38
   

Illinois Governor Arrested

 
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 10:26 am
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

okie, An evil man is anyone who takes the responsibility of president of the most powerful country in this world, then uses that power to start an illegal war based on lies and eventually kills thousands of our own men and women in our military and some 100,000,000 innocent Vietnamese unnecessarily. Being stupid is no excuse; he is still an evil man.

So, by changing only 2 words, I just used your own logic to call Kennedy and Johnson evil.

Would you agree that they were "evil" also?

mm, I think you meant to address cicerone imposter. I was really scratching my head trying to decipher that post until I realized you probably misspoke.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 10:37 am
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:

It's all very simple. When okie does it, it's OK.

Satisfied?

Understood, Joe. I apologize for any terms way over the top, but I still retain the use of koolaid or Obamalade drinker, I think those are too descriptive and accurate to discard as being too mean. Or would you rather me just call you stupid, dumb, a simpleton, vacant and malleable mind, a fervid imagination, and nuts, as you have done me?
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 11:01 am
Quote:
Governor's Office Confirms Afternoon News Conference

(Chicago) -- The office of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich has confirmed that the governor will make a statement to reporters this afternoon, ten days after he was arrested and charged with corruption.

Blagojevich is scheduled to speak at 2 p.m. at the Thompson Center in downtown Chicago.
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 11:09 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:

It's all very simple. When okie does it, it's OK.

Satisfied?

Understood, Joe. I apologize for any terms way over the top, but I still retain the use of koolaid or Obamalade drinker, I think those are too descriptive and accurate to discard as being too mean. Or would you rather me just call you stupid, dumb, a simpleton, vacant and malleable mind, a fervid imagination, and nuts, as you have done me?

Call me whatever you like. I'm not complaining about name-calling. I'm just pointing out what a hypocrite you are.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 11:40 am
@joefromchicago,
Joe, just curious, do you believe Obama was telling the truth or was he purposely being misleading when he said?

“I have had no contact with the governor or his office, so I was unaware of what was happening.”
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 11:59 am
@okie,
I have not been following that side of the Blagojevich scandal very closely. As far as I know, Obama did not have any contact with the governor or the governor's office. Have you heard differently?
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 12:12 pm
@joefromchicago,
Another question, if you are the president and someone asks you if you have had any contact with the governors office, and if your personal assistant has had numerous contacts with that office and the governor himself and has given them and or him information as directed by you, do you consider that as having contact with them? If you send a message or messages to that office through your personal assistant and have gathered information through your assistant, have you made contact with them or not?
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 12:24 pm
@okie,
If you make up stuff not in evidence does that make your question valid?
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 12:26 pm
@okie,
Depends on how you define "contact." Certainly, if one defines it in this context as "personal contact," then no, there was no contact.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 12:46 pm
@joefromchicago,
Wanna bet?????

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/12/11/depends-on-how-you-define-contact/

So, there is photographic proof that they did have "personal contact" AFTER the election.

But, there is no indication about what they discussed.
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 12:58 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:
Wanna bet?????

On what? I was answering a hypothetical question.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 01:17 pm
I see this thread has also sunk into the Okie-phonyokie swamp.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 01:29 pm
@wandeljw,
wandeljw wrote:

Quote:
Governor's Office Confirms Afternoon News Conference

(Chicago) -- The office of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich has confirmed that the governor will make a statement to reporters this afternoon, ten days after he was arrested and charged with corruption.

Blagojevich is scheduled to speak at 2 p.m. at the Thompson Center in downtown Chicago.


There may be a live webcast at this link at 2:00 p.m central time (3:00 p.m. eastern time):
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/index
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 01:54 pm
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:

Depends on how you define "contact." Certainly, if one defines it in this context as "personal contact," then no, there was no contact.

Are we back to what the meaning of the word, "is" is? After all, the essence of the question is whether they were communicating about the Senate seat, and I think it is pretty obvious that they probably had, whether it was through Obama's personal assistant or not. When you are in government, you have a staff to do alot of your work, you cannot do all the communicating directly, one on one, but communication occurs and contact is made, and especially if it is being carried out by your closest personal assistant that you probably talk to on a constant day by day basis.

Thats my take on it, anyway, I am not an apologist for Obama, but I realize most of Obama's supporters are going to give him a pass on this. To be clear, we do not yet know what was said, exactly how many times they talked, and just how often Obama directed it, was briefed on it, etc. So I have not 100% asserted that Obama was purposely misleading us, but I think the liklihood is pretty high. Confirmation of that or lack thereof will come in due time.
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 02:03 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:

Depends on how you define "contact." Certainly, if one defines it in this context as "personal contact," then no, there was no contact.

Are we back to what the meaning of the word, "is" is? After all, the essence of the question is whether they were communicating about the Senate seat, and I think it is pretty obvious that they probably had, whether it was through Obama's personal assistant or not.

Don't change the terms of the question. You asked a hypothetical of me, not a question specifically about Obama. Considering that I already said that I don't know much about this aspect of the Blagojevich scandal, I'm not sure how I can now be accused of being an apologist for Obama.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 03:17 pm
@joefromchicago,
How were you answering a hypothetical question?

Your exact words were...
Quote:
Depends on how you define "contact." Certainly, if one defines it in this context as "personal contact," then no, there was no contact.


YOU said that there was no personal contact, I proved to you that there was.
I make no claim about what they talked about, only that they DID meet AFTER Obama won the election.

joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 04:02 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:
How were you answering a hypothetical question?

Like so:

okie wrote:
Another question, if you are the president and someone asks you if you have had any contact with the governors office, and if your personal assistant has had numerous contacts with that office and the governor himself and has given them and or him information as directed by you, do you consider that as having contact with them? If you send a message or messages to that office through your personal assistant and have gathered information through your assistant, have you made contact with them or not?

joefromchicago, in response, wrote:
Depends on how you define "contact." Certainly, if one defines it in this context as "personal contact," then no, there was no contact.

The question assumes that I am the president. I assure you I am not. That makes the question hypothetical.

mysteryman wrote:
YOU said that there was no personal contact, I proved to you that there was.

In the context of the hypothetical situation, there was no personal contact between me and the governor's office. That's all I claimed.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 06:58 pm
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:
In the context of the hypothetical situation, there was no personal contact between me and the governor's office. That's all I claimed.

mm has already pointed out there was "personal contact." But regardless of whether they spoke of anything substantive on that occasion, Obama did not say "personal contact," he simply used the word, "contact." Too bad we are off to such a great start here with the new president, parsing words to try to make him to appear to be honest. He first denies contact, and now if the reports are true, there has been clear contact with Obama giving the governor a list of candidates for his seat that would be acceptable to Obama, and besides the list, he tried to get his friend, Jarrett to be appointed. No contact? If the reports are true, "no contact" is intentionally misleading at best.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 07:01 pm
Our minor league hockey team is having Rod nite tonight.

You go to the ticket office and ask in his name, and you get an extra set of tickets to a future game.



Okie no matter how much smoke you blow, you ain't makin' any fire...
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Dec, 2008 07:57 pm
@Rockhead,
His mirrors are also cracked.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 03:05:45