go back??

[Austinitis]

75. This has been an issue this election cycle

He knew.

[rocktivity]

2. Well, it WAS more than TEN years ago.

And being able to state that the handwriting IS his rather than "suggests otherwise" would be helpful, too.

:headbang:
rocknation

[mantis]

4. again

What you say is all very true. My point is the difference in media coverage.

[merh]

9. DIfference in media coverage?

Hillary doesn't f*ckin' wear a flag lapel pin, she didn't have one on last night, did they ask her why not? Did they ask her is she is patriotic.

Man you hillary supporters just don't get it - and oh yeah, telling lies about being under sniper fire is a bigger deal than whether or not a survey was completed.

[aquart]

37. Well, no, it isn't.

Because one has to do with potential legislation and restriction, the other is mere hyperbole.

Obama's biography is full of hyperbole, in which he embellishes his memories to make them more dramatic. There's one entire newspaper article on it. He's completely skating on it.

But whether he will sign or veto bills that restrict gun ownership? That was what the questionnaire was trying to find out.

I'd say anything that could result in legislation is WAY more important than sniper fire or whether Barry went to a party.

[Austinitis]

74. Exactly

[aquart]

39. Like Hillary's visit to Bosnia?

[JoFerret]

59. Quite.

Tis all nonsense.

But these "lies" are from both of them.

[Austinitis]

69. They admit it's his handwriting nt

[redqueen]

5. When have they covered all her lying about NAFTA?

Have they covered her lies about Iraq being a threat?

[jody]

6. BO is a political chameleon, adopting whatever camouflage necessary to survive and prey on

voters.

BO was a board member of the Joyce Foundation that funds the Violence Policy Center and its goal is to ban handguns.

BO considered accepting the presidency of Joyce.

Would an anti-abortion group select a pro-abortion person as its president? NO!

Would an anti-handgun group select a pro-handgun person as its president? NO!

BO's history is clearly anti-handgun and that fact will be newsworthy to the 80 million owners of firearms including 35 million who own handguns.

[Mags]

7. he's the pied piper, that's for sure.

[ProSense]

11. No, this is dumb. Obama's position on this issue is known and established. "Pro-gun" Hillary OTH,

"To prohibit the confiscation of a firearm during an emergency or major disaster if the possession of such firearm is not prohibited under Federal or State law."

Roll Call

Published on Friday, June 18, 2006] by Reuters

Senate Votes to Bar Emergency Gun Confiscation

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Senate on Thursday voted to prohibit the confiscation of legally owned guns during an emergency like last year's Hurricane Katrina, marking another victory for the gun lobby.

By a vote of 84-16, the Senate embraced an amendment by Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican. He attached his measure to a domestic security spending bill for the fiscal year starting October 1 that the Senate is expected to pass soon.

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed its version of the spending bill and negotiators will have to decide whether to keep the gun provision. The House is usually sympathetic to gun owners.



&nbs p; TA man carries a shotgun as he surveys damage to his neighborhood
in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in Metairie, outside New Orleans
September 5, 2005. The U.S. Senate on Thursday voted to prohibit the
confiscation of legally owned guns during an emergency like last year's
Hurricane Katrina, marking another victory for the gun lobby.
REUTERS/Lee Celano

Citing the constitutional right to bear arms, Vitter said that during an emergency people should be allowed to hold onto "legally possessed firearms to defend your life, your property" at a time when telephone lines and cell phones probably are not operating and victims "can't reach out to law enforcement authorities."

more

[jody]

14. HC voted against Amdt. 4616, then for the bill that became law prohibiting confiscation. Links below

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5530748&mesg_id=5538940

[merh]

12. that is not what the Joyce Foundation is about

Mission Statement
The Joyce Foundation supports efforts to protect the natural environment of the Great Lakes, to reduce poverty and violence in the region, and to ensure that its people have access to good schools, decent jobs, and a diverse and thriving culture. We are especially interested in improving public policies, because public systems such as education and welfare directly affect the lives of so many people, and because public policies help shape private sector decisions about jobs, the environment, and the health of our communities. To ensure that public policies truly reflect public rather than private interests, we support efforts to reform the system of financing election campaigns.

Seems like a pretty progressive foundation, if you ask me.

About Guns: Supporting research and public policies to reduce the toll of firearm violence.

Improving Firearms Policy
Groundbreaking collaboration of law enforcement, elected officials and public health experts issues roadmap for keeping communities safe, solving gun crime, and protecting officers.


Improving Firearms Policy
Groundbreaking collaboration of law enforcement, elected officials and public health experts issues roadmap for keeping communities safe, solving gun crime, and protecting officers.

And that use of "anti-abortion" in your post to try to confuse the missions is a pathetic, rightwing tactic intended to create false alignments, it is not necessary in your post yet you use it trying to make some odd connection.

