Convention Watch

Preview excerpts from Palin speech

Heh. Yeah, we have Fox, which also has liberals on it like Alan Colmes. Those on the left have CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS. With those ratios I can't understand why Fox rattles the left so. They don't own 100 percent anymore.

I just saw a preview of the Palin speech and have a feeling that those on the left might have been better off not accusing the woman of a fake, incestuous pregnancy and going after her 17 year old daughter. If they had treated her decently, just going after her record in office, there would probably not be that many people interested in watching and everyone but Fox might have been able to just talk over her speech like they did Fred Thompson's. With all the "scandal" this will be one of the most watched speeches of the two weeks, if not number one, and I don't think the pundits will be able to hide this one. If she bombs Dems may feel better about sinking so low, but if she delivers it even half coherently it could hurt.

Here is a link to some of the excerpts from the speech preview and you can see a livestream of the speech here.

 

they threw him under the bus and then jumped in it ran him over and left him there. Now they are ticked off at him. HYPOCRITS

 

Lieberman didn't do to well on the Old Truth-O-Meter, but one day you folks might learn what we Democrat's already knew; you just can't trust him!

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/personalities/joe-lieberman/

 

The AP has already written the story, in the past tense. I know this is SOP, but it still cracks me up when news services write a report based on a press release and post it as if it has already happened.

 

Agree on facts, or not, Lieberman did what he thought was right. He didn't have any incentive to lie or to endorse McCain. He will pay a mighty price. Dems are all over the internet threatening to "get" him and worse. And I am sure they will. A CBS commentator said he was doing it only because he is friends with McCain and wants a cabinet post. That doesn't make much sense considering how favored Obama is to win, but the reporter had to say something to blunt the message Lieberman had just delivered and I guess that was the best he could come up with. If Lieberman was doing this out of self interest he would have tried to mend fences in the party he has belonged to his entire life. You can disagree, but I think he honestly believes McCain would be better for the country.

 

So facts be damned as long as it meets the GOP and Lieberman's agenda?

 

Or better for Israel, anyway.

 

Caution for all who want to catch the Palin speech - The GOP is moving the schedule up so that they can get all of Palin's speech in, which is now going to be longer than they originally planned. If you want to hear it you better have the TV on at 10 pm.

 

The Democratic establishment supported Lieberman in the primary; it was a grass roots effort that put Ned Lamont over the top. After he lost, then he ran as an independent against the nominee of his own party for that seat. If the Republicans had put forth a stronger candidate, Lieberman probably would not be in the Senate today.

 

Why Israel? Why every American politician when run for president has to come out and said it out loud that they will protect Israel at all cost? What is at stake?

 

Israel hits a little closer to home for Lieberman for religious reasons.

 

Surely you jest. Poor little Alan Colmes barely gets a word in edgewise. Of those other media outlets you name, I agree MSNBC has a liberal bias; Fox has the most right-wing bias, and the rest run the gamut in between. As Stephen Colbert says, reality has a well-known liberal bias.

 

I don't think the network stations aired speeches from the Democratic Convention until later in the night. Most stations carried regular television shows. CNN covered every minute of the Democratic Convention and is now doing the same for the Republicans. I believe most every station is carrying the GOP's Veep speech tonight at 10:00 pm.

Seems to me that if someone cannot find these speeches on television they could stream them off the internet. I have even had to do that with ear phones because I needed to be near a family member who did not want to watch the Convention.

I'm more interested in the issues than this stuff.

Sherry

 

If you don't get the humour, maybe you are?

 

Hell fire that was hysterical! :lol:

 

ask the peanut farmer he never supported them.

 

I love it, the Truth-O-Meter stated that the only out right lie last night came from the Preacher. :jester:

Of course the other characters last night didn't do much better!

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

 

More fact checks about lies told last night from Fact Check (Annenburg)

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/gop_convention_spin.html

 

Will check the others if I have time, but off the top of my head without a doubt in this world know that Obama opposed the surge. Opposed funding for the surge. Vehemently. Said it would never work. Regardless of which version of a bill he voted for or against (or if it was one of his many votes of "present") he forcefully, unambiguously opposed funding the surge with every fiber of his being. McCain was in favor of the surge all along. If you are saying Obama told everyone he opposed it, but still voted to fund it then that would make him not only a hypocrite, but a nightmare of a President to trust to convey to the world where he stands and what he would do.

I have read that tonight on O'Reilly he finally admits what has been clear for some time, that the surge has been successful beyond "his wildest dreams" or something to that effect. That is not saying much though because he never dreamed (wild or otherwise) that it could work even when those in the military said it could. And, by the way, withholding funds for the surge is the same as withholding funds for troops on the battlefield because the "surge" was more than just the additional troops sent in and even if it weren't, the troops that were already in the battlefield needed the additional reinforcements in order to win the war. Obama was in favor of bringing the troops home before the surge even had a chance to work. He was in favor of bringing them home in defeat. Even many who originally opposed the war were not all for retreating in defeat. That is a fact that cannot be wiggled out of. He owns it and I thought he still stood by that decision. Maybe not.

Oh, and it didn't get much coverage due to the conventions, but the Anbar province was turned over to the Iraqis this week -- something many said was absolutely impossible.

 

OK so you are saying it is OK to lie, because in your heart you know he dosen't like it? Even when John McCain advised the Senate to do exactly what Obama did?

Just checking, because until you justified the same thing last night, you seemed like a straight shooter. :banghead: