Deal or No Deal?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In the Ohio debate, he raised eyebrows by saying he would renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, a blatant attempt to pander to Ohio voters of the protectionist persuasion.

Afterwards, one of his advisers tried to calm nervous Canadian officials, telling them Mr. Obama wasn't serious and that the statements were more political talk than serious policy. The sordid episode makes the Illinois senator look either amateurish or duplicitous -- or both.

Repeating this known untruth doesn't make it a fact. It only shows that Hillary's camp continues to sling mud as it seems to be all they have. Clap clap. Point point. How pathetic.

Untruth? Sling mud?

1. The memo (a concrete evidence) from the Canadian Consul who met with Goolsbee was leaked.

source

2. Obama campaign denied the story

3. then Obama said his campaign provided Canada no such reassurance while Goolsbee maintained that DeMora "misinterpreted" his comments.

4. then the Canadian Consulate issued a statement diplomatically finessing the issue.

5. now the Canadian government is investigating as to who leaqked the document.

6. As it now stands, its a "he says he says' between Goolsbie and the Canadian Consul General with the latter conceding that they may have misinterpreted the message while being profusely apolgetic (ok make that regretting) the brouhaha which they fear might give the impression that the Canadians are interfering in the US election.

You may see it as untruth I call that "caught red-handed'

Since it matters little to none what you call it, you can call it anything you want. At the end of the day, all there is is a memo written by a staffer of the Canadian Consulate in Chicago. There's nothing evidencing that what the Obama campaign has said is untrue or wrong. Nothing but a memo written by one staffer.

ETA: Just to illustrate this very simple point, when I attend meetings that are manually captured in minutes, the attendees whose verbal contributions during the meeting have been captured are afforded an opportunity to review the draft and submit changes / clarifications where needed before the minutes are finalized and distributed and serve as documentation. At the end of the day, until I sign off on what I am quoted to have said, the manually captured means nothing at all. That's common practice.

You're right. At the end of the day, what matters is that it mattered to those voters in Ohia and Texas and Rhode Island who picked Hillary as their choice for dem. nominee last Tuesday.

What matters is that this shows that smear and mud is all Hillary has to offer. Now, you and the likes of you might find that uplifting and worth celebrating. Me and those looking for substance and vision instead of smear and mud will deny her the support she'd to succeed W.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

What matters is that this shows that smear and mud is all Hillary has to offer. Now, you and the likes of you might find that uplifting and worth celebrating. Me and those looking for substance and vision instead of smear and mud will deny her the support she'd to succeed W.

Word.

[metta 0]

In the Ohio debate, he raised eyebrows by saying he would renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, a blatant attempt to pander to Ohio voters of the protectionist persuasion.

Afterwards, one of his advisers tried to calm nervous Canadian officials, telling them Mr. Obama wasn't serious and that the statements were more political talk than serious policy. The sordid episode makes the Illinois senator look either amateurish or duplicitous -- or both.

Repeating this known untruth doesn't make it a fact. It only shows that Hillary's camp continues to sling mud as it seems to be all they have. Clap clap. Point point. How pathetic.

Untruth? Sling mud?

1. The memo (a concrete evidence) from the Canadian Consul who met with Goolsbee was leaked.

source

2. Obama campaign denied the story

3. then Obama said his campaign provided Canada no such reassurance while Goolsbee maintained that DeMora "misinterpreted" his comments.

4. then the Canadian Consulate issued a statement diplomatically finessing the issue.

5. now the Canadian government is investigating as to who leaqked the document.

6. As it now stands, its a "he says he says' between Goolsbie and the Canadian Consul General with the latter conceding that they may have misinterpreted the message while being profusely apolgetic (ok make that regretting) the brouhaha which they fear might give the impression that the Canadians are interfering in the US election.

You may see it as untruth I call that "caught red-handed'

Since it matters little to none what you call it, you can call it anything you want. At the end of the day, all there is is a memo written by a staffer of the Canadian Consulate in Chicago. There's nothing evidencing that what the Obama campaign has said is untrue or wrong. Nothing but a memo written by one staffer.

ETA: Just to illustrate this very simple point, when I attend meetings that are manually captured in minutes, the attendees whose verbal contributions during the meeting have been captured are afforded an opportunity to review the draft and submit changes / clarifications where needed before the minutes are finalized and distributed and serve as documentation. At the end of the day, until I sign off on what I am quoted to have said, the manually captured means nothing at all. That's common practice.

You're right. At the end of the day, what matters is that it mattered to those voters in Ohia and Texas and Rhode Island who picked Hillary as their choice for dem. nominee last Tuesday.

