America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 11 years ago by HockeyDad. 38 replies replies.
Rammed Down Your Throats!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n4oPjlecgc


Pay attention to the morons.


When someone shows you who they are...BELIEVE THEM!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — Needled by Mitt Romney and other Republicans, Democrats hurriedly rewrote their convention platform Wednesday to add a mention of God and declare Jerusalem the capital of Israel after President Barack Obama intervened to order the changes.

The embarrassing reversal was compounded by chaos and uncertainty on the convention floor, requiring three votes before a ruling that the amendments had been approved. Many in the audience booed the decision.
The episode exposed tensions on Israel within the party, put Democrats on the defensive and created a public relations spectacle as Obama arrived in the convention city to claim his party's nomination for a second term.

The language in the party platform — a political document — does not affect actual U.S. policy toward Israel. The administration has long said that determining Jerusalem's status is an issue that should be decided in peace talks by Israelis and Palestinians.

Obama intervened directly to get the language changed both on Jerusalem and to reinstate God in the platform, according to campaign officials who insisted on anonymity to describe behind-the-scenes party negotiations. They said Obama's reaction to the omission of God from the platform was to wonder why it was removed in the first place.

The revisions came as Obama struggles to win support from white working-class voters, many of whom have strong religious beliefs, and as Republicans try to woo Jewish voters and contributors away from the Democratic Party. Republicans claimed the platform omissions suggested Obama was weak in his defense of Israel and out of touch with mainstream Americans.

GOP officials argued that not taking a position on Jerusalem's status in the party platform raised questions about Obama's support for the Mideast ally. Romney said omitting God "suggests a party that is increasingly out of touch with the mainstream of the American people."

"I think this party is veering further and further away into an extreme wing that Americans don't recognize," Romney said.

Added to the platform was a declaration that Jerusalem "is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths."

That language was included in the platform four years ago when Obama ran for his first term, but was left out when Democrats on Tuesday approved their 2012 platform, which referred only to the nation's "unshakable commitment to Israel's security."

Some delegates were angered by the change.

"There was no discussion. We didn't even see it coming. We were blindsided by it," said Noor Ul-Hasan, a Muslim delegate from Salt Lake City, who questioned whether the convention had enough of a quorum to even amend the platform.

Also restored from the 2008 platform was language calling for a government that "gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential."

For decades, Republican and Democratic administrations alike have said it is up to the Israelis and Palestinians to settle Jerusalem's final status — a position reiterated earlier Wednesday by the White House. Both sides claim Jerusalem as their capital, and the city's status has long been among the thorniest issues in Mideast peace talks.
The U.S. has its embassy in Tel Aviv, although numerous Republicans — including Mitt Romney — have vowed to move the embassy to Jerusalem.

During his 2008 campaign, Obama referred to Jerusalem as Israel's capital in a speech to AIPAC, a pro-Israel lobby. But as official policy, his administration has repeatedly maintained that Jerusalem's status is an issue that Israelis and Palestinians should decide in peace talks. The platform flub gave Republicans an opening to revive their attacks on Obama's support for Israel just as Democrats were hoping to bask in the glow of first lady Michelle Obama's Tuesday speech and gin up excitement for her husband, who will accept his party's nomination for a second term on Thursday.

But restoring the language did not placate Republicans, who used it to suggest that Obama's party is now more supportive than he is of the Jewish state.

"Now is the time for President Obama to state in unequivocal terms whether or not he believes Jerusalem is Israel's capital," said Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul.

Even as Democrats worked to quell the political fallout from the omission, some Democrats in Charlotte were in open revolt. Angry delegates screamed and threw their hands in the air as Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the convention chairman, declared the amendments approved.

"The majority spoke last night," said Angela Urrea, a delegate from Roy, Utah. "We shouldn't be declaring Jerusalem as the capital of Israel."

Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., said the move was a "reasonable adjustment," but suggested the party could have avoided the skirmish.

