• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Odrama the Liar at it again

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
President Obama sometimes strayed from the facts or made dubious claims during his hour-long evening news conference March 24.

* He said his budget projections are based on economic assumptions that “are perfectly consistent with what Blue Chip forecasters out there are saying.” Not true. The average projection by leading private economists is now for substantially less economic growth than the administration’s forecast assumes.

* He said he is reducing “nondefense discretionary spending” to less than it was under the past four presidents. Not true. His own forecast for the final budget of his four-year term puts this figure higher than in many years under Reagan, Clinton or either Bush.

* He said he was “angry” about “inexcusable” bonuses paid to AIG executives. But he glossed over the fact that his own aides insisted on watering down a Senate-passed amendment that might have prevented payment of such bonuses.

* He repeated that his budget is projected to cut the federal deficit in half by the end of his term. That’s true, but deficits also are projected to shoot up again later unless big policy changes are made.

One of the most dramatic claims came not from Obama but from a reporter who asked about children “who are sleeping under bridges and in tents across the country” and who said 1 child in 50 is “homeless.” The truth is far less dramatic. The study he cited doesn’t just count children with no roof over their heads. It also includes those whose families are staying with friends or family members, in hotels and motels, in trailer parks or in housing deemed to be “substandard.”


More Here
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Why don't you use the real headline instead of creating an inflammatory one? Just the other day in another thread this was discussed and one or more moderators agreed the use of the word 'liar" is not acceptable.

Weren't you one of the people who gave me a hard time some months ago because I did not use the headline in an article I quoted?
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Why don't you use the real headline instead of creating an inflammatory one? Just the other day in another thread this was discussed and one or more moderators agreed the use of the word 'liar" is not acceptable.


He out right lied. That is the point of the thread. It is his habit

Weren't you one of the people who gave me a hard time some months ago because I did not use the headline in an article I quoted?


Find the post
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
He out right lied. That is the point of the thread. It is his habit

What you scream is lieing others can interprete asexaggerations and misstatements. You never used such language when your hero, GB, was lieing throughtout your administration.

But you really should not create inflammatory titles.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
What you scream is lieing others can interprete asexaggerations and misstatements. You never used such language when your hero, GB, was lieing throughtout your administration.

But you really should not create inflammatory titles.


My Hero? apparently you do not read my posts. Of course the reality is your language was intended to be inflammatory. And by the way we all have typo's but good grief man use spell check and stop letting your emotions rush your posting.

Any way an exaggeration is an intended lie. But you do not want to deal with the substance of this thread so like all good libbies do you work to derail it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

targus

New Member
What you scream is lieing others can interprete asexaggerations and misstatements. You never used such language when your hero, GB, was lieing throughtout your administration.

But you really should not create inflammatory titles.

Maybe you should take a few minutes off here and go take a walk to calm yourself down. This isn't that big of a deal.
 

LeBuick

New Member
* He said his budget projections are based on economic assumptions that “are perfectly consistent with what Blue Chip forecasters out there are saying.” Not true. The average projection by leading private economists is now for substantially less economic growth than the administration’s forecast assumes.

If you had of read further, they admitted the economy and Blue Chip predictions changed since Obama gathered his numbers.

As CBO Director Doug Elmendorf explains, weaker economic news in the two months between the administration’s budget and the newest Blue Chip (and CBO) forecasts led many economists to produce a far gloomier picture. This can be seen in the chart below.

* He said he is reducing “nondefense discretionary spending” to less than it was under the past four presidents. Not true. His own forecast for the final budget of his four-year term puts this figure higher than in many years under Reagan, Clinton or either Bush.

Two things... Factcheck spits hairs by specifying not "EXECTLY" true which means it could be true depending how you look at it.

And anyway, it's not exactly true that the figure would be "lower than it was under Clinton" or any of the other presidents he mentions.

Secondly, If you would have listened to the press conference, he admitted his budget didn't look as well in the later years but his logic was as the economic picture changes, new budgets will be proposed and current issues relating to those times will be addressed. IOW, it doesn't matter what budget he proposes today because it won't be in place years from now.

* He said he was “angry” about “inexcusable” bonuses paid to AIG executives. But he glossed over the fact that his own aides insisted on watering down a Senate-passed amendment that might have prevented payment of such bonuses.

But as you stated in the other thread, it would have both morally and legally wrong without this wording. You can't let a guy work a year under a contract then rescind it on payday. Isn't that what you said? Seems like his folks did well and fair.

* He repeated that his budget is projected to cut the federal deficit in half by the end of his term. That’s true, but deficits also are projected to shoot up again later unless big policy changes are made.

Again, he finished that statement by saying policies will change and future budgets will be submitted so this one he is submitting now won't be in effect by the end of his term.

One of the most dramatic claims came not from Obama but from a reporter who asked about children “who are sleeping under bridges and in tents across the country” and who said 1 child in 50 is “homeless.” The truth is far less dramatic. The study he cited doesn’t just count children with no roof over their heads. It also includes those whose families are staying with friends or family members, in hotels and motels, in trailer parks or in housing deemed to be “substandard.”

