Hannity misquoted Obama to falsely accuse him of breaking promise
SUMMARY: On his Fox News program, Sean Hannity misquoted President Obama in falsely claiming that Obama, "in the [presidential] debate with [Sen.] John McCain, said, 'I'm going to go line by line. I'm going to eliminate all the earmarks.' " In fact, during the second presidential debate, Obama said that he wanted "to go line by line through every item in the federal budget and eliminate programs that don't work and make sure that those that do work, work better and cheaper." Indeed, during his presidential campaign, Obama actually promised to reform the earmark process and cut wasteful spending, not eliminate earmarks altogether.
On the March 11 edition of his Fox News program, Sean Hannity misquoted President Obama in falsely claiming that Obama "promised the American people" to "eliminate all earmarks." Hannity claimed that "in the debate with [Sen.] John McCain, [Obama] said, 'I'm going to go line by line. I'm going to eliminate all the earmarks.' " Hannity went on to say that Obama "had a golden opportunity to stand up to his party and say, 'I'm a man of my word, I promised the American people, and I'm going to keep it.' " He added, "If you say, 'I'm going to go line by line, I'm gonna eliminate bad programs, I'm gonna eliminate all earmarks,' that seems to me like a broken promise." In fact, during the second presidential debate, Obama said that he wanted "to go line by line through every item in the federal budget and eliminate programs that don't work and make sure that those that do work, work better and cheaper," not that he wanted to "eliminate all earmarks" [emphasis added]. Indeed, as PolitiFact.com and Media Matters for America have noted, during his presidential campaign, Obama actually promised to reform the earmark process and cut wasteful spending.
Later in the program, Hannity said: "[I]s it petty if Barack Obama says, 'I am going to go line by line and eliminate earmarks,' and the first bill he signs -- 50 days into his administration -- he signs a bill with 9,000 earmarks? That's a broken pledge."
As Media Matters documented, on his March 6 Fox News show, Hannity made the false claim that Obama made a "campaign promise" to allow "no earmarks." Hannity then aired a clip of Obama stating his desire to "ban all earmarks" from the economic recovery package, falsely suggesting that Obama was referring to banning all earmarks in general. Numerous other media figures have similarly misrepresented Obama's statements regarding earmarks to accuse Obama of breaking a promise.
From the March 11 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
ALEXIS GLICK (Fox Business News anchor): The president doesn't have a leg to stand on on this. This is why he stood behind closed door and signed off on it. Because you cannot stand there and say that corporations cannot go out and have conferences with their executives or fly on corporate jets or do all these things if you're not going to live up yourself and say to both Republicans and Democrats, "No pork allowed." I'm tired of hearing, "Well, it was the last administration's bill, and therefore we're just going to let this one pass through, and then we're gonna change the rules."
HANNITY: All right. You know what? I'm now getting to the point -- I'm going to have to give you a pass. Because that is very well said, and I am in full and complete agreement --
GLICK: [unintelligible] working on me.
HANNITY: -- with Alexis Glick. All right. But Barack Obama, in the debate with John McCain, said, "I'm going to go line by line. I'm going to eliminate all the earmarks." Now, I think politically speaking, Barack Obama had a golden opportunity to stand up to his party and say, "I'm a man of my word, I promised the American people, and I'm going to keep it." He didn't do that. Was that a big mistake?
BIANNA GOLODRYGA (financial correspondent for ABC's Good Morning America): Well, let me tell you. The people I talk to on Wall Street, of course -- because, you know, Washington, D.C., has now become the financial capital of the world -- and they care about taxes, they care about regulation. That's what they're really focused on right now. And the people I talk to are actually kind of relieved that Obama did this because they want pragmatic leadership. They want a leader that can change if he needs to, and not this idealistic symbolism that he ran on, you know, last year in his campaign.
HANNITY: Pragmatic, but this isn't exactly symbolic. If you say, "I'm going to go line by line, I'm gonna eliminate bad programs, I'm gonna eliminate all earmarks," that seems to me like a broken promise.
[...]