[jody]

15. Why do you ignore the fact that Joyce funds the Violence Policy Center to ban handguns? n/t

[merh]

21. Because I am not a simple minded twit that doesn't understand

the difference between gun control and gun bans. You clinton folks are so blessed petty, you do know that there is a difference, don't you.

You do know that gun regulations and gun controls do not equate to gun bans and/or violations of the 2nd amendment, don't you.

The extremes are absolutely pathetic and assanine, you are either with us or against us" moronic mentality. Trying to curtail violence, trying to promote safety and advocating regulations DOES NOT EQUAL BANNING.

Each year, the VPC releases hard-hitting, fact-based studies on a full range of gun violence issues. Recognizing the VPC's groundbreaking research and unique expertise, VPC staff are frequently quoted by the national news media and relied upon by policymakers. The VPC also works with national, state, and local advocacy organizations representing affected constituencies—such as women, children, minorities, consumers, and public health practitioners—to keep our neighborhoods, homes, schools, and workplaces safe from gun violence.

Honesty is so lacking in so many hillary supporters, its a damned shame.

[jody]

22. The simple fact is BO was a director of a group that wants to ban all handguns. VPC's studies have

been throughly discredited.

We disagree and I'll leave you with your fantasy.

Have a good day and goodbye. :hi:

[merh]

24. The fact is you confuse the basic truths

Gun regulations and gun control do not equate to gun banning.

Not surprised you run away, facts have a tendency to get in the way of lies and distortions.

[aquart]

38. But they do to voters, don't they?

Which is why he isn't being truthful about it. Because what got him votes as a local candidate will lose him votes as a national candidate.

And that, ducky, is the real "basic truth."

[merh]

41. No, ducky, they don't.

Just because folks like you have such simple minds doesn't mean the rest of the populace suffers from that same limitation.

[Two Americas]

43. "ban handguns now"

Every Handgun is Aimed at You: The Case for Banning Handguns, by Violence Policy Center Executive Director Josh Sugarmann, covers a wide range of issues in 10 chapters demonstrating that banning handguns is the most effective way to reduce gun violence in America.

Encompassing topics ranging from crime to homicide to suicide to women and minorities, Every Handgun is Aimed at You uses statistics, easy-to-read charts, and first-person interviews to illustrate the true nature of America's epidemic of gun violence. It is an invaluable resource for all who are working to stop firearms death and injury.

http://www.banhandgunsnow.org/

Ban Handguns Now is a project of the Violence Policy Center.
All contents © 2002 Violence Policy Center

[merh]

49. That is a 10 chapter publication written by the Executive Director

Obama didn't write it and as noted above, he did not take the post with the organization. Guilt by association is such a big thing for you folks.

[Two Americas]

51. "you folks"

I don't know who "you folks" are that you presume I am among. I am not a Clinton supporter, nor am I a gun owner. Is there something else that characterizes this "you folks" group?

This is not a question of "guilt," by association or otherwise. No one said that Obama did write it, and if he had, so what? If that were his position, there would be nothing wrong with that. What would he be guilty of? Why couldn't he write a paper about his position of handguns? Or, if he agrees with the goals of that organization, that is his right to do so and there is nothing wrong with that, either.

It is clear that this organization advocates banning handguns. That is fine, too. They have a right to take that position. Obama supports that position, or he doesn't, and there is nothing wrong with the public wanting to know his position on this issue.

[merh]

56. Then track the discussion you stepped into.

You will understand my response.

[Two Americas]

57. I did

I am not responsible for the rest of the discussion nor the remarks of the other posters. There is no way to know from what I posted which side of this I am on.

There is a lot of confusion as to where regulation ends and confiscation begins - among people on both sides of the debate. That particular organization is most definitely favoring confiscation. As with many who do advocate confiscation, they are not upfront about that. The rest of the website sounds just like the "no, no we are not favoring confiscation, we just want regulation" arguments heard so often. People who are opposed to confiscation are, for this reason, suspicious. In this case, their suspicions would be well founded.

I can't believe that any politician today does not know exactly how this game is played. Many favor confiscation, but know that it is better to not be overt or open about that. This is an issue where the politician may fool many liberals - "no, no, I didn't know they were for confiscation, I just want to see reduced violence" and then try to straddle both sides of the issue - but it is political poison with large segments of the general public, and we are trying to win a general election here.

If people favor confiscation, so be it. But they shouldn't deny that or try to weasel around it, nor should they pretend that they don't know exactly what this issue is about.

[jody]

61. VPC supports banning handguns as proved so clearly in its brief supporting D.C in D.C. v. Heller

BRIEF OF VIOLENCE POLICY CENTER et al IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS { District of Columbia}

CONCLUSION

“The District of Columbia’s handgun ban is an eminently reasonable restriction on any private right to bear arms for persons unaffiliated with a militia, given the manifest dangers to the public safety that handguns present.”

