O is having a news conference right now

First, he's talking about Iran. They say he is going to talk about health insurance, the economy, etc.

• O is having a news conference right now - Backwards typist
  • I turned the TV off - can't stand to hear him - lie....-nm
    • as did I.......... - nm
  • What a crock! - play dumb everybody! nm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

I don't know how they can stand up there and lie through their teeth like that...blaming the White House and Republicans for this financial debacle.  They know that is a lie.  They know, especially Chris Dodd, was central to this.  Also mentioned Barney Frank.  Good grief.  The hypocrisy is staggering.  They should be talking about getting us out of this mess....just yesterday they were saying don't play the blame game.  Telling McCain not to politicize it while they are politicizing it.  That man makes my skin crawl. 

And saying there was a "deal" and McCain blew it up.  The only "deal" was among senators...the only house person present could not negotiate.  He just had to listen.  If they had the plan and had gone to the house with it, then the house would have blocked it there and hours if not days would have been wasted.  Amazing the gall of some folks.  Ridiculous!!!

Why can't they all stop the political posturing and just fix this mess.  The House is only reacting to the onslaught of emails from their constituents saying protect us here, we don't like this carte blanche 700 billion.  I for one am GLAD at least the Republicans in the house said whoa wait just a minute here. 

If I didn't lose count, that's #8 since he was elected. Do I have to listen to 4 years of this?  Or is this just about chosing his cabinet and if so, did he fill all the spots yet?

I can read. I don't need to see him except when he takes questions from reporters.

FYI, I never listened to GW's press conferences either. I can't stand canned speeches.

Here is NPR's write up of today's press conference by the president for those who would like a quick run down.  I just listened to it.  Made me nauseous.

WASHINGTON December 4, 2007, 1:04 p.m. ET · President Bush said Tuesday that the international community should continue to pressure Iran on its nuclear programs, asserting Tehran remains dangerous despite a new intelligence conclusion that it halted its development of a nuclear bomb four years ago.

"I view this report as a warning signal that they had the program, they halted the program," Bush said. "The reason why it's a warning signal is they could restart it."

Bush spoke one day after a new national intelligence estimate found that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003, largely because of international scrutiny and pressure. That finding is in stark contrast to the comparable intelligence estimate of just two years ago, when U.S. intelligence agencies believed Tehran was determined to develop a nuclear weapons capability and was continuing its weapons development program.

It is also stood in marked contrast to Bush's rhetoric on Iran. At his last news conference on Oct. 17, for instance, he said that people "interested in avoiding World War III" should be working to prevent Iran from having the knowledge needed to make a nuclear weapon.

Bush said Tuesday that he only learned of the new intelligence assessment last week. But he portrayed it as valuable ammunition against Tehran, not as a reason to lessen diplomatic pressure.

"To me, the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) provides an opportunity for us to rally the international community — to continue to rally the community — to pressure the Iranian regime to suspend its program," the president said. "What's to say they couldn't start another covert nuclear weapons program."

He also asserted that the report means "nothing's changed," focusing on the previous existence of a weapons program and not addressing the discrepancy between his rhetoric and the disclosure that weapons program has been frozen for four years.

Bush said he is not troubled about his standing, about perhaps facing a credibility gap with the American people. "No, I'm feeling pretty spirited — pretty good about life," Bush said.

"I have said Iran is dangerous, and the NIE doesn't do anything to change my opinion about the danger Iran poses to the world."

Bush said the report's finding would not prompt him to take a U.S. military option against Tehran off the table.

"The best diplomacy — effective diplomacy — is one in which all options are on the table," he said.

The president also said that the world would agree with his message that Iran shouldn't be let off the hook yet.

In fact, Europeans said the new information strengthens their argument for negotiations with Tehran, but they also said that sanctions are still an option to compel Iran to be fully transparent about its nuclear program. European officials insisted that the international community should not walk away from years of talks with an often defiant Tehran that is openly enriching uranium for uncertain ends. The report said Iran could still build a nuclear bomb by 2010-2015.

In Kabul, Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert Gates reinforced the U.S. position that the new U.S. intelligence assessment shows that Tehran remains a possible threat. He said it shows that Iran has had a nuclear weapons program and that as long as the country continues with its uranium enrichment activities, Iran could always renew its weapons program.

The U.S. intelligence assessment "validated the administration's strategy of bringing diplomatic and economic efforts to bear on Iran," Gates said Tuesday, speaking at a news conference with Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai.

Bush called the news conference, his first in nearly seven weeks, to intensify pressure on lawmakers amid disputes over spending and the Iraq war. Taking advantage of his veto power and the largest bully pulpit in town, Bush regularly scolds Congress as a way to stay relevant and frame the debate as his presidency winds down.

Democrats counter that Bush is more interested in making statements than genuinely trying to negotiate some common ground with them.

Specifically, Bush again on Tuesday challenged Congress to send him overdue spending bills; to approve his latest war funding bill without conditions; to pass a temporary to fix to the alternative minimum tax so millions of taxpayers don't get hit with tax increases; and to extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

"Congress still has a lot to do," Bush said. "It doesn't have very much time to do it."

On another matter, Bush was asked about a rape victim in Saudi Arabia who was sentenced to prison and 200 lashes for being alone with a man not related to her — a violation of the kingdom's strict segregation of the sexes. Saudi Arabia has faced enormous international criticism about the sentencing.

"My first thoughts were these," Bush said. "What happens if this happens to my daughter? How would I react? And I would have been — I'd of been very emotional, of course. I'd have been angry at those who committed the crime. And I'd be angry at a state that didn't support the victim."

Bush, however, said he has not made his views known directly to Saudi King Abdullah, an ally. But he added: "He knows our position loud and clear."