What matters is that this shows that smear and mud is all Hillary has to offer. Now, you and the likes of you might find that uplifting and worth celebrating. Me and those looking for substance and vision instead of smear and mud will deny her the support she'd to succeed W.

Yes, you have every right to assume away the smear and mud and the self-righteousness. 'Cause it's all in your "head" primed for two decades by the finest products from the Republican Dirt-Making Machine.

How ironic! B)

Edited March 7, 2008 by metta

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In the Ohio debate, he raised eyebrows by saying he would renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, a blatant attempt to pander to Ohio voters of the protectionist persuasion.

Afterwards, one of his advisers tried to calm nervous Canadian officials, telling them Mr. Obama wasn't serious and that the statements were more political talk than serious policy. The sordid episode makes the Illinois senator look either amateurish or duplicitous -- or both.

Repeating this known untruth doesn't make it a fact. It only shows that Hillary's camp continues to sling mud as it seems to be all they have. Clap clap. Point point. How pathetic.

Untruth? Sling mud?

1. The memo (a concrete evidence) from the Canadian Consul who met with Goolsbee was leaked.

source

2. Obama campaign denied the story

3. then Obama said his campaign provided Canada no such reassurance while Goolsbee maintained that DeMora "misinterpreted" his comments.

4. then the Canadian Consulate issued a statement diplomatically finessing the issue.

5. now the Canadian government is investigating as to who leaqked the document.

6. As it now stands, its a "he says he says' between Goolsbie and the Canadian Consul General with the latter conceding that they may have misinterpreted the message while being profusely apolgetic (ok make that regretting) the brouhaha which they fear might give the impression that the Canadians are interfering in the US election.

You may see it as untruth I call that "caught red-handed'

Since it matters little to none what you call it, you can call it anything you want. At the end of the day, all there is is a memo written by a staffer of the Canadian Consulate in Chicago. There's nothing evidencing that what the Obama campaign has said is untrue or wrong. Nothing but a memo written by one staffer.

ETA: Just to illustrate this very simple point, when I attend meetings that are manually captured in minutes, the attendees whose verbal contributions during the meeting have been captured are afforded an opportunity to review the draft and submit changes / clarifications where needed before the minutes are finalized and distributed and serve as documentation. At the end of the day, until I sign off on what I am quoted to have said, the manually captured means nothing at all. That's common practice.

You're right. At the end of the day, what matters is that it mattered to those voters in Ohia and Texas and Rhode Island who picked Hillary as their choice for dem. nominee last Tuesday.

What matters is that this shows that smear and mud is all Hillary has to offer. Now, you and the likes of you might find that uplifting and worth celebrating. Me and those looking for substance and vision instead of smear and mud will deny her the support she'd to succeed W.

Yes, you have every right to assume away the smear and mud and the self-righteousness. 'Cause it's all in your "head" primed for two decades by the finest products from the Republican Dirt-Making Machine.

How ironic! B)

There's no convincing evidence to any of the allegations that camp Clinton has thrown at Obama. None. They played the race card and everything else in the arsenal. They're playing dirty. Always have been and always will be. If you can't see that, then you've got issues. But go on supporting the politics of the past if that's what you think the country needs.

[rebeccajo 14]

Hmmm.

I wonder if the 'kitchen sink' image is really the kind of thing a female presidential candidate should propogate?

[Charuhans 0]

In the Ohio debate, he raised eyebrows by saying he would renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, a blatant attempt to pander to Ohio voters of the protectionist persuasion.

Afterwards, one of his advisers tried to calm nervous Canadian officials, telling them Mr. Obama wasn't serious and that the statements were more political talk than serious policy. The sordid episode makes the Illinois senator look either amateurish or duplicitous -- or both.

Repeating this known untruth doesn't make it a fact. It only shows that Hillary's camp continues to sling mud as it seems to be all they have. Clap clap. Point point. How pathetic.

Untruth? Sling mud?

1. The memo (a concrete evidence) from the Canadian Consul who met with Goolsbee was leaked.

source

2. Obama campaign denied the story

3. then Obama said his campaign provided Canada no such reassurance while Goolsbee maintained that DeMora "misinterpreted" his comments.

4. then the Canadian Consulate issued a statement diplomatically finessing the issue.

5. now the Canadian government is investigating as to who leaqked the document.

6. As it now stands, its a "he says he says' between Goolsbie and the Canadian Consul General with the latter conceding that they may have misinterpreted the message while being profusely apolgetic (ok make that regretting) the brouhaha which they fear might give the impression that the Canadians are interfering in the US election.

