Should Obama be held to task for his lies?

[cybrsage]

http://youtu.be/FqKnVr3I9q8

What do you all think, should Obama have to explain why he lied about these things? Simple things, like his sunshine promise, his no lobbists promise, etc.

Or do you guys think he should get a free pass on them?

 

[piasabird]

The better question is why does the Media never question what he says or call him to task on anything? They are just members of the democratic brain washing machine.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

How is this a "lie"? He was right - the American public will decide whether he deserves to be re-elected. By definition a person can't "lie" about something that may or may not happen three years in the future, because the future is not knowable. This is particularly true where, as here, the thing he is predicting (whether or not he'd be re-elected) is not up to him but up to the American voting public. He didn't say he wouldn't run again if the economy was not mended - just that he didn't think he'd be re-elected.

I really don't think you're this stupid, so can only conclude this is yet more silly disingenuousness.

 

[cybrsage]

OOPS! Copy paste error, Corrected it in the OP. Interestly enough, I just found out that when you click a video in the video window after a video ends, the URL does not change.

The correct url is http://youtu.be/FqKnVr3I9q8

 

[Rainsford]

I think a better question is whether you think candidates promising to accomplish something and not actually doing it qualifies as a "lie". I wish Obama had accomplished more of what he talked about doing in the campaign, but "held to task for his lies" is a ridiculous way of putting it.

 

[cybrsage]

The items he has full control over, yes, I consider them lies. Things such as the sunshine promise, the no lobbyists promise (at least in his own administration, he cannot prevent a congressman from hiring one), and the like. The only person who could stop him from doing those things is himself.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

The items he has full control over, yes, I consider them lies.

He should certainly be held accountable for promises he made but didn't follow through on. But even this doesn't necessarily make them lies. Everyone has intentions that they don't follow through with for one reason or another.

 

[EagleKeeper]

American public needs to decide by re-election if his statements that did not resolve the way intended are enough to boot him.

Lies are known to be false when stated. Already happened incorrectly or knowingly will not happen.
Failures are when something is stated that can not be done. Good leaders do not point fingers because of such.

Where uttering a statement that could be followed up and is not, falls into the grid where ???

Statements by himself about his own character that are exposed should cause him to be held accountable.

If he issued the Sunshine statement:
1) knowing that he would not implement it. - Lie
2) and changed his mind to implement it. - Failure.

Did he close Gitmo. Failure - pointing fingers

Did he cut the deficit from 10T to 5T. Failure - pointing fingers
He stated that if he could not cut the deficit, he deserved to be a one term president - Lie - he is running.


There are black, white and grey statements.

Failures is something the voters should evaluate as competent of not.
Lies from a person of character should resign or not compete.
A person that is not of character will take the lies and ignore them as mis-understood.

 

[Matt1970]

20 years ago a Conservative President said "No New Taxes" and going back on his word cost him the election. It was all over the news, used in sound bites for music videos and is still used to this day.

Today a Liberal President can have a long long list of lies and it is blamed on Conservatives.

 

[Incorruptible]

bark whosain obama must be held accountable for what he has done, he should have been impeached

 

[Nemesis 1]

I really don't think you're this stupid, so can only conclude this is yet more silly disingenuousness.

Well were that statement got into this thread is a bit confusing . None the less, I have concluded from your post thjat you are Stupid and disingenuousness. IF need be I can get what he said off of Utube . One would be a moron to believe he saying anthing other than he won't run after 4 if he hasn't resolved the problem . He made it 5x worse

 

[cybrsage]

He should certainly be held accountable for promises he made but didn't follow through on. But even this doesn't necessarily make them lies. Everyone has intentions that they don't follow through with for one reason or another.

Take the sunlight promise. He violated that one as fast as he possibly could. This shows he never intended to honor that promise, which makes it a lie. Even the biased PolitiFact website says he broke this promise on his very first signature.