The president said the U.S. economy is strong, though he acknowledged that the housing crisis has become a "headwind." He said administration officials are working on the issue, but he is wary of bailing out lenders. "We shouldn't say, 'OK, you made a lousy loan so we're going to go ahead and subsidize you.' "

Asked about the 2008 election, Bush steered himself back out of commenting on politics. "I practiced some punditry in the past — I'm not going to any further."

On other issues, Bush said:

—"The Venezuelan people rejected one-man rule" when they rejected a constitutional provision that would have enabled Hugo Chavez to remain in power for life and drive changes throughout Venezuelan society. "They voted for democracy."

—He talked by telephone Tuesday with Russian President Vladimir Putin and briefed him on the new Iran intelligence estimate. Bush also said he told Putin that "we were sincere in our expressions of concern" about irregularities in the voting that produced a sweeping parliamentary victory for Putin's party.

—He has "cordial relations" with Democratic leaders of Congress despite the sharp words between the White House and Capitol Hill. He blamed Democrats for the lack of compromises, saying, "In order for us to be able to reach accord, they got to come with one voice, one position."

If history is still allowed to be accurate generations from now, this is how the inception of America, the evangelical theocracy, should be documented.

From: http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110007415
JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL

Judgment Call
Did Christian conservatives receive assurances that Miers would oppose Roe v. Wade?

Monday, October 17, 2005 12:01 a.m.

Two days after President Bush announced Harriet Miers's Supreme Court nomination, James Dobson of Focus on the Family raised some eyebrows by declaring on his radio program: When you know some of the things that I know--that I probably shouldn't know--you will understand why I have said, with fear and trepidation, that I believe Harriet Miers will be a good justice.

A propanganda machine for repubs.  No one is obligated to appear on that network.  There are plenty of other media outlets. Fox's ratings are dropping and MSNC's are climbing.  Fox disguises these facts by including their entertainment ratings in with their "news" ratings.  As far as ALL OTHER MEDIA being liberal, that is a transparent technique to keep viewers from getting opinions from ANY OTHER source than Fox.  I certainly wouldn't fall for that bunko.  I also notice that they concentrate on certain sites such as Media Matters and NY Times specifically because those sites are excellent at presenting the truth about distorted information disseminated by the propaganda machine. To each his own.

Sorry, I'm conservative, but have to ask why you would go down that road when you can find those answers yourself.

Might I suggest worldnetdaily.com, townhall.com, drudgereport.com, breitbart.com, talk radio (and the hosts' web sites, including Laura Ingraham, Glenn Beck, Savage, Levin, Michelle Malkin, Rush, etc.).  There are countless news stories that never make the mainstream media.

Another thing to consider is who a person keeps for company.  When questionable names keep coming up (Pflager, Rezko, Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, etc.), that would concern me if I were considering any kind of relationship with someone, but that's just me.

Those who support Obama get their news from MSNBC, CBS, NBC, and so on.  Those networks alone have been proven repeatedly to be biased.  All the times that McCain went abroad, where were Couric, Gibson, and Williams?  Why would any American think that the Democrats, who are determined to reinstate Fairness Doctrine, think that it won't come back and bite them?  Why should any American be silenced just because one group disagrees with another?

Do you know what is posted on blogs like the DailyKos and HuffingtonPost? 

Lastly, a couple more stats.  The #1 most liberal Senator is Obama.  Kennedy is #2, Biden is #3.  Even the moderate Democrats are distancing themselves from him.  This info is documented and not fiction.

That's rather left of left, I would say.

I'm already looking for my fire extinguisher, but the truth hurts sometimes.

Trust your own gut.

You have more options now than anytime in history to gather information.  You can gather information from both sides of the issue and verify the facts and then make your own decision based on your personal values.

Israel is getting ready to invade Gaza and is already in the process of bombing raids.  Meanwhile the current US administration (aka Bush/Condi/Cheney/etc) is perpetuating the lies about Gaza, such as who is the real terrorist, ignoring a legitimate democratically elected council, etc.  The OP explains all this.  Bottom line is that the US is giving Israel a green light, which to some of us (as well as a large portion of the world) is condoning genocide. 

And Americans wonder why the rest of the world has such a bad opinion of us. 

nm

I'm not responsible for that.  Having said that though I do think that as a whole people are more tolerant (I wouldn't go so far as to say accepting).  However, that doesn't diminish the fact that violence against homosexuals is still a prevalent crime.

I actually do wish more people would teach their children as you described above.  If that were happening, none of this would be an issue and there would be no need to take it to the schools. 

Let's take Patty, for example.  She has already said that yes, she does call homosexuals names in front of her kids.  She does this at the same time that she's spouting out references to the Bible.  So what do you think her kids think?  Maybe that it's God's will that they call homosexuals names?  I don't know what they're supposed to think or how they are supposed to act given her example.  Do you think she's teaching tolerance?  If not, who will if not the schools?

wednesday, june 29, 2005

Army Exceeds Recruitment Goals

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Richard Myers announced tonight that the Army has exceeded its recruitment goals for the month of June: Army reverses series of recruitment shortfalls. (Hat tip: Ethel.)

PENTAGON—After months of declining enlistment, the Army has more than met its recruitment goals for the month of June.

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Richard Myers announced the turnaround during a “town hall” meeting this afternoon at the Pentagon.

Myers did not provide numbers, nor did he indicate how far above the recruitment target the enlistment number is.

The investigation is still happening.  How can it be old news?

it's kinda to pre-record live news coverage.  Probably nothing major will happen today, but who knows?  Your scraping the bottom by criticizing a live news channel for having live coverage.