Obama and Rezko

[Annie]

It's not just messageboards noticing:

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4480868

Buried in Eloquence, Obama Contradictions About Pastor
In Speech, Obama Contradicted More Than a Year of Denials About His Knowledge of Rev. Wright's Sermons
By BRIAN ROSS and AVNI PATEL

March 19, 2008—

Buried in his eloquent, highly praised speech on America's racial divide, Sen. Barack Obama contradicted more than a year of denials and spin from him and his staff about his knowledge of Rev. Jeremiah Wright's controversial sermons.

Similarly, Obama also has only recently given a much fuller accounting of his relationship with indicted political fixer Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a longtime friend, who his campaign once described as just one of "thousands of donors." ....

 

[Larkinn]

It's not just messageboards noticing:

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4480868

You mean spinning?

If you read the article there is nothing contradictory in it.

His initial reaction to the initial ABC News broadcast of Rev. Wright's sermons denouncing the U.S. was that he had never heard his pastor of 20 years make any comments that were anti-U.S. until the tape was played on air.

But yesterday, he told a different story.

"Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes," he said in his speech yesterday in Philadelphia.

Wait...could it be that he could have heard controversial statements other than Anti-American views? I mean that seems logical even if it wasn't blatantly stated earlier in the article:

Until yesterday, Obama said the only thing controversial he knew about Rev. Wright was his stand on issues relating to Africa, abortion and gay marriage.

 

[jreeves]

Feeling a bit threatened by his IQ, are you?

Feel free to let us know when you admit to being wrong. I for one look forward to it.

No you can't debate someone who doesn't admit reality. Sorry. It shows his lack of intelligence and I would rather not stoop to that level.

 

[Larkinn]

No you can't debate someone who doesn't admit reality. Sorry. It shows his lack of intelligence and I would rather not stoop to that level.

Oh my. Don't confuse your opinions with reality. Really, its quite sad.

 

[jreeves]

Oh my. Don't confuse your opinions with reality. Really, its quite sad.

I can see the debate now....campaigns=jreeves, US Senate=Larkin. But I think any reasonable person can see that when he was asked how much did he contribute to your campaigns and he said more than a $100,000 dollars less than what the actual amount was, is a complete lie. Now what do you want to do, go in a circle? Me saying I am right and you saying no your not. That seems very intelligent.

 

[Larkinn]

I can see the debate now....campaigns=jreeves, US Senate=Larkin. But I think any reasonable person can see that when he was asked how much did he contribute to your campaigns and he said more than a $100,000 dollars less than what the actual amount was, is a complete lie.

The problem is that now you are lying about what he said.

He said the 50-60k was for his US Senate campaign . So how is that a lie again?

Now what do you want to do, go in a circle? Me saying I am right and you saying no your not. That seems very intelligent.

It would be intelligent if you could understand the difference between campaign and US Senate.

 

[Annie]

The problem is that now you are lying about what he said.

He said the 50-60k was for his US Senate campaign . So how is that a lie again?



It would be intelligent if you could understand the difference between campaign and US Senate.

So he is now the recycled BILL Clinton, running against the spouse. Great.

 

[jreeves]

The problem is that now you are lying about what he said.

He said the 50-60k was for his US Senate campaign . So how is that a lie again?



It would be intelligent if you could understand the difference between campaign and US Senate.

No I'm right, man this is an intelligent debate. I just ask people to read the article. If they are reasonable about it, they can clearly conclude he lied.

 

[Larkinn]

So he is now the recycled BILL Clinton, running against the spouse. Great.

Because he talks like a lawyer? Gee, he is one. Big surprise.

So funny none of you bring up the Keating 5 scandal. Ah, well I guess its ok when Republicans lie.

 

[Annie]

Because he talks like a lawyer? Gee, he is one. Big surprise.

So funny none of you bring up the Keating 5 scandal. Ah, well I guess its ok when Republicans lie.

Wow, do you sound like Maineman! C'mon, bring up how he ratted out and made deals while in VN.

 

[Larkinn]

Wow, do you sound like Maineman! C'mon, bring up how he ratted out and made deals while in VN.

Whoah me and Maineman are the only two who criticize McCain? Wow, I didn't know that.

I generally don't spend my time searching into someones history trying to dig up dirt about them. I have no idea what McCain did during Vietnam. However I find it telling that y'all are only digging up dirt on Obama. Gee, could it be for partisan bullshit reasons? Could, perhaps, you not be treating him fairly?

What a revelation!

 

[Annie]

Whoah me and Maineman are the only two who criticize McCain? Wow, I didn't know that.

I generally don't spend my time searching into someones history trying to dig up dirt about them. I have no idea what McCain did during Vietnam. However I find it telling that y'all are only digging up dirt on Obama. Gee, could it be for partisan bullshit reasons? Could, perhaps, you not be treating him fairly?

What a revelation!

Gee, I thought the 'dirt' came from the DVD's on Trinity's site. Silly me. Pfft.

 

[Larkinn]

Gee, I thought the 'dirt' came from the DVD's on Trinity's site. Silly me. Pfft.

I generally do not spend my time watching old videos of people who are affiliated with people I do not like. I consider that "digging up".

 

[Annie]

I generally do not spend my time watching old videos of people who are affiliated with people I do not like. I consider that "digging up".

But that is why we have a 'media.' To keep those of us with short attention spans, informed.

 

[jreeves]

The problem is that now you are lying about what he said.

He said the 50-60k was for his US Senate campaign . So how is that a lie again?



It would be intelligent if you could understand the difference between campaign and US Senate.

Do you understand the difference between singular and plural? In the article in states, "campaigns", not campaign. So if he gave his US senate campaign as the source of the funding then he was implying that was the only money that he got from, "let me buy your legislation" Rezko.
If you want your argument to sound legit then at least quote the article right?

 

[Larkinn]

Do you understand the difference between singular and plural? In the article in states, "campaigns", not campaign. So if he gave his US senate campaign as the source of the funding then he was implying that was the only money that he got from, "let me buy your legislation" Rezko.
If you want your argument to sound legit then at least quote the article right?

How bout you cite what Obama actually said as opposed to what the article says he said. Oh wait, but that might ruin your partisan bullshit. So much for "reality".

 

[jreeves]

How bout you cite what Obama actually said as opposed to what the article says he said. Oh wait, but that might ruin your partisan bullshit. So much for "reality".

No I was stating, what the question was. How much did he contribute to your campaigns?
Not what Obama answered, caused by him answering that question with one campaign clearly states that was the only campaign Rezko contributed to.

So try again with your political hack blindness.

 

[Larkinn]

No I was stating, what the question was. How much did he contribute to your campaigns?
Not what Obama answered, caused by him answering that question with one campaign clearly states that was the only campaign Rezko contributed to.

So try again with your political hack blindness.

Are you really this stupid? He did not answer the question . He answered his own version of the question by specifying US Senate campaign. Whoah a politician dodged a question? What a fuckin surprise.

 

[jreeves]

Are you really this stupid? He did not answer the question . He answered his own version of the question by specifying US Senate campaign. Whoah a politician dodged a question? What a fuckin surprise.

No your such a fucking political hack you can't admit the truth, when it slaps you in the face and turns you around. Then smacks you on the ass.

 

[Larkinn]

No your such a fucking political hack you can't admit the truth, when it slaps you in the face and turns you around. Then smacks you on the ass.

The truth according to Jreeves, with his fabulous reading comprehension skills.

Obama didn't answer the question, but he didn't lie.