Illinois Governor Arrested

@Advocate,

Me too!

0 Replies

@old europe,

old europe wrote:

okie wrote:
You use the politics of fear, when law abiding citizens have no need to fear anyone tapping a conversation with suspected terrorists.

You use politics of fear when claiming that your privacy is being invaded by the government's attempt to crack down on those terrorists who are trying to kill as many Americans as possible, eh?

Is this an attempt at very subtle sarcasm, or has the term "politics of fear" has been redefined recently?

The liberal leftists have loved to use the term, "politics of fear," when in reality I think they misuse it and apply it to the wrong things. They are fearing the wrong things. There are in fact legitimate things to fear, or not feared so much, and there are people to distrust or to trust. It just so happens that you and I probably do not agree on who needs to be distrusted and what needs to be feared.

0 Replies

It looks like Burris may not have told the whole truth and nothing but the truth when he took his Senate seat.

"Burris Says Blagojevich Wanted $10,000 Donation Before Senate Appointment
Sen. Burris didn't make the donation but failed to disclose the request under oath before an Illinois House impeachment panel"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/14/report-blagojevich-asked-burris-donation/

Is it too soon to ask for his resignation? I don't think so.

1 Reply

@okie,

It seems a problem created by Burris for Burris. According to all the other information about this issue, nobody in Obama's "team" knew about any demands by Blago.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Probably or possibly, but this seems to indicate how Blago made it standard practice to ask for money, EVEN AFTER HE WAS CAUGHT, so it seems likely to me that the Obama people and probably Obama himself knew more about Blago's requests to do business, more than they have ever revealed. Just common sense, ci. Sure, no proof, but its just logic. If you deal with a crook that made this standard practice, then it stands to reason you would know about his demands.

I don't think this whole affair is over. And the possiblity still exists that Blago could decide at some point to tell all. And I think that is the fear the Obama people and Democrats had at first, and this explains why they started to build the case that Blago was insane. He is crooked, yes, but probably not insane.

3 Replies

@okie,

I guess he, like most all politicos, will claim that he didn't recall.

This is right in line with Ken Starr testifying during the impeachment hearings. Ken claimed that he didn't recall 36 times.

0 Replies

@okie,

okie, You're now in the same league as agnostics; you want to believe something you can't see. Make all the assumptions you wish, but that doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

okie, You're now in the same league as agnostics; you want to believe something you can't see. Make all the assumptions you wish, but that doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

You are borrowing an okie term, "hill of beans," ci, shame on you!!!

1 Reply

@okie,

As if you're the originator of that term.

0 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

Sure, no proof, but its just logic.

I've seen scant evidence of either in your posts.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

Joe, there is evidence. We know that Blago's standard practice was to get something for whatever he did. Not unusual for many Chicago or Illinois politicians from what we hear, is it? Now, we already have Blago on tape apparently indicating Obama's people wouldn't give him anything, so evidently he had asked. Yet, Obama and his people seem to be oblivious to this. I am saying, I doubt that. That is not without evidence, Joe. Call it scant, go ahead, you have alot more trust in Mr. Obama than alot of people do. He has been caught misrepresenting the facts or promising stuff that he hasn't delivered. And he is on record as claiming there was no contact with Blago, when there was. Remember? Probably not, as we don't hear anything about this case anymore, as it is swept under the rug for a while, probably a long while.

Since you are an Obama apologist, I doubt he could do anything to cause you to suspicion him of anything. He probably walks on water, according to you.

2 Replies

@okie,

okie, You can doubt all you want; you are some lonely ignoramus who finds something wrong with all liberal politicians. Your brain is damaged beyond repair.

0 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

That is not without evidence, Joe. Call it scant, go ahead...

I wouldn't call it "scant." That would be far too generous.

okie wrote:

Since you are an Obama apologist...

That sort of charge would deserve more credence if you weren't such an unrepentant Bush apologist.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

okie is not a Bush apologist; he's what is called an "ignoramus" who doesn't understand most issues concerning politics or economics.

After Obama has been in office for less than one month, okie has determined that Obama is stupid. okie has no common sense or perspective of reality.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I do not agree with Bush on many things, and have said so. And I don't think I would label Obama stupid, he certainly is smart enough, I may have called him stupid, I don't remember everything that I have said here - do you? - but I think more accurate terms are ignorance and arrogance. Beyond that, I have also said he is very inexperienced and has totally the wrong political philosophy, and that he has demonstrated that he has not been totally honest about his philosophy. And Obama himself has called himself a screwup at least once, or that he "screwed up." I think it was more than that, I think if he really wanted an ethical administration as promised, he would right now ask for Geithner to resign. That for starters, and then Emmanuel, his attorney general, etc. etc.