KIRSTEN POWERS (columnist and Fox News political analyst): I think that the thing that people have the biggest problem with is the bickering over stupid things. So maybe it's if you are, in fact, bickering over whether to go to war, that's one thing. But I think when you start to get -- I think a lot of times --
HANNITY: Wait -- hey, let me just add one little point to this.
POWERS: -- people don't like to be hearing little things that seem petty or insider-y.
HANNITY: So, wait. But is it petty if Barack Obama says, "I am going to go line by line and eliminate earmarks," and the first bill he signs -- 50 days into his administration -- he signs a bill with 9,000 earmarks? That's a broken pledge. I doubt [former NBA player] Karl Malone's -- did you say your father or your grandfather?
MALONE: My grandfather [unintelligible].
HANNITY: I doubt his grandfather would have broken that promise.
Hannity is way too comfortable with lying.
I really think Hannity is just lying because otherwise he'd be bored. What else would he fill all this airtime with if he didn't lie?
Damn, that's a forced segue to Malone. What is the relevance of Malone's grandpa here? :D
Karl Malone put one of my former co-workers in danger of serious injury. I wouldn't automatically assume that he was raised with the best values.
really?
ya know im a longtime utah jazz fan and karl malone was one of my favorite players....just below john stockton.
i thank my dad for being a jazz fan and born in salt lake city utah.
It surprised me too, when I heard about it. My co-worker was trying to adjust the net, up on a ladder with a level. Malone was hurling a basketball against the backboard while he was doing it, missing his head by inches. My co-worker even joked with him about it trying to get him to stop, telling him "Hey, I'm taller than you right now", but he just kept doing it.
Something else that might surprise people, Dick Vitale can shoot three-pointers as well as anyone I've seen.
really? hmm wouldn't think it
I'd even like to watch him do it, if he didn't shout, "YESSS, BAYBEEEEE!" after each one.
Fawlty, it's not in the clip, but shortly before, Malone had made some comment about his grandfather looking people in the eye, and shaking their hand, and that used to mean something, etc.
-- Obama said that he wanted "to go line by line through every item in the federal budget --
So far, Pres.Obama has a decidedly funny way of accomplishing that promise.
as much as you are correct. give the guy a break and some time to come through on that promise.
OK let's compare the reaction time on other campaign items. Did we shut down Gitmo? WHy yes even though it was early days the order was signed. Pull out date for Iraq. Yes, that one was covered as well. Commitment to alternative energy - why yes again that one has been actioned. I could bore all of youwith an extensive list of the campaign promises that have been kept, or actioned, in the first 50 days. But not earmarks - the talking left wants to say it is Bush's budget. But hey I say it was Bush's IRaq war and Bush's Gitmo but somehow BHO found the time to fix those. So why not earmarks? Because that is the way Dems are going to be able to pay back the moeny to those that donated to get them in power. They had 60+% of the earmarks in a Republican budget?? ME thinks the Dems do not walk the talk.
Wesley, Have you been in a cave for the past few weeks?
This is not Obama's budget request. This is Bush's budget from last fall. It's not Obama's. It was written last fall, and is just a continuation.
If Obama doesn't go over the federal budget to your satisfaction this summer, fall, then you'll have a point. Then you can say that he has or hasn't accomplished that promise.
But this time, you're the one that's off base.
CNN - April 15th 2008 - The amendment, sponsored by federal earmark foe Sen. Jim DeMint, R-South Carolina, was shot down by a vote of 79-21. (Obama Quote)"We can no longer accept a process that doles out earmarks based on a member of Congress' seniority, rather than the merit of the project," Obama's statement said."The entire earmark process needs to be re-examined and reformed. For that reason, I will be supporting Sen. DeMint's amendment and will not be requesting earmarks this year for Illinois," the statement added.
Sept. 26, 2008 - Obama replied, "John, nobody is denying that $18 billion is important. And, absolutely, we need earmark reform . And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."
- On the campaign trail, candidate Barack Obama said that as president he would go through spending bills, "line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."
hey its a new administration getting its feet wet. back the freak off
Bomb, just pointing out quotes from Obama. His words, words (promises) that he now is not following up on. Words count, this shows his true character.
First, what promises is Obama not following up on? The omnibus spending bill is old business. If the earmark process is abused in Obama's first budget, you can complain then.