That statement by VPC proves it wants to ban handguns and those who finance it also want to ban handguns.

It's not too far fetched to believe that those who support VPC, e.g. DU members who support VPC, also want to ban handguns.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jody]

16. What do you hope to accomplish by calling me a liar when my posts are linked to facts? n/t

[jody]

17. Self delete, dupe.

[ShortnFiery]

19. The HRC folks, IMO, huddle at a handful of other sites, talk smack about US and then

think that they're so STEALTH (:wtf:) when they periodically *burst on the scene* to spew their "OBAMA BAD" feces against the wall. Yet, nothing sticks which just pisses them off even more.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

IMO, their purpose now is to work with the M$M to suppress the votes for Obama.

After all, isn't voter suppression The American Way (to serve the upper 1%)? :crazy:

[JoFerret]

8. The real lie

was when he said he was ready to be president.

But that does not count.

This gun stuff leaves both candidates stumbling and dissembling. It's a tough and a complex one for any democrat in touch with big cites and their police forces as well as the hunting crowd.
Load of bs to focus too much on it imo.

[StevieM]

18. The rules only apply if you're Hillary (eom)

[stillcool]

46. Rules? You mean like these?

CLINTON ALLIES SUPPRESS THE VOTE IN NEVADA...
On Meet the Press on Sunday, Hillary Clinton said her campaign had nothing to do with a lawsuit--written about by Nation Editor Katrina vanden Heuvel--that threatens to prevent thousands of workers from voting in the Nevada caucus on Saturday.
Back in March, the Nevada Democratic Party agreed to set up caucus locations on the Vegas strip for low-income shift workers, many of them members of the state's influential Culinary Union, who commute long distances to work and wouldn't be able to get home in time to caucus. It was an uncontroversial idea until the Culinary Union endorsed Barack Obama and the Nevada State Education Association, whose top officials support Clinton, sued to shut down the caucus sites.
The Clinton camp played dumb until yesterday, when President Clinton came out in favor of the lawsuit.

Clinton's comments drew a heated response from D. Taylor, the head of Nevada's Culinary Union, on MSNBC's Hardball. "He is in support of disenfranchising thousands upon thousands of workers, not even just our members," Taylor said of Clinton. "The teachers union is just being used here. We understand that This is the Clinton campaign. They tried to disenfranchise students in Iowa. Now they're trying to
disenfranchise people here in Nevada, who are union members and people of color and women."
Rank-and-file members of Nevada's teachers union also come out against the lawsuit filed by their leadership. "We never thought our union and Senator Clinton would put politics ahead of what's right for our students, but that's exactly what they're doing," the letter stated. "As teachers, and proud Democrats, we hope they will drop this undemocratic lawsuit and help all Nevadans caucus, no matter which candidate they support."
The lawsuit's opponents make a persuasive point. Creating obstacles to voting is what the GOP does to Democrats, not what Democrats should be doing to other Democrats.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/17/a-feisty-bill-clinton-defends-nevada-lawsuit/
Link for lawsuit: http://graphics.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/politics/20080112_nevada_lawsuit.pdf

Editorial: Follow DNC rules on seating delegates
February 25, 2008
By Editorial Board

On September 1, the campaigns of Clinton and Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) issued press releases stating that they had signed pledges affirming the DNC’s decision to approve certain representative states and sanction others for moving their nominating contests earlier. But now that the race is close, Clinton — whose top advisor Harold Ickes voted as a member of the DNC to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates — is pushing for the delegates to be seated.

Her argument is that not doing so disenfranchises the 1.7 million Florida Democrats who voted and that her pledge promised only that she wouldn’t campaign in the states, not that she wouldn’t try to seat the delegates. However, the results of the contests in Florida and Michigan are not necessarily representative of the voters’ preferences in those states. Given that most of the candidates removed their names from the Michigan ballot, and that many voters stayed home from the vote in Florida with the understanding that their contest would not affect the final delegate count, the delegate totals that the candidates accumulated in these states may not accurately reflect the will of the voters. Had there been no restrictions in Michigan and Florida, the turnout, and thus the results, may have been different.

The Four State Pledge all candidates signed on Aug. 28 stated, “Whereas, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will strip states of 100% of their delegates and super delegates to the DNC National Convention if they violate the nomination calendar... Therefore, I ____________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules ...pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window.” When the candidates pledged to campaign only in approved states, they were also agreeing to the terms listed above, which explicitly mentioned stripping noncompliant states of their entire delegation.

As it has become clear that the delegate race will be very close, politicians in the Democratic party are discussing the implications of the DNC pledge, and whether it would be wise to seat the delegates after all, rather than risk offending these important states that could be influential in the November election.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) recently said that the Florida and Michigan delegates should not be seated if they would decide the nomination. Other compromise proposals include holding new nominating contests in these states, but such contests would be expensive and cumbersome. The irony is that had Florida and Michigan not moved up their primaries, they would have voted in February and March, when they would have been even more important than in earlier months in determining the Democratic nominee — and would not have created an enormous controversy that has the potential to divide the party.
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/2/25/editorialFollowDncRulesOnSeatingDelegates

..or do you mean this stuff?...

