Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No this call was probably a forced scare tactic by Obama.
A real leader he is not, if he was he would be making one mistake after another.
A real leader can make quick smart decisions quickly, something he has terrible trouble with.
Nope, this call was to scare her into going with him. He probably told her he would find a way to take something away from her state if she did not go his way.
That's the Obama way, do it my way or I will make you pay for it.
I did plenty of research. I don't need Illinois politicians telling me that their "present" vote is the same as "no" to understand that Barack Obama doesn't have the stones to make a stand based on principle. The writing is on the wall. All one has to do is see how often he didn't vote AT ALL on issues that pertain to everyday American's. Jill, in her infinite wisdom, assumed that his Illinois Senatorial record was of utmost importance to me. She couldn't be any more wrong. Unlike her, I looked at the ENTIRE picture, and Barack Obama abstained from voting hundreds of time in the US Senate (which actually has an affect on all of us). This political maneuvering for the presidency garnered no respect from me. He abstained because he feared the political ramifications when it was time to answer to those votes during the campaign. It's clear as day, and its too bad liberals were too shallow to know and understand this.
Last edited by AeroGuyDC; 06-30-2009 at 09:29 PM..
No this call was probably a forced scare tactic by Obama.
A real leader he is not, if he was he would be making one mistake after another.
A real leader can make quick smart decisions quickly, something he has terrible trouble with.
Nope, this call was to scare her into going with him. He probably told her he would find a way to take something away from her state if she did not go his way.
That's the Obama way, do it my way or I will make you pay for it.
Don't look now, but whether you approve or not, President Obama is proving himself quite adept at plucking the strings of the government to make it sing his tunes. Success speaks for itself.
Instead of complaining about him, those who want to take his place should be taking notes.
************************************************** ******
Quoted from Obama's White Papers
To: (ALL)
DateTime: 3/25/2008 6:51:32 AM
- Obama passed legislation with Republican Senator Jim Talent to give gas stations a tax credit for installing E85 ethanol refueling pumps. The tax credit covers 30 percent of the costs of switching one or more traditional petroleum pumps to E85, which is an 85 percent ethanol/15 percent gasoline blend.
- After a number of inmates on death row were found innocent, Senator Obama worked with law enforcement officials to require the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.
- His first law was passed with Republican Tom Coburn, a measure to rebuild trust in government by allowing every American to go online and see how and where every dime of their tax dollars is spent.
- Obama created the Illinois Earned Income Tax Credit for low-income working families in 2000 and successfully sponsored a measure to make the credit permanent in 2003. The law offered about $105 million in tax relief over three years.
- Obama joined forces with former U.S. Sen. Paul Simon (D-IL) to pass the toughest campaign finance law in Illinois history. The legislation banned the personal use of campaign money by Illinois legislators and banned gifts from lobbyists. Before the law was passed, one organization ranked Illinois worst among 50 states for its campaign finance regulations.
- As a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator Obama has fought to help Illinois veterans get the disability pay they were promised, while working to prepare the VA for the return of the thousands of veterans who will need care after Iraq and Afghanistan.
- He traveled to Russia with Republican Dick Lugar to begin a new generation of non-proliferation efforts designed to find and secure deadly weapons around the world.
- Obama has been a leading advocate for protecting the right to vote, helping to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act and leading the opposition against discriminatory barriers to voting.
- In the U.S. Senate, Obama introduced the STOP FRAUD Act to increase penalties for mortgage fraud and provide more protections for low-income homebuyers, well before the current subprime crisis began.
- Obama sponsored legislation to combat predatory payday loans, and he also was credited with lobbied the state to more closely regulate some of the most egregious predatory lending practices.
- Barack Obama introduced the Patriot Employer Act of 2007 to provide a tax credit to companies that maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in America relative to those outside the US; maintain their corporate headquarters in America; pay decent wages; prepare workers for retirement; provide health insurance; and support employees who serve in the military.
- Obama worked to pass a number of laws in Illinois and Washington to improve the health of women. His accomplishments include creating a task force on cervical cancer, providing greater access to breast and cervical cancer screenings, and helping improve prenatal and premature birth services.
- Obama has introduced and helped pass bipartisan legislation to limit the abuse of no-bid federal contracts.
- Obama and Senator Feingold (D-WI) took on both parties and proposed ethics legislation that was described as the "gold standard" for reform. It was because of their leadership that ending subsidized corporate jet travel, mandating disclosure of lobbyists' bundling of contributions, and enacting strong new restrictions of lobbyist-sponsored trips became part of the final ethics bill that was signed into law.
************************************************** *******
I've had this in a folder since the primaries began; as an Obama volunteer, I often received e-mails from other workers, and this was one. I did delete the name of the sender, for obvious reasons. However, the facts are easily checked, and the original source was a copy of now-President Obama's projects. It seems that Obama was quite busy for a junior senator.