Republicans declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel in the platform the party approved last week at its convention in Tampa, Fla. GOP platforms in 2004 and 2008 also called Jerusalem the capital.


http://news.yahoo.com/democrats-change-platform-add-god-jerusalem-211928130--election.html
gringococolo Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 02-04-2006
Posts: 4,626
Shalom bitches.
rfenst Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,424
Major "political fumble" that should have been a no-brainer. Would love to know the inside politics of how that occurred and who was driving removal from the platform...
frankj1 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,252
if there is no country named Palestine...how can they have a capital?
rfenst Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,424
Romney's wiser move would have been to wait until the Convention was over and then start hammering the point- after it would be too late to change the D's platform.
HockeyDad Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,190
frankj1 wrote:
if there is no country named Palestine...how can they have a capital?



They could just declare a country using a UN partition mandate from 1947.....or just do it the old fashioned way.....send sweeping hordes marauding across the region, North Africa, and into Spain!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
rfenst wrote:
Romney's wiser move would have been to wait until the Convention was over and then start hammering the point- after it would be too late to change the D's platform.



Why wait?


Expose them for the morons they are at the earliest convenience. Catch them at their mistakes and watch them squirm to appease the fringe elements of their base!

Watch the YouTube and look at their faces...THEY'RE PISSED! Hear the yea/nay votes. The lady told the guy take the vote and let them do what they do.

You can CLEARLY hear that each and every time the Nays had it.

Explain it all away though like a good little water carrier.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
Opening Jewish eyes to the true nature of the Democratic party

I've been arguing for more than six years on this blog that the Democratic party is not pro-Israel, and I've been arguing for more than five years (since March 2007) that Barack Hussein Obama is not pro-Israel either. For those of you who have refused to listen, what happened Wednesday at the Democratic National Convention might have been an eye-opening experience... if you opened your eyes. Here's Abe Greenwald in Commentary.

Today, America got an unvarnished look at the Democratic Party’s internal conflict on Israel. Half of the Party represents the pro-Israel consensus in America. The other half? Not so much. For all the talk about the unrecognizably extreme new Republican Party, it’s the Democrats whose fringe has quietly made deep inroads into the center—especially when it concerns Israel—and fundamentally altered the nature of the Party.

When Villaraigosa heard the split vote he looked like a performer suddenly forced to work off-script—because that’s exactly what he was. The Democratic script is composed of declarations about America’s special relationship with Israel, the continued U.S. commitment to Israeli security, and the unbreakable bonds that unite Israelis and Americans against common foes. Democratic politicians can rattle off those proclamations in their sleep. What the Israel-Lobby paranoids ignore is that it’s all meant to satisfy the majority American opinion of support for Israel, not appease some shifty cabal of wealthy bigots.

Today’s fiasco might do tremendous damage to Jewish support for Democrats but it will certainly open a new chapter in anti-Israel paranoia. The Democrats, including Barack Obama, will take hits coming and going: from Israel supporters whose eyes have been opened to the nature of the Democratic Party and from Israel bashers who see the Zionist hand behind the convention chaos. Such is the price paid for a party divided.
Keep your eyes open folks. There's more to come.


http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2012/09/opening-jewish-eyes-to-true-nature-of.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


Watch the base SQUIRM.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
Here's Abe's commentary in full:


Democratic Delegates Boo “Jerusalem”


The Democratic platform once again acknowledges Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, but the reinstitution of the language in question (and the reinstituted reference to God) was more alarming than the initial change. When Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa called for Yeas and Nays on the decision he found a roughly even split among delegates. After repeating the process two more times, a befuddled Villaraigosa was visited on stage by a party official who seemingly advised him to declare the needed two-thirds in favor of the change regardless of what the delegates actually conveyed. This he promptly did, eliciting a wave of boos.

Let the paranoia begin. For the professional alarmists who see an all-powerful Israel lobby lurking behind every bush, rock, and cloud, today’s debacle is a goldmine. What could be a greater demonstration of the Israel Lobby’s dangerous subversion of American democracy than the sham vote at the Democratic National Convention that saw pro-Israel language shoved into the party platform over the heads of party delegates?

