What's new

Hows this for a stimulus?

You may want to check those facts on RECENT NEWS instead of old articles? :blink:

I really wouldn't call an article in The American Spectator as a source for unbiased facts. More like a someones view of the "facts", just like moveon.org.

Since the article in politifact is in response to something Rep. Bachmann said May 6 2009 I would say its rather recent and not old.
 
I really wouldn't call an article in The American Spectator as a source for unbiased facts. More like a someones view of the "facts", just like moveon.org.

Since the article in politifact is in response to something Rep. Bachmann said May 6 2009 I would say its rather recent and not old.
What ever makes you feel hopey changey...

BTW lies do have a way of turning around for...the truth.

NYT Finally Admits It Spiked Obama/ACORN Corruption Story

But im sure you will deflect that as well.

Carry on.
 
Heres hopey change for you...

A new White House policy on permissible lobbying on economic recovery and stimulus projects has taken a decidedly anti-First Amendment turn. It's a classic illustration of Big Government trying to control every aspect of a particular activity and in the process running up against civil liberty.

Check out this passage from a post on the White House blog by Norm Eisen, Special Counsel to the President on Ethics and Government Reform (emphasis added):

White House moves to restrict criticism of stimulus projects

"First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program.

"Second, we will focus the restriction on oral communications to target the scenario where concerns about merit-based decision-making are greatest –after competitive grant applications are submitted and before awards are made. Once such applications are on file, the competition should be strictly on the merits. To that end, comments (unless initiated by an agency official) must be in writing and will be posted on the Internet for every American to see.

"Third, we will continue to require immediate internet disclosure of all other communications with registered lobbyists. If registered lobbyists have conversations or meetings before an application is filed, a form must be completed and posted to each agency’s website documenting the contact."
The key passage is the reference to expanding regulation from registered lobbyists to "anyone else exerting influence on the process.

This is the Camel's nose under the tent, being poked because of special circumstances. Let government restrict political expression - i.e. lobbying of government officials regarding policy - in one small, supposedly specialized area and not long after the specialized area starts expanding. Eventually, all political expression regarding all policy will become subject to government regulation.
 
What does that story have to do with the claims that billions of dollars were going directly into the coffers of ACORN? Seems like you are the one who is deflecting.
Problem connecting the dots? ACORN is toxic as they try harder and harder to backpedal and CYA, they are being exposed.

End of story. :lol:
 
I really wouldn't call an article in The American Spectator as a source for unbiased facts. More like a someones view of the "facts", just like moveon.org.

Since the article in politifact is in response to something Rep. Bachmann said May 6 2009 I would say its rather recent and not old.


But Factcheck.org is a totally unbiased licensed source approved by you?
 
But Factcheck.org is a totally unbiased licensed source approved by you?

I see you are still mad at factcheck for not endorsing that little fantasy being sold by the likes of Berg, Corsi and other assorted charlatans.
 
Hmmm...............http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89612
 
No...I'm wary of bias from the backers of that site.

Seems to me that factcheck will call to the carpet any politician or group, no matter their political leanings, that plays loose with the facts. Compare that to charltons like Corsi and Berg.
 
Seems to me that factcheck will call to the carpet any politician or group, no matter their political leanings, that plays loose with the facts. Compare that to charltons like Corsi and Berg.

Charlatan......

I guess I'm supposed to get all twisted up over your diss of those two? :lol:

They aren't the point of the matter.....

Its a Constitutional thingy Trip Seven.....you ought to know about that....your first 30 seconds in the Navy should have put you on that track.

You and this country have strayed so far from the Constitution by twisting and tweaking issues to satisfy your own ego's. :down:
 
barvo 777 , bravo ....

very good debating points ... you hit your opponets from the left and you jabbed them from the right ...


good job! :up:


while i don't care to tango anymore , i still enjoy seeing reason win the day ...
 
Charlatan......

I guess I'm supposed to get all twisted up over your diss of those two? :lol:

They aren't the point of the matter.....

Its a Constitutional thingy Trip Seven.....you ought to know about that....your first 30 seconds in the Navy should have put you on that track.

You and this country have strayed so far from the Constitution by twisting and tweaking issues to satisfy your own ego's. :down:

It must have bothered you a little, you responded.

I really love the lecture about the Constitution. This coming from someone who can't understand the concept that it's up to the accuser to prove their case. Or who says things he can't support with any facts
 

Latest posts

Back
Top