December 10, 2007
Third Clinton Volunteer Knew Of Smear E-Mail
A third volunteer for Hillary Clinton's campaign was aware of a propaganda e-mail alleging that Barack Obama is a Muslim who plans on "destroying the U.S. from the inside out."
"Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential Candidacy," the email reads. "Please forward to everyone you know. The Muslims have said they Plan on destroying the U.S. from the inside out, what better way to start than at The highest level."


Two Clinton volunteers, Linda Olson and Judy Rose, have already been asked to resign from the campaign for their roles in forwarding the e-mail. The AP reported yesterday that Olson, a volunteer coordinator in Iowa County, sent a version of the e-mail to 11 people, including Ben Young, a regional field director for Chris Dodd's campaign. Young passed it on to the AP.
http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2007/12/third_clinton_v.html

Kerrey Apologizes to Obama Over Remark
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4031436
Kerrey's mention of Obama's middle name and his Muslim roots raised eyebrows because they are also used as part of a smear campaign on the Internet that falsely suggests Obama is a Muslim who wants to bring jihad to the United States. Obama is a Christian.

The Clinton campaign has already fired two volunteer county coordinators in Iowa for forwarding hoax e-mails with the debunked claim. Last week, a national Clinton campaign co-chairman resigned for raising questions about whether Obama's teenage drug use could be used against him, so Kerrey's comments raised questions about whether the Clinton campaign might be using another high-profile surrogate to smear Obama.

Hillary: Sorry for Any Offense Campaign (Bill) Has Caused
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FB65wJ6Rcfs

Bill Clinton Asks for a Second Chance
By Liz Halloran
Posted February 11, 2008

The morning after his wife, Hillary, was routed in three state contests by Sen. Barack Obama in their dead-heat battle for the Democratic nomination, former President Bill Clinton made his case for her before a packed Sunday service at one of the largest black churches in Washington, D.C.
But first he offered an apology of sorts for racially tinged comments he made about Obama and his candidacy that have triggered a backlash in the black community and among many other Democrats.

Clinton invoked his "worship of a God of second chances" in pronouncing himself glad to be at the Temple of Praise, which claims nearly 15,000 members. His invocation of second chances echoed comments he made early last week at black churches in California, where he campaigned for his wife before that state's Super Tuesday primary, which she won.
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/02/11/bill-clinton-asks-for-a-second-chance.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/02/bill-clinton-to-apologize_n_84573.html
Bill Clinton To Apologize At LA Black Churches
Once again, Bill Clinton is ready to repent.

On Sunday the former president is scheduled to visit black churches in South Central Los Angeles, where he's expected to offer a mea culpa to those who "dearly loved him" when he was their president, Rep. Diane Watson (D-Calif.) says.
Watson, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus who has endorsed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), tells us she'll usher the former president to more than half a dozen churches in her district where she says he needs to "renew his relationship" with congregants who were turned off by his racially tinged
comments in the days leading up to and following the South Carolina primary. (Such as when Clinton compared Sen. Barack Obama's landslide victory to Jesse Jackson's wins in 1984 and 1988.)

Source: Newsday
Posted on Sunday, December 16, 2007 at 12:04 pm
http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=30629&cat=5
Barack Obama Accepts Apology From Hillary Clinton
Washington D.C. 12/15/2007 09:17 AM GMT (FINDITT)

Hillary Clinton went straight to Barack Obama with an apology following a staffer's remarks about any skeletons that may be lurking in Obama's closet, pointing out that she had accepted the staffer's resignation over the disparaging remarks. Obama accepted her at her word, according to his campaign staff, and is moving on without letting it interrupt his campaign plans.

Obama is currently leading the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, the two early primary states often considered key to the process, according to numbers at usaelectionpolls.com, but on a national level Clinton still holds a huge lead. The most recently posted poll results show Obama with 31 percent of the probable voters in New Hampshire backing him with 29 percent showing support for Clinton.

Clinton Camp Pushes O-Bomber Links: Ignores Her Own Radical Ties
By: Justin Rood

ABC News - The Hillary Clinton campaign pushed to reporters today stories about Barack Obama and his ties to former members of a radical domestic terrorist group -- but did not note that as president, Clinton's husband pardoned more than a dozen convicted violent radicals, including a member of the same group mentioned in the Obama stories.

"Wonder what the Republicans will do with this issue," mused Clinton spokesman Phil Singer in one e-mail to the media, containing a New York Sun article reporting a $200 contribution from William Ayers, a founding member of the 1970s group Weather Underground, to Obama in 2001.