The reality of the situation, however, is both more interesting and more frightening than intrepid Zionist-spotters would have you believe. Today, America got an unvarnished look at the Democratic Party’s internal conflict on Israel. Half of the Party represents the pro-Israel consensus in America. The other half? Not so much. For all the talk about the unrecognizably extreme new Republican Party, it’s the Democrats whose fringe has quietly made deep inroads into the center—especially when it concerns Israel—and fundamentally altered the nature of the Party.

When Villaraigosa heard the split vote he looked like a performer suddenly forced to work off-script—because that’s exactly what he was. The Democratic script is composed of declarations about America’s special relationship with Israel, the continued U.S. commitment to Israeli security, and the unbreakable bonds that unite Israelis and Americans against common foes. Democratic politicians can rattle off those proclamations in their sleep. What the Israel-Lobby paranoids ignore is that it’s all meant to satisfy the majority American opinion of support for Israel, not appease some shifty cabal of wealthy bigots.

Today’s fiasco might do tremendous damage to Jewish support for Democrats but it will certainly open a new chapter in anti-Israel paranoia. The Democrats, including Barack Obama, will take hits coming and going: from Israel supporters whose eyes have been opened to the nature of the Democratic Party and from Israel bashers who see the Zionist hand behind the convention chaos. Such is the price paid for a party divided.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/09/05/re-democratic-delegates-boo-jerusalem/
Stinkdyr Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 06-16-2009
Posts: 9,948
Dems didn't need to fold. They won't lose their largely lockstep illiberal lefty jewish base over this.

But it is fun to see them squirm.

Beer
DrMaddVibe Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
Stinkdyr wrote:
Dems didn't need to fold. They won't lose their largely lockstep illiberal lefty jewish base over this.

But it is fun to see them squirm.

Beer



But fold they did!

Even after having a muslim pilgrimage to Charlotte!

I'm waiting for the dynamite vests to start going off! They're crazy enough to do it too!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
Frying pan Frying pan Frying pan


http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/photo-of-teleprompter-shows-democrats-23s-platform-vote-was-predetermined/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sayanythingblog%2FEnHl+%28Second+Say+Anything%29
rfenst Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,424
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Why wait?


Expose them for the morons they are at the earliest convenience. Catch them at their mistakes and watch them squirm to appease the fringe elements of their base!

Watch the YouTube and look at their faces...THEY'RE PISSED! Hear the yea/nay votes. The lady told the guy take the vote and let them do what they do.

You can CLEARLY hear that each and every time the Nays had it.

Explain it all away though like a good little water carrier.



Why wait?

You cannot figure that out on your own?

Here is why: By calling the D's out on the matter BEFORE their convention was over, Romney gave them time to fix the problem. Had he waited until AFTER the convention, the matter wouldn't have been resolved so early and easily. He could have then blamed it directly on Obama for failing top lead the D's and showing attack ads of Obama saying one thing, but the platform indicating another. Bad play on R's part.


So, they are morons. But, no one will watch the u-tube video. That is just the way people are....



DrMaddVibe Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
rfenst wrote:
Why wait?

You cannot figure that out on your own?

Here is why: By calling the D's out on the matter BEFORE their convention was over, Romney gave them time to fix the problem. Had he waited until AFTER the convention, the matter wouldn't have been resolved so early and easily. He could have then blamed it directly on Obama for failing top lead the D's and showing attack ads of Obama saying one thing, but the platform indicating another. Bad play on R's part.


So, they are morons. But, no one will watch the u-tube video. That is just the way people are....






Umm...yeah...like I DID figure out and CLEARLY stated...Carry the water for Team Owedumba though...you'll be rewarded with Hope and Change now with Electrolytes!!!!