Second, if words count and reveal character, what do Hannity's lies say about him?
Old, what two days. It was held over knowing that Obama would sign it. The government could have done business until September without a new bill. So, no this is on his administration. I do not speak for Hannity, could care less what he says. I listed from time to time, but he bores me.
Obama didn't promise to reform the earmark process first thing. He didn't promise to go throught his predecessor's budget line-by-line. He hasn't followed through on those promises yet, because the time hasn't come. If Obama's first budget is full of wasteful earmarks or pork projects, we'll talk about broken promises then.
markfoot, "Words count, this shows his true character." If that is what you believe, you must truly be a closet Obama supporter. I believe that he has spoken more than just these words. Any other words you can think of where he does show character or do you base a persons true character on just a few words. I am sure that when this President has the ability and time to go line-by-line and REFORM this system, you, in your infinite kindness will restore his charatcer. Did you believe that Bush had character after some of the things he said...for example..NATION BUILDING.
And while you are judging character, how many Republicans voted against the stimulous but will take the money? And while you are judging charatcer, how many Republicans voted against their OWN pork projects but will take the money? And you talk about Obamas' character? And you believe Hannity..
Can't you boys just get over it. Can't you boys stop the crying. And while you are quoting Omaba, did he ever say anything that ups his character rating to your approval.
If you have not cut and run, I, too, would be interested to know what promise you think Obama has broken...
Cut and Run, well since your a liberal sure you know what this is, but we conservatives are happy to stand toe to toe and fight. Now, below is a history of broken promises of Obama's over the years. I will give you many locations where it is documented of Obama Lies. FYI, these are right and left wing websites. Let you read for yourself.
http://obamawho.wordpress.com/2008/07/04/obamas-broken-promises-and-flips-flops/ - http://www.stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/11/18/yet-another-obama-broken-promise-to-the-left/ - http://www.ocregister.com/articles/biden-obama-barack-2135094-president-joe - http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0806/19/ldt.01.html - http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23520981-details/Barack+Obama's+broken+promise+to+African+village/article.do -- http://freedomeden.blogspot.com/2009/03/obamas-broken-promise-earmarks.html
These should keep you busy. This man has shown a very long pattern of saying one thing and doing another. Sure you are all happy about great leader.
Holy crap! Allow me to reply only to the topic at hand (and the only item with regard to Obama as President)... that last link claiming "Obama flat-out lied about earmarks" does nothing to back up the assertion that Obama lied, nor does it quote anything he promised. There's nothing threre.
Victor - Sept. 26, 2008 - Obama replied, "John, nobody is denying that $18 billion is important. And, absolutely, we need earmark reform . And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."
So your telling me on this last bill the Obama just signed he when line by line and made sure that the money was being spent wisely? LIE (2) Obama also said he would post all bills on line for 5 days prior to signing. LIE
2 Lies in one bill signing.
But wait there are more.
1. Make government open and transparent. Has not happen!
2. Make it "impossible" for Congressmen to slip in pork barrel projects. Yea Right, this has already happen twice.
3. Meetings where laws are written will be more open to the public. (Even Congressional Republicans shut out.)
4. No more secrecy. Really, so the e mails to Russia that got out about helping with Iran, we found out by the foriegn press.
5. Public will have 5 days to look at a bill. (NOPE)
6. We will put every pork barrel project online. (NOPE)
7. I will not hire any lobbiest? LIE
I'm sorry, but your post is way too messy and erratic for me to make any sense of it. Could you pick out your favorite so-called "lie" that you think President Obama has told since taking office? And please provide an actual quote by Obama that backs up your claim.
What is it with you conservatives/republicans and your inability to correctly form sentences in English correctly? I know you hate education and those who are educated, but really, pick up a freakin' book or something.
You're = you are
Your = possesive
Happen, past tense, is HAPPENED, (i.e. 'I'm glad that happened').
Now, to address the idiocy of your post: Obama has been in office for NOT EVEN two months. G.W. Bush, on the other hand, was on vacation for at least 1/3 of the first year of his presidency. I see Obama doing more good in these last two months than G.W. Bush did in his entire eight years as president. Give Obama a minute to get his bearings. You're (you are) not a very patient person, are you? Most conservatives aren't (are not).