In a separate e-mail, Singer forwarded an article from the Politico newspaper reporting on a 1995 event at a private home that brought Obama together with Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, another member of the radical group.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/13/clinton.obama/index.html
Clinton adviser steps down after drug use comments
Earlier Thursday, Clinton personally apologized to rival Obama for Shaheen's remarks.
Obama accepted her apology, according to David Axelrod, the top political strategist for the Obama campaign.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/edwards-no-conscience-in-clinton-campaign/
January 6, 2008, 5:18 pm
Edwards: No Conscience in Clinton Campaign
By Julie Bosman

KEENE, N.H. – John Edwards angrily took on Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton at two news conferences in a row on Sunday, saying that her campaign “doesn’t seem to have a conscience.”

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-01-17-johnson-apology_N.htm?csp=34

COMPTON, Calif. (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton and her campaign tried to mend ties to black voters Thursday when a key supporter apologized to her chief rival, Barack Obama, for comments that hinted at Obama's drug use as a teenager. The candidate herself, meanwhile, praised the Rev. Martin Luther King and promised to assist with the rebirth of this troubled, largely black city.
------------------

Johnson's comments and remarks by both Clintons before the New Hampshire primary last week had alarmed several black leaders and drew a rebuke from Obama and his top aides.

It began when Hillary Clinton gave an interview in which she seemed to discount King's role in the civil rights movement. Later, former President Clinton cast aspects of Obama's candidacy as a "fairy tale."

Clinton Surrogate Compares Obama Ad to Nazi March
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?pid=278988
Fri Feb 1, 2:23 PM ET
The Nation -- On a media conference call organized by the Hillary Clinton campaign today, Clinton surrogate Len Nichols compared an Obama health care ad to Nazis.
----------
Accusing political opponents of Nazism is an outrageous smear. Raising the specter of a Nazi march in response to a health care mailer that evokes the insurance industry is so absurd, it would be hard to take the attack seriously, were it not launched from a high profile national campaign conference call in this crucial stretch of the presidential race. And political observers know, of course, that the Clinton Campaign regularly arranges opportunities for surrogates to launch these kind of smears, which are later followed up with apologies. (See: Bob Johnson, Bill Shaheen, Bob Kerrey, and Francine Torge, to name the most recent offenders.) For his part, Nichols did not immediately return a call requesting further comment.
-------------------------
Len Nichols, Director of New America's Health Policy Program, stated, "For nearly 17 years I have worked tirelessly to reform our nation's struggling health system. Today my passion overwhelmed me. I chose an analogy that was wholly inappropriate. I am deeply sorry for any offense that my unfortunate comments may have caused.

or maybe this kind of stuff?

http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/bill-and-hillary-clintons-top-5-lies-to-voters-on-the-campaign-trail/
Bill and Hillary Clinton’s Top 8 Lies to Voters on the Campaign Trail
#1 Bill Clinton lied to voters at their rallies and said he had been opposed to the Iraq war from the start.

#2 Hillary Clinton lied and said she had been opposed to NAFTA. After an advocacy group sued to have her First Lady records released, it was revealed that she had supported and advocated for NAFTA.

#3 Hillary Clinton lied to voters about a trip to Bosnia claiming she was running for cover and did not attend a greeting ceremony.

#4 Bill Clinton lied to voters about Barack Obama’s Iraq record.

#5 Bill Clinton just completely made up a story to supporters about Obama dismissing the 90s.

#6 Hillary Clinton said she was instrumental in helping bring peace to Northern Ireland.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBCmKkLdCuA&eurl=http://... /

#7 Hillary Clinton lied to Iowa and New Hampshire voters about whether she would try to count the Florida and Michigan primaries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C08W-jgyLlA&eurl=http://... /
#8 Hillary Clinton lied at one of her rallies and said she began criticizing the Iraq War before Barack Obama did
http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/bill-and-hillary-clintons-top-5-lies-to-voters-on-the-campaign-trail/

or are you referring to this?

Published on Wednesday, December 12, 2007 by Newsday.com
Clinton Accuses Obama of Being Too Far Left
by Glenn Thrush

Using a curious tactic in a Democratic primary season dominated by liberals, Hillary Rodham Clinton Tuesday accused Barack Obama of being too far left to be elected president — citing a decade-old questionnaire indicating Obama once opposed the death penalty and backed socialized medicine.

The attack, coming as a surprising new ABC News-Washington Post poll showed her national lead over Obama widening to 30 points, is part of Clinton’s strategy of portraying Obama as too inexperienced to run for the White House.

In 1996, Obama, then running for the State Senate, filled out an election questionnaire for the liberal, good-government Independent Voters of Illinois Independent Precinct Organization. On the forms, Obama proclaimed his support for a “single-payer” health insurance system, even though he now supports a system based on private insurance. He also answered “yes” when asked if he backed state bills that would ban the possession of all handguns. He he now backs stringent but limited controls.