Great work, Jill61!
Great list (I hope you don't mind that I reformatted it in quoting you -- it was so hard to read the way you pasted it)!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
One question. Then why didn't he just vote NO if "present" held so much stature?
I doubt you have an answer for this. Instead you go to bat for this guy with nothing more than a little ammo that a few websites that cater to the liberal left can provide.
First, how did you miss the fact that even the Republicans in the Illinois Senate said using 'present' votes against candidates is purely political and doesn't mean the person casting such a vote is indecisive or doesn't have the courage to hold public office? Do you just reflexively cry "partisan" when you don't like what someone says?
Second, I don't mind if you want to challenge me to back up my claims, but some day you'll realize that you'd be wrong to dismiss me as unable to do so.
As a matter of fact, I can give you a perfect example of a bill that then-Senator Obama voted 'present' on, and why he did so. Barack Obama signed on as a chief co-sponsor of Illinois Senate bill SB0943, which would allow victims of sexual assault to request the judge seal the court records. At the same time, the Illinois House introduced similar legislation in HB0854 (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ilga.gov%2Flegislation%2Fle gisnet91%2Fstatus%2F910HB0854.html - broken link).
The Senate version of the bill passed both houses, but was vetoed by Governor Ryan. But before the House version of the bill came up for a vote in the Senate, it was argued that the bill posed potential First Amendment problems. Although Barack Obama clearly supported the overall objective of the bill, as a constitutional scholar, knowing the bill could be challenged on constitutional grounds, he voted 'present' to signal that particular problem with the bill.
[quote=AeroGuyDC;9546590]One question. Then why didn't he just vote NO if "present" held as much stature as 'No'? If he had the stones, he would have simply voted NO. It's called principle. "Present" is a form of politics and has nothing do to with principle. Even his cohorts in Illinois call it "good politics." (You should read your own link) Yes, No, or Present, and he votes Present instead of NO? And you have the guts to say this guy has the stones? Get a life. Amazing how people like yourself defend this guy like he's....the messiah. (yep, I said messiah. Have you paid attention to the sheer number of posts you've put out on this forum slobbering over the guy?)
************************************************** ***********
And amazing how you will attack him like he's Satan? Have you paid attention to how many posts you've made denigrating him? It's unfortunate that the subtle nuance of "present" signaling "no, with reservations" when
voting in the Illinois House isn't clear. It signals the bill's sponsors that there is still the possibility of a compromise, which most bills are, anyway. A quick read of Machiavelli's The Prince would help to enumerate other fine points in diplomacy and negotiation in terms of politics. It has nothing at all to do with not having principles or courage, but everything to do with strategy and achieving a settlement that satisfies both sides as best can be done; the fine art of compromise that is democracy.
************************************************** *******
I doubt you have an answer for this. Instead you go to bat for this guy with nothing more than a little ammo from an ILLINOIS article defending ILLINOIS politics. Nice job proving nothing. In case you haven't noticed, Illinois politics and politicians aren't exactly the shining light in the world of politics. And you post an article of those good ole' boys defending their own practices as proof of your point? I haven't laughed so hard all day.[/quote by AeroGuyDC}
************************************************** *******
Laughing so hard that you missed the part about President Obama working
with Chuck Hagel, who would be shocked to learn that he is now a member
of the Illinois State Senate, instead of a U.S. Senator from Nebraska? That
would have been your clue that Obama's achievement list had extended into the period after his election to the U.S. Senate. What I posted was not an Illinois-sourced paper; the government has White Papers that detail
each representative's legislative careers, sometimes found on that person's
government website, for the convenience of constituents.
Illinois politics is not different from some other states, but one should remember that Governor George Ryan (R-Il) went to prison not long ago, and Obama's original senatorial opponent, Jim Ryan (R-Il) had to leave the race due to impropriety, making way for Alan Keyes to be nearly beheaded
in the election.
I did plenty of research. I don't need Illinois politicians telling me that their "present" vote is the same as "no" to understand that Barack Obama doesn't have the stones to make a stand based on principle. The writing is on the wall. All one has to do is see how often he didn't vote AT ALL on issues that pertain to everyday American's. Jill, in her infinite wisdom, assumed that his Illinois Senatorial record was of utmost importance to me. She couldn't be any more wrong.
'Scuse, please? Uhm, you're the one who brought up his Illinois Senatorial record of voting 'present', alleging it implied having no stones. If it was so unimportant to you, why bring it upt?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
Unlike her, I looked at the ENTIRE picture, and Barack Obama abstained from voting hundreds of time in the US Senate (which actually has an affect on all of us). This political maneuvering for the presidency garnered no respect from me. He abstained because he feared the political ramifications when it was time to answer to those votes during the campaign. It's clear as day, and its too bad liberals were too shallow to know and understand this.
