Jump to content

Usa Thread


TroyinEwa/Perv
 Share

Recommended Posts

From what I remember, she was virtually forced on Mondale. That made him look even whimpier, since he couldn't even choose his own running mate.

 

 

<< At the outset the "Ferraro factor" brought glamour and energy to Mondale's rather staged, lacklustre image and plodding campaign. Shortly after the convention, however, controversy erupted about her personal finances. Her reputation was damaged by revelations of tax avoidance, shady business dealings, and possible Mafia connections of her husband, John Zaccaro. There were also allegations that Ferraro herself had been involved in financial impropriety in respect of her 1978 campaign funds. The ensuing scandal doomed the Mondale — Ferraro ticket. >>

 

 

Oxford Dictionary of Political Biography:

Geraldine Anne Ferraro

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

REPORTER CONFINED IN CLOSET DURING VEEP'S FUNDRAISER

 

26 March 2011

 

 

 

Staffers with Vice President Joe Biden confined an Orlando Sentinel reporter in a closet this week to keep him from mingling with high-powered guests gathered for a Democratic fundraiser.

 

Reporter Scott Powers was the designated "pool reporter" for the vice president's Wednesday visit to the massive Winter Park, Fla., home of developer and philanthropist Alan Ginsburg. The veep hadn't arrived yet but most of the 150 guests (minimum $500 donation) had. They were busy noshing on caprese crostini with oven-dried mozzarella and basil, rosemary flatbread with grapes honey and gorgonzola cheese and bacon deviled eggs, before a lunch of grilled chicken Caesar and garden vegetable wraps.

 

Not so for Powers. A "low-level staffer" put Powers in a storage closet and then stood guard outside the door, Powers told the DRUDGE REPORT. "When I'd stick my head out, they'd say, 'Not yet. We'll let you know when you can come out.'"

 

And no crustini for Powers, either. He made do with a bottle of water to sip as he sat at a tiny makeshift desk, right next to a bag marked "consignment." Powers was closeted at about 11:30 a.m., held for about an hour and 15 minutes, came out for 35 minutes of remarks by Biden and Sen. Bill Nelson, Florida Democrat, and then returned to his jail for the remainder of the event.

 

Powers' phone didn't work in the closet, but his Blackberry did, so he fired a picture of his impromptu prison to his editors, who posted a short blog item on the lack of freedom of the press under the veep's control.

 

Powers didn't mention his confinement in either of his pool reports that day, saying only that "press coverage was limited to a single pool reporter, filing on behalf of all local media, who was allowed to listen to the remarks but not given an opportunity to talk with anyone at the event."

 

On Friday, Powers said, the home's owner called him. "He said he had no idea they'd put me in a closet and was very sorry. He said he was just following their lead and was extremely embarrassed by the whole thing."

 

 

True Democracy in the PDR America :p

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Vice President's staff lock journalist in a closet for hours during a fundraiser to stop him talking to guests

 

 

 

The White House website proudly says ‘President Obama is committed to creating the most open and accessible administration in American history.’

 

But try telling Vice President Joe Biden’s staff that, after they held a local reporter in a closet for hours after he was invited to cover a Florida political fundraiser because they did not want him talking with the guests.

 

As the unaware $500-a-head invitees dined on caprese crostini with oven-dried mozzarella and basil, rosemary flatbread with grapes honey and gorgonzola cheese, grilled chicken Caesar and garden vegetable wraps, veteran reporter Scott Powers was locked away.

 

The Orlando Sentinel reporter was ushered into the closet inside wealthy property developer Alan Ginsburg’s Winter Falls mansion, after being told that Joe Biden and Senator Bill Nelson had not yet arrived.

 

They were due to speak to the audience to raise money for the 2012 elections.

 

He was told he could only come out when the politicians were ready to give their speeches.

 

Powers told The Drudge Report: ‘When I'd stick my head out, they'd say, “Not yet. We'll let you know when you can come out.â€â€™

 

After 90 minutes he was allowed out to hear Biden and Nelson speak for 35 minutes, before being taken back to the closet for the remainder of the event.

 

From inside his temporary prison, Powers emailed his office from his cell phone: ‘Sounds like a nice party.’

 

When Ginsburg – who has supported both Democrat and Republican candidates in the past – learnt of the treatment that took place in his house, he called the reporter.

 

Powers said: ‘[Ginsburg] said he had no idea they'd put me in a closet and was very sorry.

 

‘He said he was just following their lead and was extremely embarrassed by the whole thing.’

 

But some guests were shocked by the Vice President’s staff.

 

One emailed the paper saying: ‘I was in attendance at the Fundraiser and enjoyed a nice lunch.

 

‘If I had known there was a reporter stuffed in the closet, I would have been compelled to stand up and demand answers.