This is still dramatic no matter how you water it down. It is a sign that times are bad...

The study he cited doesn’t just count children with no roof over their heads. It also includes those whose families are staying with friends or family members, in hotels and motels, in trailer parks or in housing deemed to be “substandard.”

Chappell would be right to say that by any estimate the number of homeless children is significant even in good times, and is likely to be higher now. A 2000 study from the Urban Institute estimated that 1 million children (1.4 percent) were using assistance services and shelters at some point each year, "despite a booming economy and the lowest unemployment rate in a generation."

Chappell would also be justified in saying too many children actually are "sleeping under bridges and in tents." A 2008 report from the U.S. Conference of Mayors gives a rough idea of how many that might be. Based on data from 23 cities, the report estimated that on an average night in an average city 543 people in families (both children and adults) and 268 unaccompanied youth were sleeping on the street. That's an unfortunate figure, but nowhere close to 1 child in 50.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
If you had of read further, they admitted the economy and Blue Chip predictions changed since Obama gathered his numbers.

If you want to make assumptions about what I have read go ahead if it eases your mind. I am here for ya. I posted the article as it was written. It isn't about what I may or may not have read. However, he incriminates himself by further making any statements knowing the numbers changed.


Two things... Factcheck spits hairs by specifying not "EXECTLY" true which means it could be true depending how you look at it.

No it means their may be some element of truth but the overall picture given is false.

Secondly, If you would have listened to the press conference, he admitted his budget didn't look as well in the later years but his logic was as the economic picture changes, new budgets will be proposed and current issues relating to those times will be addressed. IOW, it doesn't matter what budget he proposes today because it won't be in place years from now.

Well you have to know what you are doing to be able to handle that.


But as you stated in the other thread, it would have both morally and legally wrong without this wording. You can't let a guy work a year under a contract then rescind it on payday. Isn't that what you said? Seems like his folks did well and fair.

He feigned anger when he said "He said he was “angry” about “inexcusable” bonuses paid to AIG executives." All the while knowing about them. Quite dishonest.


Again, he finished that statement by saying policies will change and future budgets will be submitted so this one he is submitting now won't be in effect by the end of his term.

Which has nothing to do with his statement.

This is still dramatic no matter how you water it down. It is a sign that times are bad...

Well Odrama certainly knows how to create crisis when there is none.
 

JustChristian

New Member
If you want to make assumptions about what I have read go ahead if it eases your mind. I am here for ya. I posted the article as it was written. It isn't about what I may or may not have read. However, he incriminates himself by further making any statements knowing the numbers changed.




No it means their may be some element of truth but the overall picture given is false.



Well you have to know what you are doing to be able to handle that.




He feigned anger when he said "He said he was “angry” about “inexcusable” bonuses paid to AIG executives." All the while knowing about them. Quite dishonest.




Which has nothing to do with his statement.



Well Odrama certainly knows how to create crisis when there is none.

Ask the people in CA and FLA whose home values have gone down by 50% whether there's a crisis. Ask the rapidly growing number of unemployed whether there's a crisis. Ask the Big Three auto makers whether they could go bankrupt. That is reality. You dealing with fantasy.
 

tinytim

<img src =/tim2.jpg>
When you are looking for a crisis you can always find one....

Walmart is doing good.. Saturn is selling cars...

Only businesses that deserve to close are in crisis...

And if a business can't keep up.. it should close down.. move out of the way, and let the other businesses that can keep up.. thrive...

But no.. the socialist agenda is to punish thrivers and award losers!

The big sin in America today is to be wealthy.
I should thank God I am poor.. make less than 16,000 a yr..
I won't have to worry about Obama stealing my wealth.. I HAVE NONE...

BUT I am not going to covet my neighbors wealth.. he chose a profession that pays well.. He shouldn't have to pay for others that will not work, or be subject to wealth distribution.. just because someone is Jealous of him, and "don't think" he should be paid that much.

God called me to pastor... my wealth will be in Heaven.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Ask the people in CA and FLA whose home values have gone down by 50% whether there's a crisis. Ask the rapidly growing number of unemployed whether there's a crisis. Ask the Big Three auto makers whether they could go bankrupt. That is reality. You dealing with fantasy.


Maybe you should look up in the right hand corner of my post and see what state I am in.
 

carpro

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
He out right lied. That is the point of the thread. It is his habit

True.

And the media will not call him on it.

He can say whatever he wants, lie as much as he wants...

and his lemmings just swoon and kiss his feet.

Craziest thing I ever saw.:BangHead:
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
True.

And the media will not call him on it.

He can say whatever he wants, lie as much as he wants...

and his lemmings just swoon and kiss his feet.

Craziest thing I ever saw.:BangHead:


Isn't it interesting how criticism is slanderous hate. But the criticism of Bush is just whats needed. Any criticism of Bush is spread on this board like there is no tomorrow but when it is odrama they want to work to shut threads down. :tonofbricks:
 

JustChristian

New Member
President Obama sometimes strayed from the facts or made dubious claims during his hour-long evening news conference March 24.