You may see it as untruth I call that "caught red-handed'

Since it matters little to none what you call it, you can call it anything you want. At the end of the day, all there is is a memo written by a staffer of the Canadian Consulate in Chicago. There's nothing evidencing that what the Obama campaign has said is untrue or wrong. Nothing but a memo written by one staffer.

ETA: Just to illustrate this very simple point, when I attend meetings that are manually captured in minutes, the attendees whose verbal contributions during the meeting have been captured are afforded an opportunity to review the draft and submit changes / clarifications where needed before the minutes are finalized and distributed and serve as documentation. At the end of the day, until I sign off on what I am quoted to have said, the manually captured means nothing at all. That's common practice.

You're right. At the end of the day, what matters is that it mattered to those voters in Ohia and Texas and Rhode Island who picked Hillary as their choice for dem. nominee last Tuesday.

What matters is that this shows that smear and mud is all Hillary has to offer. Now, you and the likes of you might find that uplifting and worth celebrating. Me and those looking for substance and vision instead of smear and mud will deny her the support she'd to succeed W.

Yes, you have every right to assume away the smear and mud and the self-righteousness. 'Cause it's all in your "head" primed for two decades by the finest products from the Republican Dirt-Making Machine.

How ironic! B)

There's no convincing evidence to any of the allegations that camp Clinton has thrown at Obama. None. They played the race card and everything else in the arsenal. They're playing dirty. Always have been and always will be. If you can't see that, then you've got issues. But go on supporting the politics of the past if that's what you think the country needs.

Crying Race Card = A Scoundrel's Last Refuge!!

Edited March 7, 2008 by Charuhans

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In the Ohio debate, he raised eyebrows by saying he would renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, a blatant attempt to pander to Ohio voters of the protectionist persuasion.

Afterwards, one of his advisers tried to calm nervous Canadian officials, telling them Mr. Obama wasn't serious and that the statements were more political talk than serious policy. The sordid episode makes the Illinois senator look either amateurish or duplicitous -- or both.

Repeating this known untruth doesn't make it a fact. It only shows that Hillary's camp continues to sling mud as it seems to be all they have. Clap clap. Point point. How pathetic.

Untruth? Sling mud?

1. The memo (a concrete evidence) from the Canadian Consul who met with Goolsbee was leaked.

source

2. Obama campaign denied the story

3. then Obama said his campaign provided Canada no such reassurance while Goolsbee maintained that DeMora "misinterpreted" his comments.

4. then the Canadian Consulate issued a statement diplomatically finessing the issue.

5. now the Canadian government is investigating as to who leaqked the document.

6. As it now stands, its a "he says he says' between Goolsbie and the Canadian Consul General with the latter conceding that they may have misinterpreted the message while being profusely apolgetic (ok make that regretting) the brouhaha which they fear might give the impression that the Canadians are interfering in the US election.

You may see it as untruth I call that "caught red-handed'

Since it matters little to none what you call it, you can call it anything you want. At the end of the day, all there is is a memo written by a staffer of the Canadian Consulate in Chicago. There's nothing evidencing that what the Obama campaign has said is untrue or wrong. Nothing but a memo written by one staffer.

ETA: Just to illustrate this very simple point, when I attend meetings that are manually captured in minutes, the attendees whose verbal contributions during the meeting have been captured are afforded an opportunity to review the draft and submit changes / clarifications where needed before the minutes are finalized and distributed and serve as documentation. At the end of the day, until I sign off on what I am quoted to have said, the manually captured means nothing at all. That's common practice.

You're right. At the end of the day, what matters is that it mattered to those voters in Ohia and Texas and Rhode Island who picked Hillary as their choice for dem. nominee last Tuesday.

What matters is that this shows that smear and mud is all Hillary has to offer. Now, you and the likes of you might find that uplifting and worth celebrating. Me and those looking for substance and vision instead of smear and mud will deny her the support she'd to succeed W.

Yes, you have every right to assume away the smear and mud and the self-righteousness. 'Cause it's all in your "head" primed for two decades by the finest products from the Republican Dirt-Making Machine.

How ironic! B)

There's no convincing evidence to any of the allegations that camp Clinton has thrown at Obama. None. They played the race card and everything else in the arsenal. They're playing dirty. Always have been and always will be. If you can't see that, then you've got issues. But go on supporting the politics of the past if that's what you think the country needs.

Crying Race Card = A Scoundrel's Last Refuge!!

Selective memory or actual amnesia?