Flat out falsehood. At most, the record shows 130 'present' votes out of over 4,000 votes cast. That's not only not "hundreds", it's not even a significant percentage of his votes.
And the only thing clear as day is your lack of research into Barack Obama's actual record, despite your claims otherwise.
One question. Then why didn't he just vote NO if "present" held as much stature as 'No'? If he had the stones, he would have simply voted NO. It's called principle. "Present" is a form of politics and has nothing do to with principle. Even his cohorts in Illinois call it "good politics." (You should read your own link) Yes, No, or Present, and he votes Present instead of NO? And you have the guts to say this guy has the stones? Get a life. Amazing how people like yourself defend this guy like he's....the messiah. (yep, I said messiah. Have you paid attention to the sheer number of posts you've put out on this forum slobbering over the guy?)
************************************************** ***********
And amazing how you will attack him like he's Satan? Have you paid attention to how many posts you've made denigrating him? It's unfortunate that the subtle nuance of "present" signaling "no, with reservations" when
voting in the Illinois House isn't clear. It signals the bill's sponsors that there is still the possibility of a compromise, which most bills are, anyway. A quick read of Machiavelli's The Prince would help to enumerate other fine points in diplomacy and negotiation in terms of politics. It has nothing at all to do with not having principles or courage, but everything to do with strategy and achieving a settlement that satisfies both sides as best can be done; the fine art of compromise that is democracy.
************************************************** *******
I doubt you have an answer for this. Instead you go to bat for this guy with nothing more than a little ammo from an ILLINOIS article defending ILLINOIS politics. Nice job proving nothing. In case you haven't noticed, Illinois politics and politicians aren't exactly the shining light in the world of politics. And you post an article of those good ole' boys defending their own practices as proof of your point? I haven't laughed so hard all day.[/quote by AeroGuyDC}
************************************************** *******
Laughing so hard that you missed the part about President Obama working
with Chuck Hagel, who would be shocked to learn that he is now a member
of the Illinois State Senate, instead of a U.S. Senator from Nebraska? That
would have been your clue that Obama's achievement list had extended into the period after his election to the U.S. Senate. What I posted was not an Illinois-sourced paper; the government has White Papers that detail
each representative's legislative careers, sometimes found on that person's
government website, for the convenience of constituents.
Illinois politics is not different from some other states, but one should remember that Governor George Ryan (R-Il) went to prison not long ago, and Obama's original senatorial opponent, Jim Ryan (R-Il) had to leave the race due to impropriety, making way for Alan Keyes to be nearly beheaded
in the election.
Where oh where did you get confused? I have not referred to anything that would confuse Chuck Hagel and the Illinois Senate. Furthermore, I have not quoted you or any of your posts. Where did you come up with this nonsense?
'Scuse, please? Uhm, you're the one who brought up his Illinois Senatorial record of voting 'present', alleging it implied having no stones. If it was so unimportant to you, why bring it upt? Flat out falsehood. At most, the record shows 130 'present' votes out of over 4,000 votes cast. That's not only not "hundreds", it's not even a significant percentage of his votes.
And the only thing clear as day is your lack of research into Barack Obama's actual record, despite your claims otherwise.
There you go again confusing Illinois Senate "present" votes with U.S Senate "No Vote Recorded". Get it right Jill. You come at me with all this Illinois Senate voting BS, and now you try to call me out again while confusing the issue at hand. I mentioned both 'present' and 'no vote' in my original post and you keep coming up with this crap about Illinois Senate voting. Are you intentionally avoiding the U.S. Senate record or is all this over your head?
Do I need to post Obama's U.S. Senate voting record to prove to you the man abstained from literally hundreds of votes in not even one full term as Senator?
Even his cohorts in Illinois call it "good politics." (You should read your own link)
I see you altered this post after I'd replied to it, so allow me to address this allegation. Again, you're wrong. Read it again, yourself. What was said was that it was "good politics" to use 'present' votes against a candidate during an election.
There you go again confusing Illinois Senate "present" votes with U.S Senate "No Vote Recorded". Get it right Jill. You come at me with all this Illinois Senate voting BS, and now you try to call me out again while confusing the issue at hand.
Do I need to post Obama's U.S. Senate voting record to prove to you the man abstained from literally hundreds of votes?
Here, let me quote you, back to you. . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
Liberals and independents cast their votes based off of Obama's ability to smooze and give great speeches.
The rest of us looked at his voting record and reconciled the lack of stones it must have taken to vote "Present" or "Not Voting".
Now, there is no such thing as voting 'present' in the U.S. Senate. But now that I've proven you to be utterly clueless about President Obama's actual record, you move the goal posts around and claim you were talking only about his U.S. Senate career. Rather disingenuous of you, I'd say.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
