[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Does anyone know why the municipal-money requirement wasn’t waived in Katrina’s case?[/quote]
It was.[/quote]
This video takes place in 2007, 3 years after Katrina. Is Obama making it up, or was it waived after the speech?
I can’t find much about this anywhere.[/quote]
He lied he’s an ass
Of course you won’t find it anywhere the media is covering it up
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Does anyone know why the municipal-money requirement wasn’t waived in Katrina’s case?[/quote]
It was.[/quote]
This video takes place in 2007, 3 years after Katrina. Is Obama making it up, or was it waived after the speech?
I can’t find much about this anywhere.[/quote]
Because you simply can’t tolerate the Daily Caller?
“Bush, however, waived the Stafford Act at times to provide more support to Katrinaâ??s victims. In May 2007, weeks before Obama’s initial criticism of the Katrina relief effort, the Bush administration provided an additional $6.9 billion to affected areas.”
Read more: Obama insisted on state, local Stafford Act funding after Joplin, Mo. tornado | The Daily Caller
[/quote]
This time it was just because I hadn’t checked it lol
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Does anyone know why the municipal-money requirement wasn’t waived in Katrina’s case?[/quote]
It was.[/quote]
This video takes place in 2007, 3 years after Katrina. Is Obama making it up, or was it waived after the speech?
I can’t find much about this anywhere.[/quote]
He lied he’s an ass
Of course you won’t find it anywhere the media is covering it up[/quote]
Hey man, as a fellow Masshole, I’m pumped to ‘meet’ fellow Massachusetts conservative.
sorry to derail
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Does anyone know why the municipal-money requirement wasn’t waived in Katrina’s case?[/quote]
It was.[/quote]
This video takes place in 2007, 3 years after Katrina. Is Obama making it up, or was it waived after the speech?
I can’t find much about this anywhere.[/quote]
He lied he’s an ass
Of course you won’t find it anywhere the media is covering it up[/quote]
Hey man, as a fellow Masshole, I’m pumped to ‘meet’ fellow Massachusetts conservative.
sorry to derail
[/quote]
There’s quite a few of us you’d be surprised.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Does anyone know why the municipal-money requirement wasn’t waived in Katrina’s case?[/quote]
It was.[/quote]
This video takes place in 2007, 3 years after Katrina. Is Obama making it up, or was it waived after the speech?
I can’t find much about this anywhere.[/quote]
Because you simply can’t tolerate the Daily Caller?
“Bush, however, waived the Stafford Act at times to provide more support to KatrinaÃ?¢??s victims. In May 2007, weeks before Obama’s initial criticism of the Katrina relief effort, the Bush administration provided an additional $6.9 billion to affected areas.”
Read more: Obama insisted on state, local Stafford Act funding after Joplin, Mo. tornado | The Daily Caller
[/quote]
This time it was just because I hadn’t checked it lol[/quote]
‘Ten days before Obama went to race bait in his now infamous ‘race speech’ from 2007, he voted against an appropriation that would have waived the Stafford Act and was one of only 14 Senators to do so. The appropriation obviously passed which did waive the Stafford Act â?? no thanks to Obama. And still he went to that event and falsely used it to race bait.’
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
‘Ten days before Obama went to race bait in his now infamous ‘race speech’ from 2007, he voted against an appropriation that would have waived the Stafford Act and was one of only 14 Senators to do so. The appropriation obviously passed which did waive the Stafford Act Ã?¢?? no thanks to Obama. And still he went to that event and falsely used it to race bait.’
Wow.
That is just incredible.
Truly sickening.[/quote]
Obama wasn’t lying he just got confused - Bush refused to waive the Stafford Act because he’s racist…wait…he did waive it? And I voted against waving it 10 days ago? Oh, okay. Carry on then.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
‘Ten days before Obama went to race bait in his now infamous ‘race speech’ from 2007, he voted against an appropriation that would have waived the Stafford Act and was one of only 14 Senators to do so. The appropriation obviously passed which did waive the Stafford Act Ã?¢?? no thanks to Obama. And still he went to that event and falsely used it to race bait.’
Wow.
That is just incredible.
Truly sickening.[/quote]
Sickening is a good word for this. This is simply indefensible. The media absolutely failed this country. This man lied his ass off to Katrina victims, actually painting Bush and the Federal government as racist, and all along he voted against waiving Stafford? Folks, that’s maniacal.
you can’t blame the guy for using the media’s complacency and the people’s stupidity.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
‘Ten days before Obama went to race bait in his now infamous ‘race speech’ from 2007, he voted against an appropriation that would have waived the Stafford Act and was one of only 14 Senators to do so. The appropriation obviously passed which did waive the Stafford Act Ã??Ã?¢?? no thanks to Obama. And still he went to that event and falsely used it to race bait.’
Wow.
That is just incredible.
Truly sickening.[/quote]
Sickening is a good word for this. This is simply indefensible. The media absolutely failed this country. This man lied his ass off to Katrina victims, actually painting Bush and the Federal government as racist, and all along he voted against waiving Stafford? Folks, that’s maniacal.
[/quote]
If you have enough Blackness, you get a pass.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oh for crying out loud, this just keeps getting worse.
This Obama feller is quite the piece of work.
This story is just unbelievable. Truly unbelievable.
The demagoguery with the (pitifully) phony accent is bad enough, but it is old news and can be chalked up to simple pandering. But this…this…deliberately using this unacceptable rhetoric to work up a crowd when the basis of the “rage” is an absolute lie and you can check the Senate voting record in one pass to know that it is…should be a national scandal, because it absolutely matters to the 2012 election.
It’s no wonder the administration won’t have a presser - between this and the Benghazi debacle.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oh for crying out loud, this just keeps getting worse.
This Obama feller is quite the piece of work.
He really should be called on the carpet over this. This is revolting, considering what he implied about Bush. Politics might be rough, I get that, but this above and beyond.