Frying pan

I can understand why you'd not watch the video...LOLOLOLOLOL!!! They're YOU'RE morons!
rfenst Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,424
Stinkdyr wrote:
Dems didn't need to fold. They won't lose their largely lockstep illiberal lefty jewish base over this.

But it is fun to see them squirm.

Beer


Israel is not the only reason Jews vote the way they do. 25% or so are ardent R's. Many are undecided and the predominant rest are D or D-leaning. And, if you think Jews are unthinking, largely lock-step lefty voters, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you!
rfenst Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,424
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Umm...yeah...like I DID figure out and CLEARLY stated...Carry the water for Team Owedumba though...you'll be rewarded with Hope and Change now with Electrolytes!!!!

Frying pan



Stay on track. Instead of attacking me personally, explain why you think the strategy I think would have been better for Romney is wrong?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
rfenst wrote:
Stay on track. Instead of attacking me personally, explain why you think the strategy I think would have been better for Romney is wrong?



Really?


You think I'm attacking you?


Use your brain and stop personalizing it! This thread isn't ABOUT YOU!

I've already stated why they decided to go public. It's much better to call them out for their poor behavior (which you're compliant with!) and watch them backtrack. They were wrong to even think about that...but here's the $64,000.00 question that you have to spin...If Owedumba was able to change it (by his own omission!) then why was it allowed to be stripped out to begin with!!!!


SPIN THAT ONE!
BuckyB93 Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 07-16-2004
Posts: 14,238
I tuned in for a little bit and caught that vote... it was a head scratcher.

Watch for yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cncbOEoQbOg

It was obviously predetermined. After the second vote he started reading the teleprompter and caught himself because it was clearly not a 2/3 majority and the guy didn't know what to do. Then the woman came out and pushed him along to force the adoption after a thrid vote.

Guess the delegates votes don't really count after all. What a piece of work.
Stinkdyr Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 06-16-2009
Posts: 9,948
rfenst wrote:
Israel is not the only reason Jews vote the way they do. 25% or so are ardent R's.

Many are undecided (youbetcha)

and the predominant rest are D or D-leaning (we agree)

. And, if you think Jews are unthinking, largely lock-step lefty voters (I think the above speaks for itself)

I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you! (how much? can I charge tolls?)



Beer
teedubbya Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Just thinking about tactics (which has nothing to do with carrying water or even a political position) I agree with rfenst. The spin is easier this way than had the Rs just waited a bit. Of course if you are going to disregard the D spin no matter what they say you will likely disagree, but then again you are not the intended audiance.

If the Rs had waited until after the convention, Obama would have to own it or disagree with a plank in his party (Like Romney has to). Since they got it "fixed" now this will not happen. its the old PR move of taking the acute pain now rather than the chronic pain later.

As for the spin..... plausable deniability but when I found out I fixed it unlike my competitor.

Sure no one in here will buy it. I don't buy it. But as a tactic the Rs helped the Ds on this one by being too agressive to soon rather than thoughtful about it. It is their achillies heal to an extent.


I don't see rfenst's take as anything but an analysis of the game. Sure you can disagree with it but "carry the water?" meh.... not so much.
teedubbya Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I'm also not sure the better off 4 years ago thing will work. I can't vote for the Big O cause I think he stinks.... but if folks are undecided and look at their 401 K (201K when Bush left office) that could be interesting.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
teedubbya wrote:
Just thinking about tactics (which has nothing to do with carrying water or even a political position) I agree with rfenst. The spin is easier this way than had the Rs just waited a bit. Of course if you are going to disregard the D spin no matter what they say you will likely disagree, but then again you are not the intended audiance.

If the Rs had waited until after the convention, Obama would have to own it or disagree with a plank in his party (Like Romney has to). Since they got it "fixed" now this will not happen. its the old PR move of taking the acute pain now rather than the chronic pain later.

As for the spin..... plausable deniability but when I found out I fixed it unlike my competitor.

Sure no one in here will buy it. I don't buy it. But as a tactic the Rs helped the Ds on this one by being too agressive to soon rather than thoughtful about it. It is their achillies heal to an extent.