In a statement, a campaign spokeswoman said, “Obama never saw or approved” the document, and the health care, capital punishment and gun control answers weren’t consistent with his stances, then or now.

“It was filled out by an aide who has conceded she never got Obama’s signoff,” the spokeswoman said. “Some of the answers accurately reflect Obama’s position. Others do not.”

Obama says he supports capital punishment for severe crimes, but once favored a temporary moratorium after a handful of capital cases were found to have been based on faulty evidence.

Clinton aides suggested the questionnaire proved Obama tailored his views to suit the political climate — a charge he’s often leveled at her.

In an e-mail entitled “Obama Forced to Defend Electability in Face … of New Questionnaire,” Clinton’s press office reprinted passages from an online story claiming Obama has since been criticized for “abandoning” the stands as he “rose through the ranks.”

A Insider Advantage snapshot poll taken over the weekend, as Obama and Oprah Winfrey appeared at a rally in Columbia, showed Obama leading Clinton 28 percent to 22 percent, with a 5-point margin of error.

© Copyright © 2007, Newsday Inc.

[goletian]

20. "SUGGESTS" otherwise, lol. what is this foxnews?

i thought dems didnt fall for the same shit repub idiots do. guess i was wrong.

if the case against obama is so rock solid, why do i keep seein speculation instead of flat out accusations of lying? lol, you hillary drones are gobbling it up, just like the far right eats up repub bullshit. hahaha.

[MoonRiver]

23. Does a bear shit in the woods?

:shrug:

[YOY]

25. Does a Hillarite miss an opportunity to sling mud?

n/t

[guruoo]

50. Does an Obamagandist?

:rofl:

[YOY]

58. Yes.

n/t

[mrreowwr_kittty]

29. Does MyPetRock like to link to wingnut sites?

I'm surprised you didn't find something from Powerline or Little Green Footballs to post here.

[EFerrari]

26. How sad are you.

[BzaDem]

27. Why is it that when Hillary lies about something 10 years ago, its serious?

But you are sad if you point the same thing out about Obama?

[EFerrari]

30. It's relative weight. Obama has already explained that flap.

Hillary, on the other hand, hasn't explained how she can claim to be for workers in PA and yet take money from Colombia from a government who is slaughtering labor organizers with chain saws. Who have the worst record in the world for the murders of labor organizers. Not only did Penn go there but Bill took 800K.

It's relative, I guess.

[BzaDem]

32. Bill took 800k. Not Hillary. Obama personally handwrote the questionaire about something very

controversial, and then personally lied about it. Very different than an advisor going to Columbia or her husband taking money from Columbia.

Just like Hillary went to Bosnia 10 years ago, and then personally lied about it.

My point is, the media coverage of Bosnia (even before Bill started bringing it up again)? > 1 week. Coverage of Obama's gun questionaire? I saw one program mention it for 2 min.

[EFerrari]

35. You must be fucking joking.

If my husband came home with 800k from butchers or if my campaign manager came back from meeting with the chain saw cowboys, well, that would be it for me.

And you're comparing that with what the fuck? With handwriting? Cool.

[BzaDem]

36. That's fine, but you are completely changing the subject.

You might not like Bill's stance on the trade agreement. That really has nothing to do with lying.

If every time anyone says anything negative about Obama, you simply say "Bill 800k" over and over, it's not very productive.

The OP is simply pointing out that on two very similar issues (lying about something they personally dealt with 10 years ago), the media coverage is completely different. That has nothing to do with Bill's 800k.

[EFerrari]

54. No, I'm not changing the subject in the least

unless you are ready to believe that the debunked signature story is still viable where the Clinton cackle over the deaths of thousands -- thousands -- of labor organisers in Colombia isn't worth a mention.

I might not like Bill's stance on the trade agreement? Who would you have to be to "like" a government that goes after union organizers with chain saws?

Please.

[stillcool]

55. You call liar on this?

..a recycled hit piece?

Published on Wednesday, December 12, 2007 by Newsday.com
Clinton Accuses Obama of Being Too Far Left
by Glenn Thrush

Using a curious tactic in a Democratic primary season dominated by liberals, Hillary Rodham Clinton Tuesday accused Barack Obama of being too far left to be elected president — citing a decade-old questionnaire indicating Obama once opposed the death penalty and backed socialized medicine.
The attack, coming as a surprising new ABC News-Washington Post poll showed her national lead over Obama widening to 30 points, is part of Clinton’s strategy of portraying Obama as too inexperienced to run for the White House.

In 1996, Obama, then running for the State Senate, filled out an election questionnaire for the liberal, good-government Independent Voters of Illinois Independent Precinct Organization. On the forms, Obama proclaimed his support for a “single-payer” health insurance system, even though he now supports a system based on private insurance. He also answered “yes” when asked if he backed state bills that would ban the possession of all handguns. He he now backs stringent but limited controls.

