WTF 1.2

[Embar Angylwrath]

The whole thing is unsubstantiated.

ETA: actually I shouldn't say the whole thing is "unsubstantiated", it's all a bunch of bullshit attempting some sort of retarded last minute smear on Obama and has precisely zero to do with him or his campaign. I guess the al Qaeda video they've been hoping for (like 2004) hasn't shown up yet.

So really WTF.

You're engaging in shit you condemn Jecks for engaging in. You lose credibility when you do that.

[Harlowe]

Certainly, if that were my MO, but it's not. I'm just sick to death of the Drudge WTF smear headlines that are unsubstantiated bullshit.

Wonkette handled it with it's usual awesome snark ....
http://wonkette.com/404034/why-wont-bar ... ded-family

Why Won’t Barack Obama Apologize For His Large Extended Family?

OMG WTF OCTOBER SURPRISE everybody!!! Barack Obama has a number of paternal relatives, many of whom he has met once or not at all, because they come from a secret Marxist madrassa in the foreign city of Kenya, Africa. One of his Kenyan relatives is an aunt whom he has actually met a couple of times! She came to his swearing-in in the Senate in 2004 and has been living in Boston for a while, although he hasn’t heard from her for about two years.

It turns out that this beloved aunt is an Illegal Alien, which Barack Obama really should have known about, as it is customary among “real Americans” to conduct biennial immigration status checks on members of their extended family. So now this lady is going to be deported, maybe? For all his talk about compassion, Barack Obama has yet to process the immigration petitions of his many dozens of distant relatives he does not know very well.

[Partha]

Embar, unblemished scold of the internets.

[Harlowe]

If McCain loses it won't be because of Obama's popularity among the majority of Americans - it will be the Peruvian Shaman that performed some sort of voodoo good vibe thing for Obama and ...what appears to be a curse on McCain.

Oooooh wonder what Drudge will do with this one, he's not only the choice of Arabs, Muslims and Jews - he's the CHOICE OF PERUVIAN VOODOO SKULL CULTISTS! Do you want voodoo in the fucking White House people?

http://wonkette.com/404037/barack-obama ... haman-vote


But what would a shameless WTF smear post be without some real Obama endorsements.....

Seed Magazine - endorses Obama.
http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2008/1 ... sident.php
(publishes original writing from scientists and science journalists)

Our world is more complex, dynamic, and interdependent than at any time in recent history. Financial markets are in turmoil, geopolitical conflicts abound, and our pale blue dot is in serious peril. Yet these are also times for great optimism — about what can be known and what can be accomplished, about our potential to discover and innovate. To navigate this new reality, to realize opportunity within this massive change, we need a new approach to governance and problem solving; we need a new way of looking at the world and a new set of values founded on the conviction that knowledge is good; and we need leaders who have the courage and wisdom to change their mind in the face of new evidence. Today we stand at an inflection point in modern history, and America, still inarguably and essentially the world's beacon, will chart the way forward next Tuesday. At this critical moment, we offer an endorsement and a perspective that we hope informs the decision of our American readers.

It is abundantly evident that science can refuel economic growth, address the energy and climate challenge, and help restore America's soft power around the world. President Bush dismissed this potential, turned the very act of defying science into an art, and in so doing diminished US competitiveness and disenfranchised the country's source of innovation. His administration not only disregarded evidence time and time again but also rejected and debased the very enterprise that offered that evidence. Renewing the promise of science starts first and foremost with restoring scientific integrity to government.

Sen. Obama's pledged stance on science resonates with us. He has vowed to restore integrity to the role of science advisor by reestablishing the senior status of the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and more broadly, by surrounding himself with individuals with exemplary scientific credentials; his selection of Dr. Harold Varmus as the campaign's science advisor was a very promising and laudable step in that direction. Sen. Obama understands that basic research is fundamental to how scientific advances are made. He sees the importance of expanding funding for "high-risk, high-return" work, strengthening tax policy to spur R&D, and encouraging the careers of young scientists who pursue innovative lines of thinking. He has offered a comprehensive plan to reinvigorate math and science education, and he recognizes the vital importance of re-architecting nationwide science literacy for these times. His positions on topics ranging from agriculture, alternative energy, and medical research to internet policy, patent law, and space are more robust and ultimately more in line with scientific consensus than those of Sen. McCain. These are important policy positions, and they reflect Sen. Obama's appreciation of the need to invest in science and science education as a precondition for growth and prosperity in the 21st century. We recognize, however, that these are not the issues that most voters will be thinking about when they cast their ballot.

Far more important is this: Science is a way of governing, not just something to be governed. Science offers a methodology and philosophy rooted in evidence, kept in check by persistent inquiry, and bounded by the constraints of a self-critical and rigorous method. Science is a lens through which we can and should visualize and solve complex problems, organize government and multilateral bodies, establish international alliances, inspire national pride, restore positive feelings about America around the globe, embolden democracy, and ultimately, lead the world. More than anything, what this lens offers the next administration is a limitless capacity to handle all that comes its way, no matter how complex or unanticipated.

Sen. Obama's embrace of transparency and evidence-based decision-making, his intelligence and curiosity echo this new way of looking at the world. And that is what we should be weighing in the voting booth. For his positions and, even more, for his way of coming to them, we endorse Barack Obama for President of the United States.

[Trollbait]

As to hypocricy:

Why would I post the other side? I have you for that, right? Or do you constantly come in here and post the negative on Obama or any dem? No.. Well why not? because you have those that will. lol....dumbass.


As to cowardice:

I just now looked at the thread again. I have a family to be with on Saturdays. Do you? Go peddle your strawman somewhere else.