The budget that was passed was your idol's budget, G.W. Bush. And I ask this question, in chorus with others, "What will happen to the money earmarked for Republican districts whose Republican representatives voted against the bill? Will they accept the money (more than likely). Your (possesive) disingenousness is very transparent!
Finally, Obama's team is working on making government transparent. That doesn't happen overnight, you twit.
Like to see the your false data on the vacation information you put out. Doing more good! Really, We have the largest debt this country has ever seen due to Obama, so know again you are wrong.
I'm words unable make much to sense of type the you.
Victor, do you always make fun of individuals. I bet you’re a real hoot down at the mental hospital. I am sure you also make fun of individuals in wheelchairs, with assisted walking canes, and any other disabilities. Well you are liberal, make fun and call folks names since you do not have any original ideas. Hey can I offer you a teleprompter, there may be some ideas on there?
OK, you have just lost me. Goodbye.
Someone hasn't been taking their One-A-Day with Irony pills...
VictorColorado, according to markfoot, you should change your name to Rush Hannity. He has described them to a tee.
We may have the largest debt this country has ever seen, but if it weren't (were not) for that idiot Bush, we wouldn't have to do what we're (we are) doing now!
And no, don't even start with, "We should do nothing, let everything collapse." If you truly understood what such an stupid comment that is and what such a thing would do to you personally and to the nation as a whole, you're (you are) just as irretrievably stupid as the other Republicans screeching the same thing.
And the vacation data on Bush isn't false data. Look it up.
"We should do nothing, let everything collapse." Common, did not say let everything collapse, but I do beleive that some business should go under. IF there is a market place for them, someone will create a business to take care of the customer. Common, it was not due to Bush, it was due to a housing market that was failing, the Republican even brought the information to the table in meetings and were turned away. I guess you missed all my post on those facts!!!
Turned away by WHO? They were in charge. They had the votes and the White House. What facts? TRY AGAIN.
Bush ruined this country. By the way, where is the accountibilty of the dollars spent on the wars? In which budget did Bush include these amounts? Hint: don't go searching because they are not included anywhere. But what is a trillion when it is Republicon dollars...just push it along until a new Administration takes over.
Food for thought: The U.S.A. would already have collapsed if John McCain and his sidekick, Mommy of the Year, Princess Sarah would've taken over. YIKES #2
Prince, you just can not put out a single post without insults. You are a Bush Hater but last I checked he is no longer in the office. Do one search on You Tube with Barny Frank and Hearings, listen to what was said in the hearings. It was stopped, or if they continued they were going to be called racist or worse. They coward, it was a shame.
Food for Thought, McCain and Gov. Palin would not have signed a bill that would have put this country in deeper dept.
What makes you think so? Republicans have been running up debt like crazy since Reagan.
Where is this "deeper department?" Every time you post "food for thought," there aren't enough calories there to even begin a thought, let alone reach a coherent conclusion.
Isint it funny that NOW the CONSERVATIVES and their REPUBLICAN lackys are out of power that they have discovered the evils of deficite spending? When they were in power for the last 8 years, taking us from 198 billion in surplusses to 455 billion in deficites, doubling the national debt from 5 to 10 trillion, nary a word was heard fom them about deficites. HYPOCRACY, thy name is REPUBLICAN
Public Education.
Oh, so you're not to blame? The fact that you didn't learn while in school is someone else's fault? What ever happened to personal responsibility you Cons always scream about? You talk the talk, but you don't walk the walk.
By the way, I am also a product of public education, from kindergarten through Ph.D. program. Your excuse doesn't amount to much.
The dog ate his thesis.
This is all I'm able to address from your post:
So your telling me on this last bill the Obama just signed he when line by line and made sure that the money was being spent wisely? LIE
The bill that was JUST signed is still subject to his administration's evaluation. He said JUST yesterday that if he finds an earmark and determines that it has no legitimate public purpose, he will seek to eliminate it.
I know you're hoping he lies and fails and things get worse, but you should be able to wait for him to lie before saying he lied.
Victor, above I listed many lies, read.
You asserted many lies, you neither corroborated nor proved any of them.
