Liberal Star-Tribune states that no verbal gaffes occurred in last night's VP debate; I beg to differ

According to the liberal Minneapolis Star Tribune, last night's debate between vice presidential candidates Sarah Palin and Joe Biden was polite, pointed, and contained no verbal gaffes.

Really?

According to Townhall's Amanda Carpenter, who cites Republican candidate John's McCain's bloggist, Biden lied FOURTEEN times.

Note the following:

On the foreign policy front, Biden challenged Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin when she said Barack Obama’s pledge to meet with any foreign leaders, including Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, without precondition “goes beyond naivete and goes beyond poor judgment.”

Biden lectured Palin, “That's just simply not true about Barack Obama. He did not say he'd sit down with Ahmadinejad.” During the YouTube Democratic primary debate last July Obama was asked if he would meet the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, and North Korea without “precondition” during his first year in office.

“I would,” he replied.

Biden appeared to attack Obama for making that very statement in August 2007. While Biden was challenging Obama for the Democratic nomination for president Biden said he would not support such a pledge. “Would I make a blanket commitment to meet unconditionally with the leaders of each of those countries within the first year I was elected president?” he said in an appearance at the National Press Club. “Absolutely positively no."

Five of the lies Biden told were related to tax and energy votes. During the debate Biden adamantly claimed McCain voted the same way as Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama did on a vote to raise taxes on those making $42,000 a year. The legislative record shows McCain was not present in the Senate for either of those votes and is recorded as “not voting.”

The RNC also takes issue with Biden’s assessment Palin supports a “windfall profits tax” and Biden’s claim McCain voted against alternative energy 23 times. The independent Factcheck.org has previously stated when Obama and other Democrats made similar charges about the 23 votes “they’re overstating the case.”

The other lies detailed by Goldfarb were related to Biden’s characterization of McCain’s healthcare plan, stances on bank deregulation and the $700 billion financial bailout that recently passed the Senate.

Yet, we're not going to hear that from the Mainstream Media, are we?

Why would we? From a corrupt group that has refused to report on any of Obama's shortcomings, whether its his associations with Jeremiah Wright or Bill Ayers, or his gangland-like tactics in Missouri, Virginia and Chicago to usurp our First Amendment rights, or his daily verbal gaffes on the economy, terrorism, and foreign reports, we're saturated with endless glowing reports of their "Chosen One" at every turn.

Barry Obama: Robbin' the Hood

I don't know about you, but the Twin Cities Conservative is getting a proverbial "kick" out of Democratic presidential candidate Barry Soetoro/Dunham/Obama's economic plan.

What is it? Well, undoubtedly you've heard the phrases "redistribution of wealth" and "economic justice" being bandied about. This basically entails stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, or as Obama's vice presidential minion, Joe Biden stated on ABC's Good Morning, "We want to take money and put it in the pockets of the middle class people…"

Okay, that should merely affirm what we know about the Obama camp: that they have designs on planting the seeds of Socialism in this country. Note the following from this article, courtesy of Investors Business Daily:

"'Economic justice' simply means punishing the successful and redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It's a euphemism for socialism."

Furthermore, according to Townhall.com's Austin Hill:

"Now, Obama and Biden have constructed a campaign that promises to simply take things away from people who have achieved them, and give things to people who have not achieved them. This is “change” that America cannot afford - - neither in terms of monetary, or human capital."This is the type of "change" Obama has in mind: he doesn't want to make average Joe American's life any better, but instead he wants to give those who haven't worked hard "treasure" that other Americans have earned.

How is that fair?

It's not; for the record, there are deserving people in this country; people who can use a helping hand. But don't you think most honest, sensible Americans would rather have a job than merely an entitlement? If Obama wants to mete out "economic justice," why not, IF he's elected President, require those sucking on the goverment teat, to work?

He won't, because he knows that as long as people are receiving FREE MONEY from the government, a basic tenet of the Democratic Party, that constitutes what is essentially a guaranteed vote.

