White House says it contacted candidate about jobs

Onceler said:
Exactly; I agreed with your clear sentiment that all hacks do is make loads of excuses about this behavior, which is certainly negative (and surely, you see it as a negative, correct? Otherwise, why would you characterize leftie comments as "excuses"?)

Then, I added my own thoughts, which you - once again, with your reading comprehension issues - seem to have construed as my putting words in your mouth, or something like that.

It was an extremely defensive reaction. My only conclusion could be that you really don't like anyone on the left agreeing with you.
Click to expand...

so you honestly are saying YOUR opinion is that he should be impeached and this is the most egregious action in a while....yes or no?

and you never expressly agreed with the OP, you only said you were agreeing with me AFTER you mentioned impeachment
 
Yurt said:
red herring....

if you want to start a thread about reagan, do so....it is wrong no matter who does it...but i am not surprised by your running away from the subject of this thread
Click to expand...

Topspin said:
Spurt is funny, don't attack the Conservative Icon on this thread for setting the precedent for Obama. LOL

Junior law student's faux outrage at Politicians playing politics.
Click to expand...

the board moron makes another lie because he can't read past a 1st grade level

care to take back your comments now?
 
Yurt said:
so you honestly are saying YOUR opinion is that he should be impeached and this is the most egregious action in a while....yes or no?

and you never expressly agreed with the OP, you only said you were agreeing with me AFTER you mentioned impeachment
Click to expand...

Yes. See how easy that is - to just answer a question? You so rarely do that. And look...Dixie agrees with me, too!

As for agreeing w/ the OP, it was implied...I said I was agreeing with YOU, and you wrote the OP.

I really hope this helps. You seem to be having a tough time....
 
Yurt said:
wtf are you babbling about? damn if he does and damn if he doesn't? are you actually claiming onceler is agreeing with me?

and be specific on what i am full of shit on....or else recant your lie

i really am not going to answer your post, it is full of shit, rude and has no desire for any honest debate....if you can't understand that people should be accountable under the law, then you should take a step a back and reflect on what you are really doing in life.

and hypocrite...why don't you tell us what YOU want the fallout to be? i laugh at your intellectual dishonesty and outright hypocrisy...its why you always come to oncelers defense and aid when he starts flailing in his debates with me
Click to expand...

Riiiiiiiiiiight...not man enough to answer my questions but still expects me to answer questions he has...

typical Yurtsie.
 
They announced this because they knew Romanoff would be coming out and giving a statement on this. Worse, today the e-mail that Mesina sent him was aired.

This will definitely gain legs. It's taken about 9 months to even get in the news.
 
Onceler said:
Yes. See how easy that is - to just answer a question? You so rarely do that. And look...Dixie agrees with me, too!

As for agreeing w/ the OP, it was implied...I said I was agreeing with YOU, and you wrote the OP.

I really hope this helps. You seem to be having a tough time....
Click to expand...

well dunceler....i DISAGREE with you, this is not an impeachable offense and is certaintly not the most egregious thing in a while and i'm quite surprised you feel this way, i really believed you were bullshitting....your stance is extreme and the fact that dixie agrees with you is quite amusing :)

as we can see, i was right, you never agreed with me and no, it was not implied, you brought up agree when i called you out on impeachment etc..

like i told zappy (which the idiot couldn't even figure out)....people should be held accountable under the law...i support whatever the laws allows for punishment
 
Cypress said:
It must not be illegal if Saint Ronald Reagan did it, and faced no repercussions.

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/2791/hayakawareagansestakoba.jpg
Click to expand...
Did the Reagan Administration come out and directly say they did it, with an awesome little e-mail trail? Was there, in fact, any evidence of this "suggestion" other than Hayakawa's "suggestion" that it took place? Did you, in fact, find it in connection with a story that said that Maureen Reagan denied it ever happened? Was Hayakawa using a bit of desperate "suggestion" in order to gain some sympathy?

Was it something that happened in two or more Senate races, like this time? How many more of these "suggestions" were there, then and now?

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Click to expand...
 
Damocles said:
Did the Reagan Administration come out and directly say they did it, with an awesome little e-mail trail? Was there, in fact, any evidence of this "suggestion" other than Hayakawa's "suggestion" that it took place? Did you, in fact, find it in connection with a story that said that Maureen Reagan denied it ever happened? Was Hayakawa using a bit of desperate "suggestion" in order to gain some sympathy?

Was it something that happened in two or more Senate races, like this time? How many more of these "suggestions" were there, then and now?
Click to expand...

**crickets chirping**
 
Damocles said:
Did the Reagan Administration come out and directly say they did it, with an awesome little e-mail trail? Was there, in fact, any evidence of this "suggestion" other than Hayakawa's "suggestion" that it took place? Did you, in fact, find it in connection with a story that said that Maureen Reagan denied it ever happened? Was Hayakawa using a bit of desperate "suggestion" in order to gain some sympathy?

Was it something that happened in two or more Senate races, like this time? How many more of these "suggestions" were there, then and now?
Click to expand...


That's hilarious. Did you read the article? Maureen Reagan may have denied it (and I think it is hilarious that Maureen Reagan can affirm or deny whether someone else did something. Is she omniscient?), but the administration official actually quoted in the story makes an offer to her opponent in that very newspaper article:
"If the senator chooses, on his own initiative [*wink*], not to run for reelection, I'm sure the president would be willing to offer him a substantial administration post."
Click to expand...

I can see why this was reported in Reagan's case considering his daughter was running in the primary, but it wasn't illegal then and it isn't illegal now.
 
NigelTufnel said:
That's hilarious. Did you read the article? Maureen Reagan may have denied it (and I think it is hilarious that Maureen Reagan can affirm or deny whether someone else did something. Is she omniscient?), but the administration official actually quoted in the story makes an offer to her opponent in that very newspaper article:

I can see why this was reported in Reagan's case considering his daughter was running in the primary, but it wasn't illegal then and it isn't illegal now.
Click to expand...

according to the law it is illegal, if it wasn't...why is obama spinning so furiously over his two incidents?
 
Yurt said:
according to the law it is illegal, if it wasn't...why is obama spinning so furiously over his two incidents?
Click to expand...


According to your reading of the law, "it" is illegal. According to any sane, rational person's reading of the law, "it" isn't.
 
Dixie said:
Which totally explains why the Obama administration is obfuscating so furiously! They are obviously not sane and rational people!
Click to expand...


This is what the Republicans do. They trump up these dumbass nontroversies over and over and over again when normal people respond to their bullshit they chant "spin!" and "obfuscation!" It's stupid.
 
If there was anything wrong with this I would have reported it.

I didn’t feel it was right for me after being called by a former President of the United States to talk about the details of that conversation.
 
Yurt said:
red herring....

if you want to start a thread about reagan, do so....it is wrong no matter who does it...but i am not surprised by your running away from the subject of this thread
Click to expand...

It's so easy to say "it is wrong no matter who does it", especially when your guy is dead.

But the fact is I can't find anything showing that people quoted law back in 1982 to say that the Teflon president did something wrong. His offer to Hayakawa was buried in history until conservatives decided to make an issue over Sestak.
 
If what Sestak said is true "I was offered a job to drop out of the race" then that IS illegal. There are no fine lines, politics as usual, or any of the other lame excuses being proffered. Either it happened or it didn't.

This year there is a political climate of "no more politics as usual" coming from the public. This is especially true since "The One" campaigned on "No more politics as usual"....
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top