In a statement, a campaign spokeswoman said, “Obama never saw or approved” the document, and the health care, capital punishment and gun control answers weren’t consistent with his stances, then or now.

“It was filled out by an aide who has conceded she never got Obama’s signoff,” the spokeswoman said. “Some of the answers accurately reflect Obama’s position. Others do not.”Obama says he supports capital punishment for severe crimes, but once favored a temporary moratorium after a handful of capital cases were found to have been based on faulty evidence.

Clinton aides suggested the questionnaire proved Obama tailored his views to suit the political climate — a charge he’s often leveled at her.

In an e-mail entitled “Obama Forced to Defend Electability in Face … of New Questionnaire,” Clinton’s press office reprinted passages from an online story claiming Obama has since been criticized for “abandoning” the stands as he “rose through the ranks.”

[EFerrari]

52. The word is Colombia.

[aquart]

40. So Hillary is recommending that workers be slaughtered by chainsaws?

Could you show me her statement on that?

[stillcool]

48. that's not what I read..

Hillary, on the other hand, hasn't explained how she can claim to be for workers in PA and yet take money from Colombia from a government who is slaughtering labor organizers with chain saws. Who have the worst record in the world for the murders of labor organizers. Not only did Penn go there but Bill took 800K.

[stillcool]

47. It didn't work then...

why do you think it will work now?

Published on Wednesday, December 12, 2007 by Newsday.com
Clinton Accuses Obama of Being Too Far Left
by Glenn Thrush

Using a curious tactic in a Democratic primary season dominated by liberals, Hillary Rodham Clinton Tuesday accused Barack Obama of being too far left to be elected president — citing a decade old questionnaire indicating Obama once opposed the death penalty and backed socialized medicine.

The attack, coming as a surprising new ABC News-Washington Post poll showed her national lead over Obama widening to 30 points, is part of Clinton’s strategy of portraying Obama as too inexperienced to run for the White House.

In 1996, Obama, then running for the State Senate, filled out an election questionnaire for the liberal, good-government Independent Voters of Illinois Independent Precinct Organization. On the forms, Obama proclaimed his support for a “single-payer” health insurance system, even though he now supports a system based on private insurance. He also answered “yes” when asked if he backed state bills that would ban the
possession of all handguns. He he now backs stringent but limited controls.

In a statement, a campaign spokeswoman said, “Obama never saw or approved” the document, and the health care, capital punishment and gun control answers weren’t consistent with his stances, then or now.

“It was filled out by an aide who has conceded she never got Obama’s signoff,” the spokeswoman said. “Some of the answers accurately reflect Obama’s position. Others do not.”Obama says he supports capital punishment for severe crimes, but once favored a temporary moratorium after a handful of capital
cases were found to have been based on faulty evidence. Clinton aides suggested the questionnaire proved Obama tailored his views to suit the political climate — a charge he’s often leveled at her.

In an e-mail entitled “Obama Forced to Defend Electability in Face … of New Questionnaire,” Clinton’s press office reprinted passages from an online story claiming Obama has since been criticized for “abandoning” the stands as he “rose through the ranks.”

[Austinitis]

73. Just watch as we sink your candidate with this.

[AtomicKitten]

28. Maybe he didn't actually know precisely which piece of paper they were talking about after all.

Can't expect every GOTCHA to go quite the way you expected but, hey, you go on with your bad self and pretend whatever the hell it is you want to get faux-outraged about in the continuing saga of Hillary's Last Stand.

[Arrowhead2k1]

31. Unless it makes a compelling YouTube video

it's useless dribble. Reality bites huh?

[KaptBunnyPants]

33. And Hillary doesn't face an McCarthyite campaign to impugn her patriotism.

She has gotten typecasted for lying because of the Bosnia exaggerations, which were fairly grand. Reporters fit stories to the narrative, which is stupid but apparently they are hopeless. But why should we spend time defending her when she is waging a hopeless campaign based on fear and slander of the certain Democratic nominee?

[mahina]

34. Can't check now, dodging sniper fire.

[aquart]

42. Yeah, that debate must have felt like it.

So why did Obama lie about attending those parties in Hawaii? And why did he exaggerate his drug use?

And he was against gun ownership before he was for it?

[stillcool]

44. Recycling?

did you get a hold of that kindergarten essay?

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/12/12/5776/
Published on Wednesday, December 12, 2007 by Newsday.com
Clinton Accuses Obama of Being Too Far Left
by Glenn Thrush

Using a curious tactic in a Democratic primary season dominated by liberals, Hillary Rodham Clinton Tuesday accused Barack Obama of being too far left to be elected president — citing a decade-old questionnaire indicating Obama once opposed the death penalty and backed socialized medicine.1212 01

The attack, coming as a surprising new ABC News-Washington Post poll showed her national lead over Obama widening to 30 points, is part of Clinton’s strategy of portraying Obama as too inexperienced to run for the White House.