The problem is that these entitlements are like crack cocaine to those who ABUSE them. They are hooked.

Robin Hood, Barry Obama is not.

Star Tribune: Iraq War still matters to Democrats

We're likely to hear the same defeatist rhetoric from Washington insider and Democratic Vice Presidential candidate, Joe Biden at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

You've heard the familiar lamentation from the Left: we need to get out of Iraq, this was an illegal war, Bush is worse than Hitler/Saddam/Stalin, etc, and he should be prosecuted for war crimes.

Yawn.

According to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Iraq still matters to delegates. If this story exposes anything, it epitomizes misplaced priorities in the Liberal agenda:

Universal health care, alternative energy, surrender from Iraq.

Furthermore, it demonstrates how inexplicably naive and misinformed the Left is.

"Minnesota delegate Miguel Lindgren, of Roseville, said he is worried that Iraq is taking a back seat to the convention's focus on domestic issues.

'I haven't heard much, and it concerns me," Lindgren said. 'Obviously, we're getting lost in the hype and the hoopla in the convention talking about issues at home finally, but we need to readdress the war.'"

Of course it is, you nincompoop. The war is going well, despite every effort from your corrupt liberal mainstream media to paint it as the second coming of Vietnam. Even your beloved Messiah, Democratic presidential candidate Barry Hussein Obama is having a difficult time portraying Iraq as a failure.

There ARE more pressing issues our future president needs to address, primarily a sinking dollar, sluggish economy, insane gas prices, etc.

"And one of the more forceful comments about Iraq at the convention came from Sen. Edward Kennedy on Monday night. 'Barack Obama will be a commander in chief who understands that young Americans in uniform must never be committed to a mistake, but always to a mission worthy of their bravery,' Kennedy told the crowd."

What a disengenous boob. You and your Leftist ilk (namely Bill Clinton and Al Gore) were clamoring for the dismissal of Saddam Hussein in the 1990's while maintaining that the Iraqi despot was feverishly working on a WMD program consisting of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. Even your new VP candidate had strong words about Saddam earlier this decade (thank you Gateway.com):

Here is the transcript of Joe "Glowstick" Biden speaking about Saddam's WMD.
Joe Biden on Meet the Press on Sunday April 29, 2007:

MR. RUSSERT: I want to go back to 2002, because it’s important as to what people were saying then and what the American people were hearing. Here’s Joe Biden about Saddam Hussein: “He’s a long term threat and a short term threat to our national security.”

“We have no choice but to eliminate the threat. This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world.”

“He must be dislodged from his weapons or dislodged from power.” You were emphatic about that.

SEN. BIDEN: That’s right, and I was correct about that. He must be, in fact—and remember the weapons we were talking about. I also said on your show, that’s part of what I said, but not all of what I meant. What I also said on your show at the time was that I did not think he had weaponized his material, but he did have. When, when the inspectors left after Saddam kicked them out, there was a cataloguing at the United Nations saying he had X tons of, X amount of, and they listed the various materials he had. The big issue, remember, on this show we talked about, was whether he had weaponized them. Remember you asked me about those flights that were taking place in southern Iraq, where—were they spraying anthrax? And, you know, what would happen? And, you know, so on and so forth. And I pointed out to you that they had not developed that capacity at all. But he did have these stockpiles everywhere.

MR. RUSSERT: Where are they?

SEN. BIDEN: Well, the point is, it turned out they didn’t, but everyone in the world thought he had them.

The weapons inspectors said he had them. He catalogued—they catalogued them. This was not some, some Cheney, you know, pipe dream. This was, in fact, catalogued. They looked at them and catalogued. What he did with them, who knows? The real mystery is, if he, if he didn’t have any of them left, why didn’t he say so? Well, a lot of people say if he had said that, he would’ve, you know, emboldened Iran and so on and so forth.

But does it really surprise anyone that the Left refuses to address incriminations from its dear beloved Democratic leaders when THEY admonish the world for failing to act against a ruthless tyrant? No, only when it comes from a Republican.

Typical.