Obama signs first law without Web comment

Updated: Thursday, January 29th, 2009 | By Angie Drobnic Holan
One of President Obama's major campaign planks was making government more open and accountable. It's a reaction to a habit in Congress of rushing bills through the House and Senate without giving people much opportunity to know what the bills would do. Indeed, sometimes members of Congress don't even know what's in the bills.

So Obama pledged during the campaign to institute "sunlight before signing."

"Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them," Obama's campaign Web site states . "As president, Obama will not sign any nonemergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House Web site for five days."

But the first bill Obama signed into law as president — the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — got no such vetting.

In fact, the Congressional Record shows that the law was passed in the Senate on Jan. 22, 2009, passed in the House on Jan. 27, and signed by the president on Jan. 29. So only two days passed between the bill's final passage and the signing.

The legislation was not posted to the White House Web site for comment in any way that we could find.

We see no way the bill could be deemed emergency legislation, even taking the broadest view.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...five-days-of-public-comment-before-signing-b/

April 2009
But nine days after taking office, he signed a bill into law without posting it on Whitehouse.gov for five days. Since then,10 more bills have become law over the president's signature, and only one has been posted online for five days - and that was for five days after it cleared Congress, not after formal presentment. Two bills have been held by the White House for five days before signing - but they weren't posted online!

http://www.cato.org/publications/techknowledge/promise-keeps-breaking

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Take the sunlight promise. He violated that one as fast as he possibly could. This shows he never intended to honor that promise, which makes it a lie.

It's a broken promise, as Politifact stated. Whether it is a lie or not depends on his intent, as EagleKeeper stated. Only he knows whether he intended to break the promise or not.

 

[cybrsage]

You really think he intended to keep that promise when he broke that promise with the VERY FIRST bill he signed? Really?

 

[feralkid]

Speaking of lies; did you not promise to leave this forum if Rick Santorum lost the nomination?

 

[Incorruptible]

You really think he intended to keep that promise when he broke that promise with the VERY FIRST bill he signed? Really?

barky whosain obama had no intention to keep his promise, that pos needs to be kicked out

 

[cybrsage]

Speaking of lies; did you not promise to leave this forum if Rick Santorum lost the nomination?

I certainly did. Did Rick Santorum lose the nomination?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

You really think he intended to keep that promise when he broke that promise with the VERY FIRST bill he signed? Really?

Only he knows. I see no point in speculating... he didn't do what he promised, for whatever reason, and should be held accountable for that.

I'm sure you can find an instance where he actually lied, if you look hard enough.

 

[cybrsage]

What position do you hold in the Church of the Obama? It cannot be a high ranking one, for you admit Obama did something wrong. I am guessing you are a door greeter or such.

 

[feralkid]

I certainly did. Did Rick Santorum lose the nomination?

Months ago.

Or are you waiting until after the Republican Convention to officially weasel out of your promise?

 

[Nintendesert]

As long as the President wins and defeats the evil Republicans I don't care what he says or does. By any means necessary!!

 

[Anarchist420]

I don't care whether he lied, because I could think critically. Everyone who voted for him should've known his voting record before they voted for him as his record as a senator was not that great on civil liberties. In other words, if he always voted for the patriot act then it would've been rational to suspect that he was lying when he first said he would close down guantanamo.

 

[cybrsage]

Months ago.

Or are you waiting until after the Republican Convention to officially weasel out of your promise?

Wait, you actually think Santorum lost the nomination? Priceless!

 

[thraashman]

Wait, you actually think Santorum lost the nomination? Priceless!

He dropped out, which is the equivalent of forfeiting, which is opting to accept loss rather than continue competing. cybrsage here will try to claim that Santorum's dropping out does not constitute losing because he didn't run the race to completion. Which also means that hurdler who got hurt on the first hurdle in the Olympics didn't lose that race.

 

[cybrsage]

He dropped out, which is the equivalent of forfeiting, which is opting to accept loss rather than continue competing. cybrsage here will try to claim that Santorum's dropping out does not constitute losing because he didn't run the race to completion. Which also means that hurdler who got hurt on the first hurdle in the Olympics didn't lose that race.

Do quitters ever win?