In 1996, Obama, then running for the State Senate, filled out an election questionnaire for the liberal, good-government Independent Voters of Illinois Independent Precinct Organization. On the forms, Obama proclaimed his support for a “single-payer” health insurance system, even though he now supports a system based on private insurance. He also answered “yes” when asked if he backed state bills that would ban the possession of all handguns. He he now backs stringent but limited controls.

In a statement, a campaign spokeswoman said, “Obama never saw or approved” the document, and the health care, capital punishment and gun control answers weren’t consistent with his stances, then or now.

“It was filled out by an aide who has conceded she never got Obama’s signoff,” the spokeswoman said. “Some of the answers accurately reflect Obama’s position. Others do not.”

Obama says he supports capital punishment for severe crimes, but once favored a temporary moratorium after a handful of capital cases were found to have been based on faulty evidence.

Clinton aides suggested the questionnaire proved Obama tailored his views to suit the political climate — a charge he’s often leveled at her.

In an e-mail entitled “Obama Forced to Defend Electability in Face … of New Questionnaire,” Clinton’s press office reprinted passages from an online story claiming Obama has since been criticized for “abandoning” the stands as he “rose through the ranks.”


© Copyright © 2007, Newsday Inc.

[Austinitis]

71. Too bad the Obama campaign's orgininal response was a lie...

[sampsonblk]

45. Not necessary to ask if Hillary lies or not. We already know the answer.-nt

[ProSense]

53. Dumb. Obama's handwriting on the form has nothing to do with the issue: gun control. Let's explore

Obama's position on the issue is established, but Hillary claimed she was pro-gun this weekend. Let's explore:

"To prohibit the confiscation of a firearm during an emergency or major disaster if the possession of such firearm is not prohibited under Federal or State law."

Roll Call

Published on Friday, June 18, 2006] by Reuters

Senate Votes to Bar Emergency Gun Confiscation

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Senate on Thursday voted to prohibit the confiscation of legally owned guns during an emergency like last year's Hurricane Katrina, marking another victory for the gun lobby.

By a vote of 84-16, the Senate embraced an amendment by Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican. He attached his measure to a domestic security spending bill for the fiscal year starting October 1 that the Senate is expected to pass soon.

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed its version of the spending bill and negotiators will have to decide whether to keep the gun provision. The House is usually sympathetic to gun owners.



TA man carries a shotgun as he surveys damage to his neighborhood
in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in Metairie, outside New Orleans
September 5, 2005. The U.S. Senate on Thursday voted to prohibit the
confiscation of legally owned guns during an emergency like last year's
Hurricane Katrina, marking another victory for the gun lobby.
REUTERS/Lee Celano

Citing the constitutional right to bear arms, Vitter said that during an emergency people should be allowed to hold onto "legally possessed firearms to defend your life, your property" at a time when telephone lines and cell phones probably are not operating and victims "can't reach out to law enforcement authorities."

more

[jody]

63. HC voted for the appropriation bill that included prohibiting gun confiscation. Why don't you tell

the entire story?

Either you deliberately misrepresent the truth or you are grossly ignorant of the entire story about confiscating firearms.

[Zodiak]

65. link please?

And then answer this....who doesn't vote for appropriations bills? What was the Democratic breakdown for that particular bill? Also, when the amendment for the gun measure to the appropriations bill came up, did she vote for or against including it in the overall appropriations bill? All of these questions are pertinent to qualifying your statement.

I have studied the Senate, and very few appropriations bills get passed without overwhelming bipartisan support.

[jody]

77. Links in DU thread at link below.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5532055&mesg_id=5532804

[Zodiak]

78. That is what I suspected

She voted to not have the amendment included, according to your links. But the amendment was included because she lost that vote. Then 100% of the Senate voted for the appropriations bill...because appropriations bills almost always get 100% support.

Basically, she had no choice.....but when she was given the choice on the amendment, she voted to confiscate guns during emergencies.

[ProSense]

70. So she voted against it because she hoped it would pass? Maybe it's you who is "grossly ignorant."

n/t

[jody]

76. Neither you or I know why HC voted against the amendment that passed and then voted for the bill. n/

[Austinitis]

67. It goes straight to the issue: Honesty.

[dchill]

64. YES! YES! YES!

And ANYONE who is a liar should be flogged! ANYONE! Right?
Right?

[Austinitis]

66. Yes, Totally.

[JoFerret]

68. Boneheadness exposed brings Obama down to earth

...where he belongs along with the rest of us flotsam and jetsam of mere mortals.
Short answer: yes.
Reason: politician.

[Carrieyazel]

72. Yes he did. He favored a ban on handguns in the 1990's.

To say you "never did" when you did is a falsehood.

[PBS Poll-435]

79. Yes. He. Did.