As to enraged:

I am not at all enraged. I think it is funny. It is not an angry WTF....it is a boggled WTF. You, on the other hand, appear to become unhinged and bandy about strawman cowardice, hypocricy, and enragement charges.

Too rich.

[Trollbait]

P.S. I fully intend to vote for Obama....

....but you have to ask me nicely first, Lurker.

[Lurker]

As to hypocricy: Why would I post the other side?

I didn't call you a hypoctrite for attacking Obama while claiming to be a supporter. I called you a hypocrite for compaining about the invasion of Joe the Plumbers privacy while saying nothing about the invasion of privacy in this case, even though this involves actual leaking of private information by government officials and the JTP case didn't.

As to cowardice: I just now looked at the thread again.

Three times you've posted today and still haven't explained what this thread is supposed to mean.

[Trollbait]

Joe the Plumbers privacy while saying nothing about the invasion of privacy in this case, even though this involves actual leaking of private information by government officials and the JTP case didn't.

Frankly, I disagree that a criminal and illegal alien has an expectation of privacy. A citizen clearly does. That can be an argument for another thread.

Three times you've posted today and still haven't explained what this thread is supposed to mean.

If you really seem to want antagonistic words tossed about and you actually need an explanation for something so simple I will say the word for you is idiot.

You still have not asked me nicely to vote for Obama.

[Lurker]

Frankly, I disagree that a criminal and illegal alien has an expectation of privacy. A citizen clearly does. That can be an argument for another thread.

This thread was pointless so why save a good discussion for another one?

I'd argue that the woman isn't a "criminal" since the proceedings won't go through criminal court, but that's besides the point. Is it your position that the government can violate their own departmental rules and leak classified information about someone as long as they aren't a citizen? The constitution offers no protection for non-citizens?

I guess that's why you were pro-torture and removing the right of habeas corpus, as long as the people stood accused of being "criminals" or non-citizens.

[Partha]

Duh.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Duh.

I think that's your most intelligent post. Ever.

[Ddrak]

I guess that's why you were pro-torture and removing the right of habeas corpus, as long as the people stood accused of being "criminals" or non-citizens.

I don't think Jecks was in favor of anything much that went on at Gitmo. If I remember right, he didn't really have much to say at all.

I think his statement on this woman's right to privacy is misplaced though - it appears her case hasn't been heard in court yet and until the time it does she does have the right to privacy as she's neither a criminal or an illegal alien until proven so.

Dd

[Lurker]

I don't think Jecks was in favor of anything much that went on at Gitmo. If I remember right, he didn't really have much to say at all.

His MO is not having much to say, but I think he was against torture and Gitmo in general. I was using sarcasm to point out his hypocrisy.

[Harlowe]

Someone(s) is in trouble.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.c ... unt_co.php

Experts: Leak On Obama's Aunt Could Make Persecution More Likely
The Associated Press reported Saturday morning that an application for asylum made by Obama's aunt, Zeituni Onyango, was rejected four years ago by an immigration judge. It sourced the information to a federal law enforcement official, and another source in a position to know.

We added later that day that the leak -- which is now being probed by government investigators -- appears to clearly violate government regulations, as laid out in a memo written by a US Customs and Immigration Services official.

But the memo also contains one important reason why there's such a strong prohibition against disclosing asylum applications. It reads:

These regulations safeguard information that, if disclosed publicly, could subject the claimant to retaliatory measures by government authorities or non-state actors in the event that the claimant is repatriated, or endanger the security of the claimant's family members who may still be residing in the country of origin. Moreover, public disclosure might, albeit in rare circumstances, give rise to a plausible protection claim where one would not otherwise exist by bringing an otherwise ineligible claimant to the attention of the government authority or non-state actor against which the claimant has made allegations of mistreatment.

In other words, the leak could well increase the chances that Onyango could be persecuted -- maybe even tortured -- for seeking asylum in the U.S. if she is ultimately deported to Kenya. Or that her family members could be similarly mistreated, whether or not she's deported. And thanks to that very danger, the leak could even bolster Onyango's asylum claim.

Immigration experts confirmed to TPMmuckraker that this reading was accurate.

Matthew Hoppock, an immigration lawyer in Kansas City who focuses on asylum cases, noted the regulations in an email to TPMmuckraker, and argued that the leak has "made it more likely that if Ms. Onyango is removed to her home country, she will face persecution for having sought asylum in the United States."

[Trollbait]

I think his statement on this woman's right to privacy is misplaced though - it appears her case hasn't been heard in court yet and until the time it does she does have the right to privacy as she's neither a criminal or an illegal alien until proven so.

She is already proven so. Immigration is not the same as a criminal case. She applied for asylum and it was denied. She stayed after being denied. She is therefore an illegal alien and a criminal..

His MO is not having much to say

If by that you mean I do not blather on endlessly then you are right. I only post on a subject I am interested in. Unlike others on this board I do not feel the need to weigh in on every topic or on every thread. You cannot construe support or lack of support for a specific subject based on my lack of presence in a thread. That is idiocy.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Lets not confuse issues here...

There isn't much to suggest Obama had anyhting to do with his relative trying to dodge the law.

That being said, why are people here defending someone who flouts the law?

[Lurker]

That being said, why are people here defending someone who flouts the law?

I'm not sure anyone here is defending the federal employees that leaked the information.

oh... did you mean the woman? Nobody is defending her either.

[Ddrak]

That being said, why are people here defending someone who flouts the law?

Defending her right to privacy - sure. Defending her actions - nope. Until she faces the deportation hearing, I think she has a right to not have her name plastered all over the place.

Dd