Can Obama's word be" TRUSTED"? Apparently NOT..Count the 180s..

[Tellurian]

February 1, 2008

By Jen Haberkorn - Barack Obama, the senatorial candidate of 2004, might have a bone to pick with Barack Obama, the presidential candidate of 2008.

Videotapes of debates and speeches that were obtained by The Washington Times show that Mr. Obama took positions during his Senate campaign on nearly a half-dozen issues ranging from the Cuba embargo to health care for illegal aliens that conflict with statements that he has made during his run for the White House.

For example, in MSNBC's Oct. 30 presidential debate, Mr. Obama hesitantly raised his hand and joined with most of his Democratic rivals to declare he opposed decriminalizing marijuana. (See clip below.)

But as a U.S. Senate candidate, Mr. Obama told Illinois college students in January 2004 he supported eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use or possession, a debate video shows.

"I think we need to rethink and decriminalize our marijuana laws," Mr. Obama said during a debate at Northwestern University. "But I'm not somebody who believes in legalization of marijuana."(See clip below.)

...

Mr. Obama's differing answers on marijuana are among five conflicts between positions he took while running for Senate in 2004 and those he now articulates while running for president, a review of debate tapes shows. Experts said the likely reason for the changes was that Mr. Obama ran as a liberal during his Senate run but has become more centrist as he pursues the broad coalition required to win the White House.

The position changes include:

• In a 2003 forum on health care, Mr. Obama said he supported the children of illegal aliens' receiving the same benefits as citizens, "whether it's medical, whether it's in-state tuition." Asked specifically whether he included "undocumented" people, Mr. Obama replied, "Absolutely."(See clip below more at link.)

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080201/NATION/43529865/0/NATION04

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tellurian]

4. Yes, my thread is not about anecdotal evidencs..the proof resides in the link

[1corona4u]

6. Spam.

[Clintonista2]

7. HERE R MORE SPAM 4 U!

[neutron]

22. Today's NYT Scandel: Obama Lied to Iowa Voters

He DILUTED a bill to force Nuclear Power Plants to report Leaks.
Even worse, he took HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS from
Nuclear Power Proponents.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?ex=1359694800&en=f2cec53f8b5de3bc&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[Tellurian]

2. Why would I TRUST my vote to Obama..

when he reinvents the meanings on mostly everything word he speaks..

[sunonmars]

3. He's a worse flipflopper than Kerry and thats saying something

[Tellurian]

5. It's about time people begin to realize his words are meaningless..

They call it an "evolution" of words; there is a simpler explanation for it.. it's called Lying!

[BlackVelvet04]

29. Did you see the post that gave three meanings to the

word bipartisanship?

[Tellurian]

8. "You Can't TRUST Obama with your VOTE or your COUNTRY!.."

[ugdude]

9. hillary voted for the war in iraq. She is responsible for the

economic and human lives lost.

[Tellurian]

10. It's Bush's War nimrod!

[CatnHat]

32. When will the media in general

start being honest with the American people. So far the "media darling" has gotten a pass. Let's see where Obama stands, not what he "says". What about the "shady" deals with that "slum lord"??? That story got buried so fast, it made my head spin. Tired of Obama camp "feeling" victimized anytime it looks bad for their candidate. They automatically go into Clinton bashing. If Obama supporters are that confident about their guys integrity, they should be first to demand the "truth" be told.

[Bitwit1234]

11. Isn't it odd

When ever a newspaper has the guts to print some of the negative and damning information about the Other candidate, someone always manages to flame and smear Hillary because of it...typical.

[Tellurian]

12. It's the usual bill of fare from the Obamabots..now they've taken to spam..

I've alerted ...but...crickets

[desi]

25. I appears to be an invasion of sorts

by the Kosbot lemmings. LOLOL

[Tellurian]

26. I'll say..

I've had to sharpen my sword twice today!

[NYCGirl]

13. You seem to love right wing newspapers like the Washington Times when they

say things you want to hear.

Washington Times is the moonie paper!

[Tellurian]

15. We've been expecting you..

what took you so long?

[NYCGirl]

16. I don't hang out here 24/7 like you.

The Washington Times? Are you nuts? Wait, don't answer that.

[Tellurian]

19. Your boy wil shrink like a wool sweater in the washing machine..

when faced with the Truth..He doesn't hold up..The Repugs will bury him.

NO THANKS!

[Thrill]

14. You know you've sunk to a new low when The Right Wing Washington Times

is considered a credible opinion or source. LOL

[Tellurian]

17. The credible source is in the video w/Obama's lip-flips on tape!

and that is what the Repukes will bury him with if he gets the nom..

[Thrill]

18. Hillary is already buried by them

[Tellurian]

20. Forgot to take your reality meds again?

[madrchsod]

21. a new low----the washington times

......you want some links proving hillary is a communist-socialist traitor to the american people and has been for 40 years?