 

‘I would also like to know if this is actually legal to treat people like caged animals. I’m disgusted by these actions.’

 

Florida state law says kidnapping entails ‘forcibly, secretly or by threat confining, abducting or imprisoning another person against her or his will and without lawful authority.’

 

Powers said of his treatment: ‘It was frustrating and annoying that I was not given a chance to do my job fully and properly.

 

‘This was an extreme, and extremely inappropriate way of handling the press… it was essentially a rude and uncomfortable way to treat a reporter.’

 

[color:red]He attempted to play down his treatment calling it ‘hardly unusual or shocking’ and confirmed that he received an apology from Ginsburg.

 

But the Vice President’s staff emailed him an apology which he said ‘I found far less satisfying than Ginsburg’s.’[/color]

 

The incident is especially embarrassing for the administration because it comes at a time when the White House has been condemning the treatment of journalists trying to report in Libya.

 

Just ten days ago, President Obama’s spokesman Jay Carney told reporters: ‘journalists should be protected and allowed to do their work.’

 

[color:red]The Vice President’s office did not respond to requests for comment.[/color] ;)

 

 

 

Link

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me either. But the country would have been sorry if she/Mondale had prevailed over Reagan. 55555 (Wasn't that the election that Reagan one by light years?)

 

HH

Ferraro couldn't have been the stalwart liberal everyone imagined in 1984. She had been a paid contributor on Fox News for years and tonight, Fox will do an hour tribute to her; Fox News to offer Geraldine Ferraro special Sunday

 

 

Greta Van Susteren will host “Geraldine Ferraro: A Celebration of Life†at 10 p.m. Sunday on Fox News Channel.

 

Ferraro died today at age 75. The former New York congresswoman had been Walter Mondale’s running mate in 1984 on the Democrat presidential ticket. She had been a Fox News contributor since 1999.

 

In comments today on Fox News, Van Susteren said, “Geraldine was extraordinary.â€

 

Van Susteren stressed that Ferraro cared passionately about women and was a huge trailblazer for women as the first female vice-presidential candidate on a major ticket.

 

The host of “On the Record†said she got to know Ferraro through the years. Van Susteren reminded viewers that Ferraro had supported Hillary Clinton’s run for the presidency in 2008, and that Ferraro was proud when Sarah Palin was named John McCain’s running mate. As “a very strong Democrat,†Ferraro didn’t agree with Palin on the issues, though, Van Susteren added.

 

“She had very, very strong convictions,†Van Susteren said in remembering Ferraro. “She was tough as could be.â€

 

 

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that I agree or disagree. I just like beating HH and Flash to it. :nahnah:

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/24/president-obama-has-lost-his-legitimacy-to-remain-/#

 

President Obama has lost his legitimacy to remain in office. The Libyan war has exposed the administration’s lawlessness and rampant criminality. If Republicans and conservatives are serious about restoring constitutional government, they will demand that Mr. Obama be impeached.

The war is going badly. The coalition is cracking; the strategic aims of the military intervention are not clear; Russia, China, India and Brazil oppose it; the Arab League is condemning the deaths of innocent Libyans caused by Operation Odyssey Dawn; and it appears that Moammar Gadhafi will succeed in clinging to power - defying the international community and humiliating the United States. Mr. Obama has called for Col. Gadhafi to step down. He has staked American prestige and power on helping bring about that end. The failure to achieve this will render America a paper tiger on the world stage. We will no longer be feared or respected...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Analysis: Obama doesn't mention Libyan rebels

 

 

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama wanted to tell a hesitant America why he launched a military assault in Libya, and he wanted to describe it on his terms — limited, sensible, moral and backed by international partners with the shared goal of protecting Libyans from a ruthless despot.

 

[color:red]Trouble is, the war he described Monday doesn't quite match the fight the United States is in.[/color]

 

[color:red]It also doesn't line up with the conflict Obama himself had seemed to presage, when he expressly called for Moammar Gadhafi's overthrow or resignation. Obama's stated goals stop well short of that. And although Obama talked of the risks of a long war, he did not say just when or on what terms the United States would leave Libya.[/color]

 

Obama never directly mention the Libyan rebels seeking Gadhafi's overthrow, even though the heavy U.S.-led firepower trained on Gadhafi's forces has allowed those rebels to regain momentum and push toward Gadhafi's territory.

 

"We have intervened to stop a massacre," Obama said.

 

Ten days into a conflict many Americans say they do not understand, Obama laid out a moral imperative for intervening against a murderous tyrant, and doing so without the lengthy international dithering that allowed so much blood to be spilled in Bosnia. His address at the National Defense University echoed campaign rhetoric about restoring U.S. moral pride of place after squandering it in Iraq.

