Another Clinton lie that made this woman change who shes supporting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVuMYKs8iJs&eurl=http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/hqblog
YouTube - Why Lorna Brett Howard Switched from Clinton to Obama

It's clear that the Clinton's lie as easily as they breathe. Why on earth does anybody expect to have a good outcome when dealing with liars?

instead of taking a stand. Now I wonder if his "present" votes weren't pandering to the Christian right in preparation for this candidacy? Just say'in.

Reading problems? Just can't take a concept from Civics 101?

:boring:

At least to me.

boring

the discussions

Clintons regardless of how clearly they are wrong.

it would have been a million times better than how she actually voted.

Good one.

She tossed Hills away and put up Obama and then tossed Obamas away and put up Edwards..

She changed sides over hillary's attack on the present votes.

...don't need to watch videos or to read in order to know that their candidate is right about everything and everybody else is WRONG!

It's seriously a PITA. They'll start fights with you and you'll go through all of this work to get links and quotes to prove your point, only to have them not read them at all. I'm done trying to reason with them. I find them simply unreasonable.

... that she lives in Chicago and New York. (Or maybe it's my mistake, and she lives in Chicago, IA; and New York, IA.)

So in all honestly I simply have to ask: why does anyone, anywhere at anytime give Bill Clinton an once of credibility on anything?
The Clinton's have been a fraud since the late 1970s. And yes, I readily admit that voted for them, knowing full well that they were scum.
But they were better than the other scumbags on offer, so I held my nose and voted.
Not a ringing endorsement, but there it is.

Over the years we all knew, or quickly learned, that these two have been willing to screw us over if it will help them out personally. This is not a shocking new bit of info. These are not new revelations coming down from the mount folks, it's freakin well-documented history. Ask anyone associated with the Clinton Administration- Donna Shalala, Robert Reich, Georgie Steppy, Dee Dee Myer, Vernon Jordan, Betty Currie, Al Gore, ...hell ask Monica.

Sometimes it's like I'm living in the twilight zone here, people in the year of our Lord 2008 are just now coming to the faint realization that Bill and Hillary Clinton might.... just might......be full of shit.
Can it really be that people are just now looking into their tv's and ONLY NOW discovering that these two narcissistic, pathological liars are self-serving creeps? What next? Will the nation suddenly realize that the undercoating on a new car is a scam? That credit card companies are screwing you over? Jesus, where does it all end?

...in an investigation into a 20 year old land deal...

Another Obamite jumps onto the rightwing bandwagon to attack, attack, attack

When will Obamas supporters tout him on issues, instead of endless attacks upon others>? Ever?

full of shit. This is not conjecture, and it's not just me saying it. Bill Clinton said it.
And people will remember all the good times from the "good old days".

Granted, we will all still end up voting for them in November. They will savage Edwards and Obama before it is over and somehow wrap up enough delegates to win the Democratic nomination.
I'm not sure what it'll be worth by then, but they will have "won" it.

And in November the vast majority of us, me included, will hold our noses, get really drunk and somehow find it in our hearts to vote for them. We know they are scumbags, but they are OUR scumbags. And We know Hillary Clinton is a pathetic fraud who won't accomplish shit in the White House.
But we also know what those crazy bastards on the right might accomplish if they win. So in the end we will hold our noses and vote for people we know are completely full of shit in order to save us from the truly vile shit we could be getting if the other guys win.

Edwards and Obama make people want to vote for them. Team Clinton operates on a different set motives, that's all I'm saying.

If I recall correctly, he lied to about every damn person he knew, drawing them all down into his lurid affair and dirtying their reputations along with his.

at how much the Clintons have been lying.

also a pure lie?

Yep.

ESPECIALLY not politicians.

I would say that I think some people are in for some rude awakenings... but I suspect anything counter to that "100% honest" meme will be brushed aside or explained away.

*sigh*

its not a question of being 100% honest but being 100% deceptive it is very chilling

issues over a long period of time.

The point I think is that in comparison with the outright Clinton lies in Iowa and NH about Obama's support of choice she wanted to make clear who was telling the truth and who was not.

Exchanges over abortion enter third day
Font size:
Print article
E-mail this to a friend
Letter to editor



By KATE DAVIDSON
Monitor staff


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

January 08. 2008 1:36AM



The back-and-forth over Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's support for abortion rights dragged on for a third day, with the Clinton camp mailing a letter to voters yesterday from two dozen pro-choice activists touting Clinton's record.

It was the second Clinton mailer in three days scrutinizing Obama's record on pro-choice legislation. A glossy flier sent out over the weekend said Obama voted "present" instead of "yes" or "no" on anti-abortion legislation in the Illinois state Senate. Yesterday's letter - signed by leaders from state affiliates of Planned Parenthood,, NARAL Pro-Choice, the National Organization of Women and the YWCA - reiterated the criticism.

"The difference between Hillary's repeatedly standing up strong on choice and Obama's unwillingness to vote 'yes' or 'no' is a clear contrast, and we believe the voters in New Hampshire deserve to know the difference," the letter said. "We support Hillary Clinton because she never ducked when choice was at stake."

(to me, voting "present" is a sign of "weakness."

thing about hrc that she perceives to be wrong or as she says a lie.....I personally think this lady is lying for the reasons she left HRC to join obama and her is what she said back in December, "In this case, I think both candidates are committed to choice and I hate to see the pro-choice community cannibalize itself on this issue,'' said Brett. "If either candidate wins, the pro-choice community is in good hands."

Today,(December 4th) Illinois NOW endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for president.

"She is, after all, our native sister," said Bonnie Grabenhofer, president of
Illinois NOW in a statement on the group's website. "We know from her record and in her heart she will be there for us."

But Illinois NOW was not content to leave it at that. Grabenhofer also took a serious swipe at Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), denigrating his record on women's rights in the state Senate.

"When we needed someone to take a stand, Senator Obama took a pass," said Grabenhofer, criticizing him for voting 'present' on many key votes. "He wasn't there for us then and we don't expect him to be now."

So you think this woman is lying?

As for Grabenhofer's half-witted lie-dripping statement about Obama's "present" vote on the abortion issue, what do you say about this:



I fully want to see your hare-brained response to this statement from Pam Sutherland. I guess she was lying too...

:puke:

It's sad that someone was so fooled by the Clintons. This is just another example.

us the truth later on?

no.

:boring:

It is tough to defy Obama in Chicago.

Yes, you flagellate yourself, but I'd like to see you in handcuffs. Permanently. The smell of granite in the morning ... Ahhh.

from Chicago thinks. For me it was the smarminess of the attitude on the issue that matters - the details of the voting record - never knew them, never a factor.