[Tellurian]

24. Another Obama LIE you can LINK.. NYT

Obama Lied to Iowa Voters Claimed he Passed Legislation

Nuclear Leaks and (?)Response Tested Obama in Senate

By MIKE McINTIRE

Published: February 3, 2008

When residents in Illinois voiced outrage two years ago upon learning that the Exelon Corporation had not disclosed radioactive leaks at one of its nuclear plants, the state’s freshman senator, Barack Obama, took up their cause.

Mr. Obama scolded Exelon and federal regulators for inaction and introduced a bill to require all plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail, telling a crowd in Iowa in December that it was “the only nuclear legislation that I’ve passed.”

“I just did that last year,” he said, to murmurs of approval.

A close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story. While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks.

Those revisions propelled the bill through a crucial committee. But, contrary to Mr. Obama’s comments in Iowa, it ultimately died amid parliamentary wrangling in the full Senate.

“Senator Obama’s staff was sending us copies of the bill to review, and we could see it weakening with each successive draft,” said Joe Cosgrove, a park district director in Will County, Ill., where low-level radioactive runoff had turned up in groundwater. “The teeth were just taken out of it.”

The history of the bill shows Mr. Obama navigating a home-state controversy that pitted two important constituencies against each other and tested his skills as a legislative infighter. On one side were neighbors of several nuclear plants upset that low-level radioactive leaks had gone unreported for years; on the other was Exelon, the country’s largest nuclear plant operator and one of Mr. Obama’s largest sources of campaign money.

Since 2003, executives and employees of Exelon, which is based in Illinois, have contributed at least $227,000 to Mr. Obama’s campaigns for the United States Senate and for president. Two top Exelon officials, Frank M. Clark, executive vice president, and John W. Rogers Jr., a director, are among his largest fund-raisers.

Another Obama donor, John W. Rowe, chairman of Exelon, is also chairman of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear power industry’s lobbying group, based in Washington. Exelon’s support for Mr. Obama far exceeds its support for any other presidential candidate.

In addition, Mr. Obama’s chief political strategist, David Axelrod, has worked as a consultant to Exelon. A spokeswoman for Exelon said Mr. Axelrod’s company had helped an Exelon subsidiary, Commonwealth Edison, with communications strategy periodically since 2002, but had no involvement in the leak controversy or other nuclear issues.

The Obama campaign said in written responses to questions that Mr. Obama “never discussed this issue or this bill” with Mr. Axelrod. The campaign acknowledged that Exelon executives had met with Mr. Obama’s staff about the bill, as had concerned residents, environmentalists and regulators. It said the revisions resulted not from any influence by Exelon, but as a necessary response to a legislative roadblock put up by Republicans, who controlled the Senate at the time.

“If Senator Obama had listened to industry demands, he wouldn’t have repeatedly criticized Exelon in the press, introduced the bill and then fought for months to get action on it,” the campaign said. “Since he has over a decade of legislative experience, Senator Obama knows that it’s very difficult to pass a perfect bill.”

Asked why Mr. Obama had cited it as an accomplishment while campaigning for president, the campaign noted that after the senator introduced his bill, nuclear plants started making such reports on a voluntary basis. The campaign did not directly address the question of why Mr. Obama had told Iowa voters that the legislation had passed.

(more)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?ex=1359694800&en=f2cec53f8b5de3bc&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[BlackVelvet04]

34. This isn't surprising......

The campaign did not directly address the question of why Mr. Obama had told Iowa voters that the legislation had passed.

[Jai4WKC08]

23. Don't you get it people?

Yes, it's the Washington Times. A very right-wing, moonie-owned, liberal-smearing (but nationally read) paper. So this is what you're gonna see EVERY SINGLE DAY if Obama wins the nomination. Question is, can he stand up to it? Can he fight back? Will he fight back, giving his whole "can't we just get along" strategy to win independents?

I feel comfortable that Hillary Clinton knows how to handle the Freak Show. She's been doing it for so long now. I'm not so sure about Obama. He's never really had to. Maybe he can. If he wins our nomination, I sure hope so. But maybe going thru an election or two as a VP would teach him how.

[MethuenProgressive]

27. As one of Obama's professional posters put it today "Don't Take Obama's Word"!

No one paying attention does, sweetie.

[UALRBSofL]

30. Good thread

Thanks for posting

[Evergreen Emerald]

28. that has been my problem with him all along.

His words do not match his actions

[Tellurian]

36. But Ted Kennedy and John Kerry say "he's their candidate"..

apparently, their view of honesty and integrity are limited. If Obama is elected; how long will it take for him to screw K&K?

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

33. FLIP FLOP

[avrdream]

35. Thanks for digging this out, Tell.

More of the same. Barack is going to get absolutely hammered by the Repubs on these opinion changes if he becomes the nominee.

[Tellurian]

37. He might, if he's not part of the Republicans scheme of maintaining control

of the 3 Branches of government in perpetuity.. Kerry and Kennedy in control of Congress..