3. Meetings where laws are written will be more open to the public. (Even Congressional Republicans shut out.)
FYI not only were the GOP Congressional members invited they took part in both the stimulus bill and the spending bill then they lied that they were not invited and voted again
5. Public will have 5 days to look at a bill. (NOPE)st them.
This was a goal that could not happen in this case because the President got the bill the day it had to be signed or the govenment was going to have to stop all spending even on right wing projects that are in the works.
6. We will put every pork barrel project online. (NOPE)
The bill is on line in total this includes all pork some of it is in earmarks and some is in other authorizations.
7. I will not hire any lobbiest? LIE
Name the lobbiest(s)
William Lynn, vice president of government operations and strategy at Raytheon, to be deputy Defense secretary.
Having lobbied the government on behalf of the defense industry giant Raytheon, Lynn's appointment violates the newly-instituted ethics guidelines that the president applied to his staff shortly after taking office.
Yes, Obama did grant some waivers. Since you brought up the specter of a McCain/Palin administration [shudder!], I'll add that it would have tough to find someone who wasn't a lobbyist in that administration.
Oh, you're busted plagiarizing yet again. Such a little cheater!
Yes he did, accept it, move on. He Lies, and I have shown you he has in the past and will in the future.
If you read my post that you're replying to, you'll see that your response makes no sense.
...and, by the way, hoping or predicting that he will, at some point, "lie" or break a promise as President is a pretty lame way to armchair politics. But, by all means, continue hoping for broken promises and failure if that's your thing.
Mark,
Stop searching for lies to back up Hannity's lie. Senator McCain was 100% "against" earmarks, and President Obama wanted to "reform" earmarks. Hannity is a pro at cherry picking words to create a 'false argument', and here you are listing sites to back up this guy. Please re-read the words of who said what, and stop the craziness in defending a 'false argument' created for ratings by Hannity.
"Hey Marshall, I do listen to Hannity, Rush, Dr Savage, Walton and Johnson, Glenn Beck, Pat Gray, Dennis Miller. SO what, at least they will tell us things that ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC,..." markbfoot199
I think what you were trying to say (you cannot write coherently, so we have to do the best we can to interpret what you're (you are) trying to say) is that these clowns you listen to tell you things that MSM don't. You didn't finish your (possesive) sentence properly, so inferece via context is necessary.
To answer, I'd say that you prefer to hear the lies of these right-wing blowhards. I know that the American MSM really isn't the best in the world, but out of all of the news organizations in the world (including BBC, Deutsche Welle and a host of others), you choose the liars. They are obviously telling you what you want to hear, as right-wing talking points is all you're (you are) interested in.
Common, like I said, I do not listen to the boot lickers like yourself. Again, a liberal, never answer questions, just turn the subject matter to something else. Also, the only individuals getting talking points are the liberals in the media. If I remember correctly, last week the W.H. was sending out to the morning talk shows what to talk about on the air in refrence to Rush. Really, wow, I thought the media was bias?
(1) What questions (that were not nonsensical) did you pose?
(2) Who said anything about White House talking points? Republicans are the kings of talking points and pushing those talking points as far as they can. Please. I think for myself. I don't need talking points. You're the conservative, YOU need the talking points to tell you what to believe and say each day - and it doesn't matter if yesterday's talking points contradict today's, does it? You have your marching orders...
Boot lickers? You consider BBC and Deutsche Welle to be boot lickers?
Wow...just wow..
You choose to listen to people who, on a daily basis, lie and distort. I listen to news sources from around the world to get a sense of what's going on without the editorials and personal opinions creeping in from American reporters.
But I'm the one who listens to the boot lickers.
OK. There's no point in even trying to debate with you. You're obviously mentally unable to do it honestly.
Mr Pot, meet Mr Kettle.
Sorry, I'm at lunch, and my reading comprehension is low with my blood sugar. That was meant to corroborate that Mark B. Foot can't reason. Not a slam at CSL. I thought that post was written with a foot instead of a brain.
Easy mistake. You might notice that the format of my comments to markbfoot199 have been a bit strange, as I need to make sure I'm pointing out the proper usage of certain aspects of the English language.