I don't see rfenst's take as anything but an analysis of the game. Sure you can disagree with it but "carry the water?" meh.... not so much.



You agree with it...but don't "buy it"...that's about as wishy washy as you can get.

Thanks for delivering.Frying pan

If you were carrying the Kenyan King's jockstrap, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable bucket of water that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got 2 arms and believe in unicorns and Hope & Change -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
teedubbya Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
DrMaddVibe wrote:
You agree with it...but don't "buy it"...that's about as wishy washy as you can get.

Thanks for delivering.Frying pan

If you were carrying the Kenyan King's jockstrap, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable bucket of water that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got 2 arms and believe in unicorns and Hope & Change -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.


Dude you are blind.

If I am watching you play chess against someone I hate (thus I am rooting for you) and see you make what I beleive is a bad move that doesn't lose the game but does give your opponent an advantage they didn't previously have and could have been avoided...... and say so.... it doesn't all of a sudden make me root for them or carry their water....

It is possible, in fact preferable, to recognize when your opponent gained an advantage by something you did or you will never learn from it.


It is possible to observe the race from many angles.... one is tactics. i think the Rs misplayed this tactically.

If you can't understand that concept that speaks louder than the menacing red letters often posted in here LOL
DrMaddVibe Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
teedubbya wrote:
I'm also not sure the better off 4 years ago thing will work. I can't vote for the Big O cause I think he stinks.... but if folks are undecided and look at their 401 K (201K when Bush left office) that could be interesting.



There have been several thousand people that cashed in their 401K's to survive during this administration!

http://sdrostra.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Obama-economy-results3.png


BUSH isn't running! This is Owedumba's Economy and it's that giant sucking sound that Perot spoke of!


teedubbya Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
DrMaddVibe wrote:
There have been several thousand people that cashed in their 401K's to survive during this administration!

http://sdrostra.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Obama-economy-results3.png


BUSH isn't running! This is Owedumba's Economy and it's that giant sucking sound that Perot spoke of!





If we are to look back to see if we are better off than we were 4 years ago that would neccesitate looking back to the Bush years..... that's the tactical issue in my eyes. I want to avoid Bush like the plague this cycle.... rather than give a reason to point the focus that way...... The Rs were doing well with that. i fear this is a mistake too.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
teedubbya wrote:
Dude you are blind.

If I am watching you play chess against someone I hate (thus I am rooting for you) and see you make what I beleive is a bad move that doesn't lose the game but does give your opponent an advantage they didn't previously have and could have been avoided...... and say so.... it doesn't all of a sudden make me root for them or carry their water....

It is possible, in fact preferable, to recognize when your opponent gained an advantage by something you did or you will never learn from it.


It is possible to observe the race from many angles.... one is tactics. i think the Rs misplayed this tactically.

If you can't understand that concept that speaks louder than the menacing red letters often posted in here LOL



You do whatever you need to do.

Please do so with some facts though. The whole fairy tale that Hope and Change worked? Please!

You're entitled to think whatever you want about how the Romney Campaign does their job just like I am...neither one of us WORK for it...it's OPINION!

This race hasn't been completed and is far from being over so feel free to get behind whatever racecar you need to and push it to the finishline as it coasts in on fumes...one is flush with money...one is operating in the red. Good luck!
teedubbya Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
DrMaddVibe wrote:
You do whatever you need to do.

Please do so with some facts though. The whole fairy tale that Hope and Change worked? Please!

You're entitled to think whatever you want about how the Romney Campaign does their job just like I am...neither one of us WORK for it...it's OPINION!

This race hasn't been completed and is far from being over so feel free to get behind whatever racecar you need to and push it to the finishline as it coasts in on fumes...one is flush with money...one is operating in the red. Good luck!


I never said hope and changed worked. I never said the race was completed. I actually was careful to state that it wasn't. Commenting on tactics isn't necessarily getting behind a particular race car. I recognize you can't see that though your blinders.

