Just admit that you can't win talking about the issues so you have to stoop to smear tactics.Originally posted by: SecPro
The levels of idiocy and hypocrisy in this thread are bordering on the insane.
1. John McCain is an unpaid director of the IRI. He does not participate in the day to day operations of this Congressionally chartered organization. There is no comparison between his role at IRI and someone sitting at a party while a bunch of anti-Semites toast the destruction of Israel.
2. It's the very height of hypocrisy when you claim that the LATimes has every right not to, and should not release this tape but cheered wildly when newspapers released classified information that put the Bush admin. in a bad light. Just be honest, you don't want this tape released because it might reflect badly on your messiah. Just admit it.
Originally posted by: SecPro
The levels of idiocy and hypocrisy in this thread are bordering on the insane.
1. John McCain is an unpaid director of the IRI. He does not participate in the day to day operations of this Congressionally chartered organization. There is no comparison between his role at IRI and someone sitting at a party while a bunch of anti-Semites toast the destruction of Israel.
2. It's the very height of hypocrisy when you claim that the LATimes has every right not to, and should not release this tape but cheered wildly when newspapers released classified information that put the Bush admin. in a bad light. Just be honest, you don't want this tape released because it might reflect badly on your messiah. Just admit it.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The issue with the tape has NOTHING to do with McCain supporting Khalidi.
I am sure if there was as tape of McCain and Khalidi you guys would be demanding that tape be made public as well.
McCain was not at the dinner shown on the tape.Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The issue with the tape has NOTHING to do with McCain supporting Khalidi.
I am sure if there was as tape of McCain and Khalidi you guys would be demanding that tape be made public as well.
It's the same tape.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
McCain was not at the dinner shown on the tape.Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The issue with the tape has NOTHING to do with McCain supporting Khalidi.
I am sure if there was as tape of McCain and Khalidi you guys would be demanding that tape be made public as well.
It's the same tape.
Obama appeared at a dinner where there were multiple anti-Israeli slurs presented and the LA Times wants to sit on the tape. Who are they protecting?
Where is the evidence that Khalidi worked at the IRI???Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
When Rashid Khalidi was leading the International Republican Institute John McCain was a financial supporter and he (McCain) is currently listed as he IRI?s board of directors chairman
Judith Miller had a moral obligation to abide by her agreement not to release the source of her information and ended up spending 12 weeks in jail for contempt of court.Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
ProfJohn
Pleased cite the law, ordinance, or regulation that requires the tape to be released.
The paper has a legal and moral obligation to abide by a legal agreement with a source.
Time to put up or shut up. Explain how you desire to share someones personal property trumps the law.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Judith Miller had a moral obligation to abide by her agreement not to release the source of her information and ended up spending 12 weeks in jail for contempt of court.Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
ProfJohn
Pleased cite the law, ordinance, or regulation that requires the tape to be released.
The paper has a legal and moral obligation to abide by a legal agreement with a source.
Time to put up or shut up. Explain how you desire to share someones personal property trumps the law.
I guess the first amendment only applies when it is a Republican in the cross hairs?
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Judith Miller had a moral obligation to abide by her agreement not to release the source of her information and ended up spending 12 weeks in jail for contempt of court.Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
ProfJohn
Pleased cite the law, ordinance, or regulation that requires the tape to be released.
The paper has a legal and moral obligation to abide by a legal agreement with a source.
Time to put up or shut up. Explain how you desire to share someones personal property trumps the law.
I guess the first amendment only applies when it is a Republican in the cross hairs?
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Judith Miller had a moral obligation to abide by her agreement not to release the source of her information and ended up spending 12 weeks in jail for contempt of court.Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
ProfJohn
Pleased cite the law, ordinance, or regulation that requires the tape to be released.
The paper has a legal and moral obligation to abide by a legal agreement with a source.
Time to put up or shut up. Explain how you desire to share someones personal property trumps the law.
I guess the first amendment only applies when it is a Republican in the cross hairs?
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Judith Miller had a moral obligation to abide by her agreement not to release the source of her information and ended up spending 12 weeks in jail for contempt of court.Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
ProfJohn
Pleased cite the law, ordinance, or regulation that requires the tape to be released.
The paper has a legal and moral obligation to abide by a legal agreement with a source.
Time to put up or shut up. Explain how you desire to share someones personal property trumps the law.
I guess the first amendment only applies when it is a Republican in the cross hairs?
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nope, show both to the public and let the public decide.
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nope, show both to the public and let the public decide.
God I love the sound of desperation.......hahahaaa
Originally posted by: T2T III
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nope, show both to the public and let the public decide.
God I love the sound of desperation.......hahahaaa
Desperation ... blah, blah, blah. If we truly had everything on the table with both candidates, Obama's support would be down to 20%, or lower.