"SO what, at least they will tell us things that ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, and any other news that is in the bag for Obama, getting tingle up their legs."
"I then take what I hear [and repeat it until I believe it]."
You might be more comfortable posting on Town Hall. Granted, MMFA has its share of hacks and dimwits, but do you think anyone will take you seriously when you dish standard talking points like this?
P.S. I noticed that some people are ridiculing your English. You might not be a native speaker (I'm not). It's rather pathetic to make fun of someone for that, and it sends the wrong message about what's valued, but if you're going to argue online and want to be taken seriously, you really need to shape up.
Second, I get called names and other things all day long. I enjoy it, find it funny, but thanks. They love to avoid the subject and attack the messenger.
I do not repeat to I beleive, what I do is read and investigate. I do not trust anyone on the news, right or left. They only spill what will get them ratings, I know and accept this fact. Like I have always known, there is some truth it what is being put out, you just have to find it.
"Second, I get called names and other things all day long. I enjoy it, find it funny, but thanks."
I you enjoy it, that's your personal thing, but I've found that those ridiculed tend to build up conscious/unconscious hatred (see: Malkin at Oberlin).
"I do not repeat to I beleive, what I do is read and investigate."
You might really do this (I don't know), but saying that the "media is in the bag for Obama" will hardly make anyone believe you're able to make up your own mind.
Secondgate:
You may be new here, maybe not. markbfoot199 has been posting here for some time. Believe me, he has made it quite clear that English is his native tongue - one that he mangles worse than those who have learned English as a second (or third...) language.
It's important to communicate properly when commenting online. It's important to make sure that you make sense. When people communicate in person, things like the difference between your/you're, there/their/they're, to/two/too are figured out by context.
By the way, it's very telling of your native country that you can write the English language better than markbfoot199, a native speaker. markbfoot199 claims to be a product of the American public educational system. I am as well, but you can tell the difference between us, can't you?
"By the way, it's very telling of your native country that you can write the English language better than markbfoot199, a native speaker." - me
The above is meant as a compliment, Secondgate. Please don't read any more into it than that. Thank you.
You didn't have to add that. I got it ;p
I just recently started reading comments/posting (i've been reading the site for a while, on and off), so I wasn't aware that markbfoot199 is a native speaker (or not).
To clarify - I wasn't really trying to chastise, though I know that's how it came across. What I should have said was this: there's no point in pointing out his grammatical errors when his logical ones are the size of Gods. So he can't express his thoughts well, so what? The real issue is the poor quality of his thoughts to begin with.
P.S. I noticed that some people are ridiculing your English. You might not be a native speaker (I'm not). It's rather pathetic to make fun of someone for that
No one is making fun of him for that. English is his first language.
That aside, perhaps you can help me.... Can you decipher for me a specific lie that markbfoot199 thinks President Obama has told?
"That aside, perhaps you can help me.... Can you decipher for me a specific lie that markbfoot199 thinks President Obama has told?"
Nope.
Whatever, man. There's always one of you self-righteous spoilsports, huh? You know what I think is pathetic? That grown people can't communicate in the language they've been speaking their entire lives. I can usually tell the difference between somebody who is struggling with a language they aren't well-grounded in and somebody who writes like a two-year-old, and this guy is the latter. The more people like you think caring about intellectual ability is "pathetic" and "sends the wrong message", the more this country descends into the intellectual cesspool it has become.
Pat, we have the -- well, benefit isn't exactly the right word -- of having known Mark for a while now. I don't know if SG has. I think he legitimately thought Mark was not a native born English speaker. I thought the same the first time I read one of his comments.
Besides, SG seems to be one of the good guys.
Mark, did you see our President Obama speaking at the Business Summit Meeting today? Did you notice how President Obama spoke "freely" to the Business Leaders? Lastly, did you get this quote about Pres. Obama not being able to speak without a teleprompter from the Republicans Pundits i.e. Rush, Sean, Glenn? Here's a thought: Listening is never the problem, it is repeating and believing what you hear without objective thinking that becomes the problem.
Btw, CNN and MSNBC carried the President's Business Summit live, whereas FoxNoise showed Cavuto.