 

"Mindful of the risks and costs of military action, we are naturally reluctant to use force to solve the world's many challenges," Obama said. "But when our interests and values are at stake, we have a responsibility to act."

 

Gadhafi's forces have been largely pinned down and unable to mount a massacre since the first hours of the war, while U.S. and NATO warplanes have become an unacknowledged aerial arm of the rebels. Obama said the United States will help the opposition, an oblique reference to the rebels.

 

Over the weekend U.S. Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt aircraft, designed to provide battlefield support to friendly ground forces, flew attack missions for the first time in this conflict. The Pentagon also disclosed Monday that Air Force AC-130 gunships, low-flying aircraft armed with a 105mm howitzer and a 40mm cannon, had joined the battle. Those two types of aircraft give the U.S. more ability to confront pro-Gadhafi forces in urban areas with less risk of civilian casualties.

 

The Pentagon's lead spokesman on Libya operations, Navy Vice Adm. William Gortney, told reporters Monday that the U.S. military is not coordinating with the rebels. But he left little doubt that, by design or not, Western air power is propelling the rebels forward.

 

"Clearly they're achieving a benefit from the actions that we're taking," Gortney said. He displayed a chart that showed rebels advancing within 80 miles of Sirte, Gadhafi's home town.

 

If the purpose of the U.N.-sanctioned military action is to protect civilians, does that include pro-Gadhafi civilians who are likely to be endangered in places like Sirte that are in the rebels' crosshairs? If not, it is difficult to see the Western intervention as a neutral humanitarian act not aligned with the rebels.

 

The first goal of the intervention was to prevent a massacre of civilians in Benghazi, the eastern Libyan city where Gadhafi forces were threatening to crush the rebellion two weeks ago. Gadhafi said he would "show no mercy."

 

A U.S.-led assault quickly accomplished that first goal. A no-fly zone was established two weekends ago with little resistance. The U.S. and its partners then launched airstrikes on Gadhafi supply lines and other military targets not only near Benghazi but around other contested areas as well.

 

[color:red]But the role of Western air power then went beyond that initial humanitarian aim, to in effect provide air cover for the rebels while pounding Gadhafi forces in a bid to break their will or capacity to fight.[/color]

 

Now U.S. forces are pulling back, handing much of the responsibility for the open-ended military campaign to allies, as Obama said they would.

 

"So for those who doubted our capacity to carry out this operation, I want to be clear: The United States of America has done what we said we would do," Obama said with clear satisfaction.

 

He meant that the U.S. had hewed to its stated role under a U.N. Security Council resolution that authorized force.

 

But he acknowledged that the U.N. mandate doesn't extend to Gadhafi's ouster, even if many of the nations carrying it out might wish for that. Obama was frank about the reasons why.

 

"Broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake," Obama said.

 

It would shatter the international partnership he relies on for diplomatic cover and security backup. It would probably mean sending U.S. ground forces into yet another Muslim nation, something Obama has said he will not do in Libya. It would undoubtedly increase the risk to the U.S. military, the costs of the war and U.S. responsibility for shoring up and protecting whatever Libya might emerge, Obama said.

 

"To be blunt, we went down that road in Iraq," Obama said, where thousands of U.S. forces remain eight years after the fall of Saddam Hussein.

 

"That is not something we can afford to repeat in Libya," Obama said.

 

Getting rid of Gadhafi "may not happen overnight," Obama warned, in his first acknowledgement of the stalemate with the rebels that many analysts and some of his own military advisers suspect is coming. Gadhafi, Obama said, might well cling to power for some time.

 

The United States is considering arming the rebels, directly or indirectly, and U.S. officials say the U.N. resolution would allow that. Obama mentioned nothing about the possibility of civil war in Libya, or what the U.S. might do if the war grinds on for months.

 

Obama still faces questions about why Libya and not Yemen, or not Syria. One of his closest national security advisers, Denis McDonough, told reporters Monday that the administration doesn't "get very hung up on this question of precedent."

 

"We don't make decisions about questions like intervention based on consistency or precedent," McDonough said.

 

Throughout his address, Obama seemed to be answering his own criticism of past wars and past leaders who committed military force too hastily or too hesitantly.

 

The Nobel Peace Prize winner never used the word "war" to describe what's happening in Libya, but made a point of addressing what the conflict he chose "says about the use of America's military power, and America's broader leadership in the world, under my presidency."

 

His book "The Audacity of Hope" and his Nobel speech established the same predicates for U.S. military intervention — an allied coalition and use of multinational power.

 

"We know that the United States, as the world's most powerful nation, will often be called upon to help," Obama said Monday. "In such cases, we should not be afraid to act, but the burden of action should not be America's alone."

 

 

 

Link

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...