I hapen to agree that the thumbscrews could have been put on the Dems much tighter had things been done differently. You extrapolate that into assuming something about rnfest that may not be true. It certainly isn't true for me. Your passion(or hate...of Obama) can blind you at times to things that are pretty obvious.
teedubbya Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
And it is an opinion ... on tactics.... one that certainly can be wrong.... either way...


but to jump to you must support this, or beleive in hope and change, or whatever is really silly.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
teedubbya wrote:
And it is an opinion ... on tactics.... one that certainly can be wrong.... either way...


but to jump to you must support this, or beleive in hope and change, or whatever is really silly.



Well, I was fot it before I was against it....yeah...more doublespeak..what?horse
teedubbya Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Well, I was fot it before I was against it....yeah...more doublespeak..what?horse



You really can't be that blind can you? LOL I beleive you are smarter than this and arguing just to argue.

I'm rooting for my favorite football team. They have the ball 4th and 15 on their own 30. They go for it and run it up the middle. I say that was a bad call (tactics). They should have punted.

You say.... you are rooting for the other team. you want them to win. how can you say they are better? you can choose whatever team you want to be behind but at least have the facts.... etc...



silly... and incoherent
rfenst Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,424
teedubbya wrote:
You really can't be that blind can you? LOL I beleive you are smarter than this and arguing just to argue.

I'm rooting for my favorite football team. They have the ball 4th and 15 on their own 30. They go for it and run it up the middle. I say that was a bad call (tactics). They should have punted.

You say.... you are rooting for the other team. you want them to win. how can you say they are better? you can choose whatever team you want to be behind but at least have the facts.... etc...



silly... and incoherent


LOL!
(But you still need to dumb it down further)
DrMaddVibe Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
teedubbya wrote:
It certainly isn't true for me. Your passion(or hate...of Obama) can blind you at times to things that are pretty obvious.



You've got to be kidding me.

The openly declared Democrats on this board have carried the water. They have to. They need to. If they were to stop now, it would be an admission that they were wrong. Not one comment or serious thread from them about their guy screwing up...no...it's all been lollipops, rainbows and unicorn rides since his coronation.

You can bury your head in the sand all you want.

I bashed on W for his spending...I even said he was spending like drunken sailors but sailors have to use their own money...several times. So don't give me the "one side vs. the other" baby momma drama.

Even on a thread like this...look at it..."ooooooh, you're picking on ME!!!" all the way to a real video where you've got a couple on national TV with tshirts and signs looking bewildered at the fact that the Palestinian fringe isn't being represented. This is the party that Robert says the Jewish people align themselves with? Gimmie a break. See the forest for the trees. Who's blind on THAT?

If THAT'S not carrying water I don't know what else would be! Why defend a person or organization that doesn't value the person?

DrafterX Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,582
my puppy-dog ate some goose poop yesterday... Mellow
DrMaddVibe Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554
rfenst wrote:
LOL!
(But you still need to dumb it down further)



That's the DNC WAY!


Peggy Josephs...COME ON DOWN! You're the next contestant on the Hope and Change!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI
teedubbya Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
LOL Drafter. hope he doesn't get that giardia thing

ok DMV if you say so.... you are really out there today


my bigger issue is with the name of this thread.... why exactly is ram down your throat?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,554

Obama knew of the omission of God and Jerusalem from the platform before the convention



Two days into the Democratic National Convention, uproar has emerged as the Democratic Party platform was released. Among the controversial platform positions was the removal from previous years' platforms of "God," the removal of support for Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, the refusal to meet with Hamas, refusal of the right of return for Palestinian refugees to Israel.

When controversy ensued, the DNC was forced to backtrack -- at least on the topic of "God" and Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. In an embarrassing display, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was forced to hold three voice votes before finally deeming the two amendments regarding God and Jerusalem to be reinserted into the platform. See the video here.

CNN reported that the nays seemed to exceed the ayes regarding the amendments. Then Villaraigosa just declared the amendments passed - to boos and rancor. Shades of Mayor Daley and the 1968 Convention.