Hey Marshall, I do listen to Hannity, Rush, Dr Savage, Walton and Johnson, Glenn Beck, Pat Gray, Dennis Miller. SO what, at least they will tell us things that ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, and any other news that is in the bag for Obama...
Mark, you listen to ALL those shows? AND you listen to enough of the other networks to come to the conclusion that they are "in the bag for Obama?" Christ, you must be the most productive employee on the planet.
Get a life.
You really can't think in comeplete sentences, can you? The phrase posted above has no point and no predicate.
I looked at the freedomeden site and I agree with Emanuel...
I think you're somewhat confused. Obama can't go line by line and eliminate things from a bill that has already passed through Congress. All he can do is sign it into law or veto it.
its barely a month and a half, he is getting daily gloom all around him....i sure as hell would wanna concentrate on certain things first than getting evrey single promise i made completed
Which one has he keep?
the past tense of 'keep' is kept.
You might want to jot that down as well.
Common, answer the question, which one has he kept?
Heh, it's really not worth it, but I've half an hour to kill.
I was going to post the three promises I knew the President kept, but I thought, "Hmm, why not inform myself whether our President kept any other promises in the last 2 months and simultaneously teach this person about using the Internet."
So here's what I did.
I went to google, typed in "Promises Obama kept" without the quotation marks. Predictably, this led me to thousands of websites. After sifting through a few, I came upon one that might be credible. I followed up on 2, they seemed legit. Furthermore, the three promises I knew were kept (stem cells, Republican cabinet member, funding alternative energies) are listed, so there's a good chance that the others are legit as well.
It was useful for me to find out that our President kept 18 promises he made (in just 1.5 months), and I hope it was useful for you to learn how to use the Internet.
In case anyone's interested:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
You understand that quotes you provide do not support the argument you are making, right?
the problem is perception. Obama was firmly opposed to business as usual regarding earmarks during the campaign and now he is singing a somewhat different tune, so if the media is questioning his sincerity, it's understandable. He is not going through it line by line, and these earmarks are still bypassing congressional committees, so where is the reform OBama promised? I don't see it. Sure the Republicans are playing politics here too, they have 40% of these themselves, but that doesn't negate OBama's waffling.
Give the guy a chance. He's only been if office a short time and has had to deal with a lot of problems his predecessor left for him. Wait for Obama's first budget before complaining.
You're right about the perception problem. It's created by exactly the kind of dishonesty MediaMatters highlights.
it's a fair point. I am talking about those in the media who are questioning it, it's not that wild of misinformation as mmfa would like to believe.
See above....and abover
P.S. Perception, you've got to be kidding me. A con giving his perception of the President. Too bad it just restarted on January 20,2008 after fogetting about it from January 2001 until 2008.
Read 'em and weep...Eight more years of crying...YIKES!!! WMDs' Forever, the hunt continues.
Obama was firmly opposed to business as usual regarding earmarks during the campaign and now he is singing a somewhat different tune
Under 2% of a bill he inherited is earmarks. You probably don't know this, but Obama can go line by line and look each earmark in the bill he signed and, if deemed wasteful, he can still eliminate them. Signing the bill does not prevent him from eliminating specific wasteful spending. And again, we're talking about 1% of the bill, which many are distorting and using as a way to fabricate a broken promise that was never made.
You're right. However, I wonder if Obama is playing the snot-nosed, cry-baby Republicans for the fools they are. Obama can definitely handle the bill via line item veto. Maybe he left the earmarks in (if he did) to see if any of the Republicans who voted against the bill would take any of the money earmarked for their particular districts? If so, Obama has just allowed the Republicans to look even more stupid than they come off as.
First, I totally agree with your point re: Obama doesn't appear to be on the ball with this.
Second, you seem to be giving the media (way) too much credit. How many times have they decried to high havens the MILLIONS FOR BEES!? BEES!!!!??? without, you know, even mentioning the dangers of losing honey bees?
Third, Obama can still go "through it line by line." I don't know if he will (I'd like him to), but honestly 2% isn't that much. It's still (damn) important, but at the moment I'd like him to devote his time to, you know, the other 98%.
