NY Times And Hussein Caught Trying To Erase His History - Video Proof
Predictably, The New York Times is shilling for Barack Hussein Obama…in an article in todays NYT, we read this:
But important nuances appear to have been lost in the partisan salvos, particularly on Mr. McCain’s side. An examination of Mr. Obama’s numerous public statements on the subjects indicates that he has consistently condemned Hamas as a “terrorist organization,” has not sought the group’s support and does not advocate immediate, direct or unconditional negotiations with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president. (emphasis mine)…
Larry Rohter, who wrote the NYT article goes on to quota an Obama adviser:
Susan E. Rice, a former State Department and National Security Council official who is a foreign policy adviser to the Democratic candidate, said that “for political purposes, Senator Obama’s opponents on the right have distorted and reframed” his views. Mr. McCain and his surrogates have repeatedly stated that Mr. Obama would be willing to meet “unconditionally” with Mr. Ahmadinejad. But Dr. Rice said that this was not the case for Iran or any other so-called “rogue” state. Mr. Obama believes “that engagement at the presidential level, at the appropriate time and with the appropriate preparation, can be used to leverage the change we need,” Dr. Rice said. “But nobody said he would initiate contacts at the presidential level; that requires due preparation and advance work.” (emphasis mine)…
Um…yo, Dickhead. Check out the video:
In case there are any deaf people here, below is a transcript of the key point in question:
QUESTION: In 1982, Anwar Sadat traveled to Israel, a trip that resulted in a peace agreement that has lasted ever since.
In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?
OBAMA: I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration — is ridiculous.
It never ceases to amaze me how the two Dem candidates just flat out and out lie on camera and in print, when all the while (and they have to know it) evidence exists for millions to observe, that exposes their lie.
Actually kind of creepy really. Think about it…
Nods to LGF.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
Pretty simple.
May 10th, 2008 at 1:44 pmThey know the lib mainscream press is gonna give ‘em a pass.
Hope I’m wrong I’ll be surprised if ANY media coverage other than blogs, etc., is given to the blatant lie.
I believe we all know that bloggers, both right and left, are making a huge difference in how people perceive candidates; however, clearly it is the right-wing bloggers that are making a greater difference for the simple reason that the mainstream media is preposterously left wing already.
I wonder how long it will be before online exposure of blatant lies and fraud will be given the credit it deserves.
If this guy were any bigger a lying sack of shit, his name would be John Kerry.
May 10th, 2008 at 1:51 pmI’d vote for Kerry before I’d vote for Obama
May 10th, 2008 at 2:53 pmI forgot what an asswipe Silky is. “…that we believe in equality, that we believe in diversity…”
If the rest of the world doesn’t think we believe in equality by now, then they can “kill my royal Scottish ass.” And, as for diversity, it’s not the goal, dipstick, it’s the result.
May 10th, 2008 at 3:48 pmYou lie O’Bambam, you lie!
May 10th, 2008 at 6:31 pm