You can also say “rectal goat leprosy” but “Hannity” is shorter.
So… the fact that there’s no proof proves that there’s proof?
Well, I have no evidence that the tape has proof that you’re a terrorist-pedophile-atheist. So you know what that means.
It was speculation regarding how the video would be harmful versus the article posted since the article didn’t cover that type of information.
:: stage whisper ::
So the lizard-people talk to you, too? :eek:
It means that if I were running for President and someone withheld it that people opposing me would screem bloody murder.
There’s a simple solution to this. The LA times can show the video to it’s own employees (representing both parties) and they can report on it. It was, after all, given to them for the purpose of reporting on it.
Are you saying they haven’t reported on it? They broke the story! Or are you saying that because the article didn’t say that Obama was cheering on Hamas they must be suppressing it? Do you concede that perhaps the article didn’t say that because it didn’t happen? And therefore, the LA Times is not protecting ANYONE except their own integrity?
What about the fact that McCain has, as chairman of the IRI, approved funding for Khalidi’s organization more than once? Does that taint McCain at all? Or is all fault on Obama here?
You mean report on it like, say, something like…this story?
Ah, but that story doesn’t specifically say that Obama shook the hand of a suicide bomber’s mother, or that Obama stood on the table and toasted the deaths of America and Israel. Therefore it must have been laundered of all the Obama-derogatory truthiness.
BIAS!!!1!eleventy!
And there you have it. Clear proof that the Love Arafat Times is lying, because we already know this isn’t true, because Muslims hate Israel, and if Obama isn’t Muslim, then why is he brown!?
(I trust I will suffer no more derision for my campaign against Cognitive Dissonance, the number two threat to the Republic!)
Or as one reporter told me, “To see if its even worth bothering about.” Occassionally, one of the nutters in a political party will announce/propose a bill that looks controversial, party officials will let reporters know “off the record” that the thing’s a turkey and they’ve no intention of letting it go anywhere so not to bother reporting it. This lets Sen. Nutjob or Congressperson Crackers announcement announcement/bill die a quiet death, without giving the opposing side any traction to say that the party is “divided” (even though the only person in the party in favor of it is the guy who proposed it). Or worse, bringing the crackpots out of the woodwork to scream that they’re in favor of it, and the government must act upon it NOW!
You are presuming a priori that the tape contains something damaging.
Is your real name Michael Goldfarb?
haha goldfarb. What a dick that guy is.
OK, I’m stumped. Just who is this person Goldfarb is talking about but won’t name, who is not Khalidi or Ayers, and who is anti-semitic, and who is somehow associated with Obama?
I’m guessing either Wright (long odds) or Farrakhan (much more likely). Asserting that Khalidi is anti-Semitic is also assuming facts not in evidence, for that matter. Pro-Palestinian doesn’t necessarily equal anti-Semitic. Goldfarb is a weasel’s weasel.
*GOLDFARB: I think we all know who we are talking about.
*
No we don’t! Who is Goldfarb talking about? Biden? Michelle? Clinton? Who?
Ah, should have previewed!
Could it be… Satan?
At this point they could release the damn tapes and the whispering still wouldn’t stop. That’s the thing about rumor and paranoia and denial.
If the tape came out tomorrow and it was squeaky clean, the McCain campaign would say, “That’s not the real tape, is it? They must have edited out the bits that we heard about! Where’s the REAL tape?”
If you watch the linked video it is clear Goldfarb doesn’t know who Goldfarb is talking about either…
Probably with the real Birth Certificate.