Thanks for twisting and misrepresenting what I post here, ci.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie, What you miss in all your rhetoric is how all campaigns for president is run. Do you ever remember anything of value? Obama didn't run his campaign any different than past candidates; that's a fact, but you are ready to criticize Obama for what is "normal." As for your opinion about his honesty, ignorance and arrogance, your subjective views are way off the mark. It's my opinion that he's ten times smarter than the average American. He was president of the Harvard Law Review. What did you ever accomplish?

Your admission that "I do not agree with Bush on many things" falls flat on the basis that you find Obama to be ignorant and arrogant. You're aiming your criticisms at the wrong man.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

okie, What you miss in all your rhetoric is how all campaigns for president is run. Do you ever remember anything of value? Obama didn't run his campaign any different than past candidates; that's a fact, but you are ready to criticize Obama for what is "normal."

Some things he did are common to all campaigns, but some of his stuff is different, and he has taken some things to the extreme. How he organized his campaign with people in neighborhoods and on the ground, and using the internet, has been different. He brought his community organizing methods, some think this is good, I don't. However, what he is doing is tapping into people's discontent and promising more giveaways than ever before, so I perceive Obama as just using the negative aspects of citizen attitudes. He is a candidate that is symbolic of people's discontent and negative aspects of pop culture, not a good sign in my opinion.

Quote:

As for your opinion about his honesty, ignorance and arrogance, your subjective views are way off the mark. It's my opinion that he's ten times smarter than the average American. He was president of the Harvard Law Review. What did you ever accomplish?

Intelligence does not preclude arrogance and ignorance, and just plain being wrong. Many intelligent people have been wrong, and arrogant, and self centered. What have I accomplished? I am not ashamed of it. I paid my own way through college, by working, I worked for a decade and a half for a major corporation, and have run a business for more than 20 years, successfully, raised a family without government doles, and happily married for more than 30 years. I have always paid my taxes, and am a law abiding citizen, and strangely for this day and age, ci, I want my public officials to do the same thing. What has Obama done. Alot, but has he ever run a business so that he even understands business? He has "organized" in Chicago, sorry, I'm not impressed, some of the public housing projects still live in squalor. There are plenty of politicians in Washington that have accomplished not a whole lot, except to prove they can be elected by promising to give away your money and my money so that they can get elected. Earn respect, you have to do more than that, ci, to earn respect. Many of these politicians are corrupt, plain and simple, and it is a known fact that Chicago is not exactly a hotbed of honest politicians.

Quote:

Your admission that "I do not agree with Bush on many things" falls flat on the basis that you find Obama to be ignorant and arrogant. You're aiming your criticisms at the wrong man.

Mr. Obama is not above criticism, ci. The man has accomplished nothing significant yet, except win an election, and how he did it is questionable in my opinion.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

Quote:

Some things he did are common to all campaigns, but some of his stuff is different, and he has taken some things to the extreme.

Were they illegal?

How he organized his campaign with people in neighborhoods and on the ground, and using the internet, has been different. He brought his community organizing methods, some think this is good, I don't.

And your reason is?

However, what he is doing is tapping into people's discontent and promising more giveaways than ever before,

After eight years of Bush, who wouldn't be discontented? Most people's pay and benefits didn't keep up with inflation, many couldn't find jobs or lost jobs and their homes, and people lost a good portion of their retirement savings in the stock market. Are you saying this will not elicit discotent?

so I perceive Obama as just using the negative aspects of citizen attitudes.

And rightfully so. It's interesting to see that you are blind to all this destruction of the Bush regime.

He is a candidate that is symbolic of people's discontent and negative aspects of pop culture, not a good sign in my opinion.

"...negative aspects of pop culture?" Where in the world do you come up with such stupidity? It must not be difficult for you, because you come up with these negatives that has no basis in fact.

0 Replies

I wonder whether Burris is toast. There is ample evidence that he lied to investigators, and only changed his story in an affidavit when he learned that a conversation was on tape. It could be that the Senate itself will expel him.

1 Reply

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

I wonder whether Burris is toast. There is ample evidence that he lied to investigators, and only changed his story in an affidavit when he learned that a conversation was on tape. It could be that the Senate itself will expel him.

The sooner the better. And I think Obama's people and go betweens, and possibly Obama himself, know more about Blago's extortion attempts than they claim. If that is ever found to be true, if those suspicions are ever substantiated, then Obama should resign as well. After all, what makes Obama so immune to wrong doing, if it is shown to be true? Nothing in my opinion. He is just another Chicago politician. We already have Blago on record as saying they wouldn't give him anything, yet Obama claims he knows nothing.

1 Reply

Illinois Governor Arrested

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know