Tonight, Sean (the smirking chimp?) Hannity (or is he Eddie Munster?) claimed Obama was cutting spending on veterans' health care. Then, he reported that the VA was considering asking vets to have their private insurance cover some expenses. Of course, the truth (to which Mr. Hannity appears positively allergic) is that Obama has increased funding for veterans health care to a record level.
Try not to read too deeply into it.
Hannity's ratings are "NOT" as high as he may like, so bringing on Sports Figures is a way to "boost" his numbers, I think. You know what's funny too is watching how Hannity become "confused" when he gets wrapped up in his 'false arguments' (Republican Talking Points), then loose his spot from the paperwork (where he's reading from) to close out of his 'false argument'. Funny, funny, funny.
That is not eliminating earmarks just one earmark in that specific bill. Hannity is a master of taking things that another person says to change it to make his point. He learned this from Rush. Both of them thow fits if they think someone is doing the same to them by the way.
What!? How is this statement, which Obama made yesterday applicable to what Hannity misquotes him as saying last year? And besides, to actually determine if Obama fails to deliver on this pledge, you're going to have to give him for than 24 hours.
Obama said he is going to go "line by line" and "seek to eliminate [earmarks]". That is what Hannity said he said. Hannity's only mistake was running the two quotes together, but he is substantively correct, and the headline is wrong.
That is not what Hannity said Obama said. Yesterday, Obama said he was going to seek to eliminate any earmark that has no legitimate public purpose. Hannity said that Obama said he would "eliminate all the earmarks" during a debate with McCain.
Does the word "context" mean anything to you? You can't take two different statements and splice them together. The quote you provided shows that he would eliminate some earmarks, while Hannity said he pledged to eliminate all earmarks.
"If my administration evaluates an earmark and determines that it has no legitimate public purpose, we will seek to eliminate it". That's conditional, and therefore does not apply to all earmarks. Your own words show that Hannity lied.
Wow! Tell me again how evaluating an earmark to determine if it has a legitimate purpose and eliminating it, is the same as eliminating all earmarks?
If you are going to eliminate all earmarks, there is no need to go line by line. Obviously Hannity was exaggerating. However, Obama clearly broke his campaign promise; he did not go "line by line" and evaluate earmarks. He has admitted so. Thus, the headline is simply wrong.
Wait a second, just above you said that Hannity had it right...
So, does he have it right, or is he exaggerating? Of course, it's neither. Hannity is LYING. He's good at it.
To the right wing crazies if you say you want to evaluate and elminate on a case by case basis if you are on the left that is a promise to emlinate all. These crazies do not even look to see if the President can even do as he says or if it is Congress that has to take the lead.
Congero, if JHEARD takes you literally, as he did SeannieTheLyingSissyBoy, jheard will never be heard from again. Unless Seannie gives another false example.
Hey, careful PoW - I love sissy boys...
:)
You're not very smart, are you?
The quote you give above totally contradicts what you are saying.
Let me show you:
If Obama said that his adminstration evaluates an earmark and determines that it has no legitimate public purpose, we will seek to eliminate it. It's an 'if...then' clause. That quote says nothing, not a word, about eliminating all earmarks. How you came up with that is very telling - you watch right-wing tv or listen to right-wing radio.
If you're going to come here to comment, at least put some thought into your comment - and for God's sake, make for damned sure that you don't contradict yourself.
commonsenseliberal is my hero <3
It takes balls to make a claim, then proceed to "support" it by pasting a quote which does not, in fact, support you claim at all.
Do you lack the ability to read, or do you think none of us can?
Is Hannity really gay?
As he does have breeder status, possibly not. He does gay bash, which can be evidence of repressed homosexuality. Somehow learning about his kinks has little appeal on the whole.
He's ,sadly, very good at lying. I'm really suprised he was never picked up by the Bush Administration.
Hannity is a smart kid. He knows exactly what he is saying and doing and he is making millions at it. He is on top of his game .Being mentioned by President Obama elevated him in the consevative ranks. He is probably only second to rush limbaugh. Political office could tempt him but then he would have to give up the millions he is making to raise millions for a run at being a governor congressman senator or president. JOE CAPRIO/CITYLIFEPRODUCTIONS
Are we surprised that Hannity is making inaccurate statements about President Obama? I'd be more surprised if he told the truth.