Pro-Obama "journalists" spun the story as if Barack Obama suddenly intervened and rode to the rescue and personally intervened to get the two amendments passed.

That part may be true.

But the bigger story is that he knew of the language in the platform before it was released and passed.

Reid Epstein reports in Politico:

Two platform planks sparked division at the Democratic National Convention here Wednesday.

Things got so bad that President Barack Obama was forced to personally intervene, ordering language mentioning God and naming Jerusalem as the rightful capital of Israel be added.

Obama had seen the language prior to the convention, a campaign source said, but did not seek to change it until after Republicans jumped on the omissions of God and Jerusalem late Wednesday. And even then, it had to be forced through a convention hall full of delegates who nearly shouted down the change.

It was only when blowback occurred that could hurt his political prospects that he stepped forward and inserted the language to assuage critics.

There is additional support for Epstein's reporting. Not only had previous reports indicated that the platform's original language was meant to conform to Obama's positions but the people on the drafting committee, and one in particular, have close ties to Barack Obama.
Read more:

Eliot Abrams writes in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal (What is Israel's Capital? Democrats Have Trouble Saying):

Among the Democratic committee members this year were Newark Mayor Cory Booker, Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, former Florida Rep. Robert Wexler, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, and former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland.

None of these people are strangers to Barack Obama and no doubt were quite aware of his priorities and policies - and agenda going forward.

But did one person in particular play a key role in the sections regarding Israel?

All signs point to Robert Wexler as being that person.

Since 2008 he has been a defender of Barack Obama when it comes to his treatment of Israel. He has served as Obama's emissary (or at least one of them) to the Jewish community. When he served in Congress he was involved in Israel-related legislation. After he left Congress (he chose not to run for reelection because he was caught having lied about his residency) he went to work for a "think tank" that focused on the Middle East: the Center for Middle East Peace and Economic Cooperation . This is an appeasement-oriented think tank funded by a billionaire donor to Democrats. I wrote about Wexler in 2009 that this sinecure could be perceived as a thank you for promoting Obama's campaign in 2008. His role in defending Obama even extended to the convention itself when he delivered a speech on this topic. He is not just promoting Obama for partisan reasons - his paycheck may depend on it.

So it can be presumed that Robert Wexler has been very much in contact with Barack Obama and his campaign and was very aware of how Obama wanted the platform drafted. Wexler helped draft that platform, was very aware of what Obama's agenda is and Obama was more than in the loop.

Wexler is one of the more disgraceful former members of Congress - and, when controversy erupted, he pointed the blame at a prominent pro-Israel group. He lost this blame game (see Jennifer Rubin's blog) when his story was found to have many holes in it.

Of course, this is just one of many examples of Barack Obama pushing a policy regarding Israel and then being forced to back track when his political fortunes compelled him to trim his sails.

In a second term, Obama will need to do no more trimming. He will have a great deal more flexibility.

UPDATE: The Washington Post published this column on the controversy that confirmed Wexler helped write the controversial section on Israel:

"The language in the platform is 100 percent pro-Israel language," said Robert Wexler, a former Democratic House member from Florida who now runs the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace in Washington.

Wexler, who acted as a liaison for Obama to a sometimes-suspicious Jewish community during the 2008 campaign, served on the platform-drafting committee and helped write the section on Israel.

So this is how Obama's emissary and spinner to the Jewish community defines 100 percent pro-Israel language? That says a lot about what Anderson Cooper might describe as the alternate universe people like Robert Wexler and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz live in - as does their President.



http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/obama_knew_of_the_omission_of_god_and_jerusalem_from_the_platform_before_the_convention.html#.UEidE1Oy3hE.twitter#ixzz25iRP7htg



TW...there's nothing being rammed down my throat the way this issue was rammed down theirs! NOTHING.
HockeyDad Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,190
An October attack on Iran would fix this.
Users browsing this topic
Guest