the President-elect had not expressed a favorite to replace him, and his inclination was to avoid being a "kingmaker,"
On Dec 11, 3:45 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > http://blogs.knoxnews.com/knx/granju/2008/12/note-to-presidentelect-o... > > >>> ...on November 23, 2008, his senior adviser David Axelrod appeared on Fox > >>> News Chicago and said something quite different. > > While insisting that the President-elect had not expressed a favorite > to replace him, and his inclination was to avoid being a "kingmaker," > Axelrod said, "I know he's talked to the governor and there are a > whole range of names many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a > fondness for a lot of them." > > On Dec 11, 4:02 am, "Happy Holidays ! mike 532" > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > " For Obama to claim he held not discussion with the Governor about > > his > > replacements is clearly a fudge -- Obama's campaign manager already > > said he had... " > > do you have a link for that informstion ? > > On Dec 10, 11:49 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Yep... And normally a President elect does not have the DEGREE of > > > coverage Obama has... This honeymoon is not like like your ordinary > > > one... Obama take a tactic to dominate the news from election to Jan > > > 20.... Part of the risk in a "All about Obama" MSM culture is when > > > shit hits the fan it spreads quickly throiughout the country... A > > > Governor selling a Sem=nate seat to the highest bidder is a story most > > > American can understand - Greed and Lust... Economic AND POWER... > > > > For Obama to claim he held not discussion with the Governor about his > > > replacements is clearly a fudge -- Obama's campaign manager already > > > said he had... And this fudging of facts will become the assumed > > > method of Obama... In short he is will to spin truth into a nice > > > comfortable lie... The Press already has noted this... > > > > On Dec 9, 6:08 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > jgg, > > > > > "Ending Obama's Honeymoon?" Sheeeeet, the guy hasn't even been sworn > > > > in yet! > > > > > On Dec 9, 4:13 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > This editorial Hollywood is becoming typical, the MSM need fresh meat > > > > > to feed on -- Democratic Politician on are their diet as well... As > > > > > titular head of the the Democratic Party (especially concerning HIS > > > > > hometown and state) the Buck stops at Obama... Silence will just > > > > > taint the perceptions of Obama's ethics quickly if no action is > > > > > taken... > > > > > > This is ending Obama's Honeymoon... > > > > > >http://blogs.knoxnews.com/knx/granju/2008/12/note-to-presidentelect-o... > > > > > > >>> Today, President-Elect Obama spoke out about the emerging > > > > > >>> political scandal out of Illinois involving his former Senate > > > > > >>> seat, and he denied emphatically having ever even spoken to the > > > > > >>> now-arrested governor about the matter, saying: > > > > > > "I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were > > > > > not, I was not aware of what was happening." > > > > > > Ummmm....I have to say that this statement is pretty hard to believe. > > > > > Of course the outgoing Senator and his staff would speak to the > > > > > governor of the same party and his staff about which individuals might > > > > > be shortlisted for the vacant seat. There would be nothing wrong with > > > > > such conversations, as long as no quid pro quo scenario was discussed > > > > > or suggested. That would simply be a reasonable and prudent > > > > > conversation for Obama to have had with Blagojevich, and it's hard to > > > > > believe that he did not. > > > > > > And in fact, according to one of his top advisors, Obama did talk to > > > > > the governor about the matter. > > > > > > On Dec 9, 4:42 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > > Why in the fuck are you asking me? I made my position on the subject > > > > > > quite clear. Go bitch at someone else. > > > > > > > On Dec 9, 2:36 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Why then in 2006 was corruption labeled Republican??? Especially > > > > > > > when the fact you suggest was true then as well??? Consider the > > > > > > > Democrat's October Surprise", Rep. Folley... They KNEW about it > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > over a 1 1/2 years and did and said nothing... > > > > > > > > On Dec 9, 12:56 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Phil, > > > > > > > > > What we have is not Democratic corruption or Republican > > > > > > > > corruption but > > > > > > > > political corruption. Sometimes it's Democrats and sometimes > > > > > > > > it's > > > > > > > > Republicans. Throw them all in jail, they can pass the time > > > > > > > > discussing > > > > > > > > politics. > > > > > > > > > On Dec 9, 11:12 am, Philobealo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D94V9NK80&show_article=1-Hide... > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