* He said his budget projections are based on economic assumptions that “are perfectly consistent with what Blue Chip forecasters out there are saying.” Not true. The average projection by leading private economists is now for substantially less economic growth than the administration’s forecast assumes.

* He said he is reducing “nondefense discretionary spending” to less than it was under the past four presidents. Not true. His own forecast for the final budget of his four-year term puts this figure higher than in many years under Reagan, Clinton or either Bush.

* He said he was “angry” about “inexcusable” bonuses paid to AIG executives. But he glossed over the fact that his own aides insisted on watering down a Senate-passed amendment that might have prevented payment of such bonuses.

* He repeated that his budget is projected to cut the federal deficit in half by the end of his term. That’s true, but deficits also are projected to shoot up again later unless big policy changes are made.

One of the most dramatic claims came not from Obama but from a reporter who asked about children “who are sleeping under bridges and in tents across the country” and who said 1 child in 50 is “homeless.” The truth is far less dramatic. The study he cited doesn’t just count children with no roof over their heads. It also includes those whose families are staying with friends or family members, in hotels and motels, in trailer parks or in housing deemed to be “substandard.”


More Here

Revmitchell

Old 10-25-2008, 10:53 AM

It appears to be a certified copy which is more than what I have...
Posting a photo on the internet is not releasing it. Factcheck is owned by the Annenburg Corp which has always had close ties to Ayers and Obama. Nothign is credible about it.

So Rev, you now believe Factcheck when they support your anti-Obama rhetoric when previously you said "Nothing is credible about FactCheck." Which is it?
 

LadyEagle

<b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
Isn't it interesting how criticism is slanderous hate. But the criticism of Bush is just whats needed. Any criticism of Bush is spread on this board like there is no tomorrow but when it is odrama they want to work to shut threads down. :tonofbricks:


You know, I did some perusing through some of the BB archives last night (to refresh my memory) and there are multiple, multiple, too many to count, threads and comments bashing Bush. I was not a GW Bush fan by any means, but some of the comments on this forum were beyond the pale. But thpse were opinions and as long as there were no personal attacks against other BB members, I let the horrible accusations, smears, allegations, etc. against GW Bush stand - some were downright embarrassing and so disrespectful of the Office of President.

For as long as I have been a mod on this forum (5-6 years??), I have witnessed all of the Bush bashing. I have endured moderating this politics forum through two brutal Presidental Elections. Well, times have now changed and the shoe is on the other foot. Bush was a peach compared to this new guy, IMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JustChristian

New Member
When you are looking for a crisis you can always find one....

Walmart is doing good.. Saturn is selling cars...

Only businesses that deserve to close are in crisis...

And if a business can't keep up.. it should close down.. move out of the way, and let the other businesses that can keep up.. thrive...

But no.. the socialist agenda is to punish thrivers and award losers!

The big sin in America today is to be wealthy.
I should thank God I am poor.. make less than 16,000 a yr..
I won't have to worry about Obama stealing my wealth.. I HAVE NONE...

BUT I am not going to covet my neighbors wealth.. he chose a profession that pays well.. He shouldn't have to pay for others that will not work, or be subject to wealth distribution.. just because someone is Jealous of him, and "don't think" he should be paid that much.

God called me to pastor... my wealth will be in Heaven.

Your head is in the sand. Using this logic there wasn't a war going on during WW2. You can always say a war is on, right?
 

JustChristian

New Member
President Obama sometimes strayed from the facts or made dubious claims during his hour-long evening news conference March 24.

* He said his budget projections are based on economic assumptions that “are perfectly consistent with what Blue Chip forecasters out there are saying.” Not true. The average projection by leading private economists is now for substantially less economic growth than the administration’s forecast assumes.

* He said he is reducing “nondefense discretionary spending” to less than it was under the past four presidents. Not true. His own forecast for the final budget of his four-year term puts this figure higher than in many years under Reagan, Clinton or either Bush.

* He said he was “angry” about “inexcusable” bonuses paid to AIG executives. But he glossed over the fact that his own aides insisted on watering down a Senate-passed amendment that might have prevented payment of such bonuses.

* He repeated that his budget is projected to cut the federal deficit in half by the end of his term. That’s true, but deficits also are projected to shoot up again later unless big policy changes are made.

One of the most dramatic claims came not from Obama but from a reporter who asked about children “who are sleeping under bridges and in tents across the country” and who said 1 child in 50 is “homeless.” The truth is far less dramatic. The study he cited doesn’t just count children with no roof over their heads. It also includes those whose families are staying with friends or family members, in hotels and motels, in trailer parks or in housing deemed to be “substandard.”


More Here

Which is it Rev? Were you not telling the truth back then, or now?
 

LeBuick

New Member
I was not a GW Bush fan by any means, but some of the comments on this forum were beyond the pale. But thpse were opinions and as long as there were no personal attacks against other BB members, I let the horrible accusations, smears, allegations, etc. against GW Bush stand - some were downright embarrassing and so disrespectful of the Office of President.

I've seen some Obama bashing that would fit this category also. Does this mean you will use your mod powers to stop this disrespectful slandering of the office?
 
Top