It's Hemmer Time - All Comments

re: Obama camp cries foul.

Give me a break! — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:50:23 GMT

More conservative excuses for not getting the job done!

re: Obama camp cries foul.

Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:34:31 GMT

Give me a break!: Where have I heard the word "distraction" used before? Oh yeah! That's what Obama calls any facts or past history that pop up that make the Chosen One look bad...

I disagree with your assessment that abortion is a distraction. I think it is a huge issue with most Americans. I agree with you that I don't think the Bush Administration took on abortion as a priority. Maybe events like 9/11, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the issues like the energy crisis, illegal aliens, the economy, etc. got in the way...

re: Obama camp cries foul.

Give me a break! — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:39:43 GMT

I think abortion is a bigger distraction than an issue with most Americans. If a Republican President, with a Repulican Senate, with a Republican House, with a Repulican appointed Supreme Court can not stop abortion who can? The Repulicans use abortion as a political tool. I would like to see the people against abotion step up to the plate for once. Adopt a child, become a foster parent, put your money where your mouth is instead of wasting it on politicians who say one thing and do nothing!

re: Obama camp cries foul.

referee33 — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:49:22 GMT

Not having watched I must rely on your comments to be accurate and I'm sure they are. The abortion question is probably one of the hottest hot button issues ever. It is extremely difficult to look at both sides of the issue without emotions taking control of our thought process. McCain replied to the question of "personhood" (which means what?) by saying "at conception". If "personhood" is some kind of legal status where is McCains bill in Congress giving IRS tax deduction status to people that provide a doctors statement confirming pregnancy? Obama replies by dancing around the question saying "it's above my pay grade". Maybe it is but we deserve a definitive answer. I'm sure what I'm about to say will raise blood pressures all over the blogosphere but it is my opinion and I'm entitled to express it. The government currently gives the collection of cells that makes up a fetus the same legal rights as the collection of cells that makes up a tumor. The fetus does not become a legal entity until it takes a breath. If the fetus provides no legal benefits to the parents how can there be any kind of penalties if the fetus is removed? Twenty plus years ago my wife and I were faced with having to make the choice between abortion (D&C) or carrying to term. It is an extremely hard decision to make. We are thankfull that the decision did not have to include which back alley doc to go to if we chose to terminate. While I personally do not agree with abortion as an alternative to conventional birth control, I do not feel it should be removed as a viable medical procedure that can be choosen by informed adults. The decision to abort is one that can only be made by the people involved and their personal Deity. Government should not be involved attempting to legislate morality, which is what this issue is, one of morality. The last big effort to legislate morality, Prohibition, ended up a major failure that really only benefitted criminals.

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

LiberalHammer — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:32:18 GMT

Jim - Sorry to use your own words again but this is what you asked me to explain, "LH...would you please explain to all Resolution 1411? And if you have time, would you please let me know what type of weapons Saddam and his sons used to kill over 100,000 Kurds and disabled nearly as many ?" I answered your question about resolution 1411, why did you change it to resolution 1441, and then blame me for not answering your question after the fact? I hope you realize that the more you go out of your way to change and reframe a subject, after the fact (the resolution switch) and then blame me for it and then insult my intellegance with your liberal lefty hating arrogance, the less likely I will stand to even listen to you or take you seriously.

re: Obama camp cries foul.

Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:54:44 GMT

jmark: I think abortion is a big issue for most Americans. When it comes out that while Obama was an Illinois Senator, he did his best to support the murder of infants born alive during an abortion, I think that will shock a lot of people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPZCXcTwZPY

And that is exactly why he ignored the question regarding "when does a baby have human rights" posed to him during the Saddleback forum. He couldn't answer it because he knows the facts are there to show that he supports infanticide. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xkT_W5l9-k&feature=related

re: Obama camp cries foul.

jmark — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:47:57 GMT

Big issue for the sattlebackers perhaps, but for the rest of the country "it's the economy, stupid". Obama proved he's quite capable of holding his own. Minus the teleprompter, imagine that.

re: Obama camp cries foul.

Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:31:26 GMT

jmark: Both candidates for the most part did pretty well. However, Obama did have a few stumbles - like the one I mentioned in my post. Abortion is a big issue and Obama couldn't handle the question posed to him. McCain appears to have won round 1, so to speak. The Obama camp doesn't like that - it's not supposed to happen that way.

And who can explain a lack of any "Obama bounce" this far into the election year? Wasn't Obama supposed to be way ahead of McCain in the polls by now? Hasn't happened. Wonder why. Although we do have the "greatest speech ever given" coming up by Obama at the Democratic National Convention. Katie Couric will probably have to be revived with smelling salts....The entire mainstream media will be crying tears of joy... can't wait to read the unbiased reviews in the newspapers... Obama may even get a bounce after that....

re: Obama camp cries foul.

jmark — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:59:39 GMT

I watched it and thought both candidates handled themselves fairly well. 'Man in the sky' would approve.

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

Jim Hayett — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:42:04 GMT

Shoe Guy...a U.S. lobbyist group? Obama has the support directly from terrorists organizations like Hamas!! And who does William Ayer support? Terrorists! And that's Obama's buddy!! Get real Shoe Guy! Went to Snopes and no info on your allegations. I did find where you copied and pasted that story from. McCain received no money from that group, like Obama has from Ayers and others. If the AACL does endorse McCain, at least he doesn’t side with them. Can’t stop people from endorsing you that you may not side with. That’s going to be up to Obama and McCain to figure out for themselves.

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

Jim Hayett — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:29:56 GMT

LH…you didn’t answer the questions. Why? I respect your intelligence so my surmise is you don’t want to admit that you too have been bamboozled by the MSM. Or, you are an anti-war left wing person who just hates war and will find fault, even if it includes lies, with war. Wrong, but understandable. HERE IS THE DEFINITION OF RESOLUTION 1441: United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a resolution by the UN Security Council, passed unanimously on November 8, 2002, offering Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolution 660, Resolution 661, Resolution 678, Resolution 686, Resolution 687, Resolution 688, Resolution 707, Resolution 715, Resolution 986, and Resolution 1284). And it involves Saddam’s WMD’s (make sure all liberals reread the words before this please. WMD’s, in case you missed it). By the way, you never answered my earlier questions about Gore, Clinton, Pelosi, Kerry, Edwards and others who ALL ADMITTED that Saddam has WMD’s. And the deaths of the Kurds and Shiites (200,000 – 300,000) were from guess what? WMD’s. Why didn’t you answer that question either? That’s what prompted 1441. Please LH, why is this so hard to accept? I hate this war as much as anyone. I can’t stand to see Darfur and all the other genocides. How much can the U.S. do before we realize we can’t be the only world peace organizer? Had 9/11 not happened, or if bin Laden was taken by Clinton, I doubt very much that the war in Iraq would have been started. Remember, the war is not against Iraq or their people. The war is against terrorism and that’s where the terrorist chose to hide and fight.

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

jmark — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 15:19:51 GMT

Group tied to al-Qaida backs McCain for prez By Jerome R. Corsi "Presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain has enjoyed strong support from a lobbyist group that backs the Kosovo Liberation Army despite allegations the KLA is a Muslim terrorist group with ties to criminal drug networks and al-Qaida" A vote for McCain is a vote for al-Qaida.

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

LiberalHammer — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 14:06:43 GMT

Jim - Security Council resolution 1411 (2002) International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Great but that's when your hated UN and your arch-enemy Bill Clinton were president at the time. What about now what about genocide in Darfur, Dictators in Jamica & Hati, military backed Regimes in Asia. If the justification for Iraq changed to free people from oppression, by using military power, then why has it not been adpoted to all these problems around the world. I'll tell you why, they are not of strategic interest in the Bush Administration's forgein policy.

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

LiberalHammer — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 14:00:12 GMT

http://www.ithaca.edu/politics/gagnon/talks/us-iraq.htm I beleive you might be interested in 1985. The Reagan adminitration should share some blame in those 100,000 deaths. The US backed Iraq in the war and it's dictator, and turned a blind eye to atrocities, becuase it was in the USA national intrest too.

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

LiberalHammer — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:49:12 GMT

Jim - Afgahanistan was not a war of choice it was in reaction to the attacks of 9/11. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. There's the black and white of it.

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

jmark — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:10:51 GMT

sg134: Fare thee well obedient child.

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 01:27:11 GMT

referee33: I found your comment to be very interesting. I think you are right on about the "professional politician". Too many smooth talkers and little-doers. You are right in a way, about the do-nothing Congress. Although, Nancy Pelosi is in charge and should have been working on more substantial issues than wasting taxpayer dollars and time trying to "get Bush". She also was the one blocking the vote on drilling - not even allowing lawmakers to have a say.

SG134: Sorry to see you go. Thank you for your insightful comments and opinions. Hope to see you back. And yes, if Obama was indeed elected President, I would support him as best I could - if he did the job of the American people and showed he truly had our best interests at heart. In my mind, that means not leading us down the path to socialism. I fear if he is elected, however, that would be the case.

Somehow I don't think liberals would support McCain or give him a chance if he were to become President. After crying the election "was stolen" , we'd settle in for more of the same - like the horrible way they treated Bush through 8 years.

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

Jim Hayett — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 00:08:28 GMT

LH...would you please explain to all Resolution 1411? And if you have time, would you please let me know what type of weapons Saddam and his sons used to kill over 100,000 Kurds and disabled nearly as many?

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

Jim Hayett — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 22:20:30 GMT

Shoe Guy...what do you know about this? According to Federal Election Commission filings, Barack Obama has received illegal donations from Palestinians living in Gaza, a hotbed of Hamas terrorists. Obama received more than $24,000 in campaign contributions over a period of two months last fall from three Palestinian brothers from the "Edwan" family in Rafah, Gaza, which is a Hamas stronghold along the border with Egypt. The story was uncovered by Pamela Geller of the Atlas Shrugs blog. (see Federal Election Commission report) Attorney and conservative commentator Debbie Schlussel notes foreign nationals are barred from making contributions in connection with any election -- federal, state, or local -- and an individual is allowed to give only $2,300 per election to a federal candidate or the candidate's campaign committee. "The donations are basically through and through illegal -- that's number one. And number two is how the Obama campaign tried to conceal it," Schlussel Terrorist with hostagechides. "They listed the campaign contributions as coming from Rafah, Georgia. They used the 'GA' from Gaza so it makes it look like it's legal; and then for the zip code it says '972,' which is actually the area code to dial over to Gaza," she contends. The attorney comments that if the Obama campaign is willing to "accept thousands of dollars beyond the legal limit and they're also going to flout [Federal Election Commission] restrictions...that's very indicative of what kind of president [Obama] is going to be."

re: Beyond McCain or Obama

sg134 — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:20:57 GMT

To all, I want to let everyone know that this is my last comment. I know I have not made many, but due to certain issues I will no longer post my comments here at this site. Before I do sign off, I want to say that I will continue to read all the blogs and with great delight. But during my months of reading, I did a very in depth study of the posts and comments. And for those that want to blast me, I will not reply. What I have found is that 80% of the liberal blogs and comments towards the conservative blogs, like Amy, Jim, Toni and others, are not about the subject. Or can I say in harsher terms, “not about the truth or the facts posted.” These recent comments from Shoe Guy (you are very funny guy by the way), Liberal hammer, MC, and all the other liberals are very much not true or not a good reply to the post. And even the ones that are, are not accurately responding to the post or the subject. I also see that nearly all the liberal posts, like Jeff, MC, Victor, when it comes to politics, are also just not right or very truthful. And when I hear those that say this is what is putting America on the stupid side, it’s hard to disagree with them. Stating your opinion is one thing, but stating it as the facts or the truth is another. And I totally agree with those that say those lies are what hurts America. How can it not? If the media ever decided to look out for Americans and do it with sincerity, they would not be so disgraceful towards the truth or those that are not liberals. MC, Liberal Hammer, Jeff, Victor, you are all wrong about the media. You are in the small minority about what the media does to America. Amy and Jim are right in their facts when they prove to you that the majority of Americans do not trust the media for honesty or balanced news. Please, look elsewhere for the truth. It is not on the TV you watch or the papers you read. That is easily judged by your posts and comments. Balanced news and balanced thinking does make us more honest when it comes to our national issues and problems. Amy, I hope you will stand behind Obama if he wins because I will too. But I’m afraid that if McCain wins, these same liberals that hate so much of the good Bush has done with keeping us safe and the good McCain will do, these liberals will still continue to hate and lie about those that don’t side with liberals and their thinking. That is what is undoubtedly harming America. Good bye, Sally G