Obama using bribes to maintain Senate Majority

Originally posted by Perplexity
Exactly, he isn't the first president to do this and he won't be the last.

Point being what? That everyone should just look the other way and pretend it's ok for the president (or people on his staff) to break the law just because other presidents have done it? Or is it that we shouldn't care because it's Obama and he should get a free pass for some bizarre reason? Or maybe we should look the other way because Obama can do no wrong compared to Bush?

Breaking the law is breaking the law. Just because a law has been broken before doesn't mean that the next one to break it should get a free pass. Nor does being president mean Obama or anyone else should get a free pass just because of their job.



Personally I find it pretty sad that anyone would excuse Obama breaking the law just because someone else did it before. This is the reason why the country is the way it is right now. Because people don't give a rats behind when politicians break the law as long as it's not a politician they hate. And people wonder why things just keep getting worse and the same idiots keep getting voted back into office.

reply to post by Blaine91555


I see your point, however I think there may be a major executive privledge breaker here... IF they subpoena documentation from the recievee rather than from the president's office, is EP still in effect? The previous administration created a huge crapstorm when they attempted to extend EP to cover the office of Vice President. Imagine if this administration tried to do the same only with congressmen, senators, and congressional staff & aide positions. I can only imagine the judicial branch would hear arguments about that relatively swiftly.

Listen, guys, we had Valerie Plame outed, u.s. attorneys fired, warrantless wiretaps, and blatant manipulation of the American people to support a war in Iraq... and that's the that sh*t actually made it to mainstream media. What was the end result? Nada...

This Obama sh*t is so small by comparison... But good to know you guys suddenly care about such moralities.

Originally posted by spiritualzombie
Listen, guys, we had Valerie Plame outed, u.s. attorneys fired, warrantless wiretaps, and blatant manipulation of the American people to support a war in Iraq... and that's the that sh*t actually made it to mainstream media. What was the end result? Nada...

This Obama sh*t is so small by comparison... But good to know you guys suddenly care about such moralities.

Funny you say that.
I like Bush just about as much as the next guy, but..
Last I remembered, everyone was trying to prosecute Bush(And they still are).
The only thing I remember out of the Bush Era is the other side trying to take him out.

Now that it is your manin office, you are all silent.
I see no "ANTI WAR" groups that I saw before.
Just silent drones.

What you say is so hypocritical it aint even funny.

Originally posted by Erdna
Even if Obama is behind this, is he not above the law, being President and all? ... As President, his job should be to act in the best interest of the country.

NO! As this goes directly against the very foundations of self-governance! The very idea that one would presume that a President should be considered above the law should seriously look at and study Richard Nixon. By your logic, then President Nixon, should not have been brought up for impeachment as his actions were 'in the best interest'.

By keeping democrats he can trust in power, it will allow the government to do its 'job' better.

Positions within government should not go to friends (I know, it happens), but rather to the best man for the job. That is the basic tenet of self-governance which we have drifted grossly off course from. Quid Pro Quo does not enable the government to do its job.

So he is in a way acting in the best interest in the nation. If you guys want to say that a President shouldnt be able to decide who's in power through bribes because it is illegal, than at the same times others can argue he shouldnt be in power because he is supoprting a war right now and killing people is illegal.

Can you further that statement? As you are making a far stretched and illogical point. Bribing someone to with a high-level position in order to possibly give an incumbent a better chance at reelection is not the same as a President or other Public Official supporting a war.

A war, which by the way that is continually funded by Congress, not the President.

Just saying... He IS the law.

That is just a scary statement in its own and shows the lack of care about governance in this country by the general populace. No Man is above the Law.

Originally posted by Erdna
Even if Obama is behind this, is he not above the law, being President and all? ... As President, his job should be to act in the best interest of the country. By keeping democrats he can trust in power, it will allow the government to do its 'job' better. So he is in a way acting in the best interest in the nation. If you guys want to say that a President shouldnt be able to decide who's in power through bribes because it is illegal, than at the same times others can argue he shouldnt be in power because he is supoprting a war right now and killing people is illegal. Just saying... He IS the law.

He is the the law? Are you kidding? After reading this I can only come to three possible conclusions:

1) This person is very young and uneducated.
2) This person is being sarcastic to prove a point.
3) This person is foreign and has no idea about the Presidency.

Richard Nixon would have loved to have a supporter like this man or woman.

Really there are no other options.

I'm not surprised either...
Wait... yes I am. I'm surprised he's not being accused of setting kittens on fire at midnight while he does the Naked Satan Dance in the Oval Office.

Those dang Muslim, Nazi, Socialist, Communists love the Naked Satan Dance.

Originally posted by OverSword
As I seem to recall Nixon was not the one who broke into McGoverns campain offices but he was impeached none the less.

Slightly off-topic but a correction is needed in your statement. Nixon was never impeached as he resigned before it could happen. Some future information for ya! Only Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton have ever been impeached.

Originally posted by Common Good

Originally posted by spiritualzombie
Listen, guys, we had Valerie Plame outed, u.s. attorneys fired, warrantless wiretaps, and blatant manipulation of the American people to support a war in Iraq... and that's the that sh*t actually made it to mainstream media. What was the end result? Nada...

This Obama sh*t is so small by comparison... But good to know you guys suddenly care about such moralities.

Funny you say that.
I like Bush just about as much as the next guy, but..
Last I remembered, everyone was trying to prosecute Bush(And they still are).
The only thing I remember out of the Bush Era is the other side trying to take him out.

Now that it is your manin office, you are all silent.
I see no "ANTI WAR" groups that I saw before.
Just silent drones.

What you say is so hypocritical it aint even funny.

Nobody inside the US Gov is trying to prosecute Bush. No suits have been filed.
The Justice Dept. hasn't said boo.

Now a lot of people have called for investigations and prosecutions, but that's not the same thing.

Now that my man's in office? WTF?

I consider myself an independent thinker... My first choice would have been Ron Paul... then maybe Dennis Kucinich... when it was Obama vs Hillary vs McCain, I was glad Obama beat Hillary... when it became Obama vs McCain, it was clear what the right choice was. I don't think I was alone in this logic.

Bush/Cheney are war criminals. This is not about party lines and this is exactly why nobody can take the so-called 'right' seriously, because the 'right' supported war criminals.

And yes, between the invasion of Iraq that had nothing to do with 9/11, the use of intentional lies and manipulation to gain support for that war, and the use of torture to obtain false confessions to justify that war.... I'm going to pick my battles and say we had WAR CRIMINALS for 8 YEARS... and this little bullsh*t about Clinton's BJ or the stuff Obama is doing... while it could explode, is more of a pre-crime vs mass murder debate.

And as much as people like to say both sides are bad... the scales definitely tip harder toward the mass murder/treasonists.

And as far as anti-war.... as soon a sh*t hits the fan in Iran you can expect to see those protests again... meanwhile FOX News will be saying it's the only right decision the president has made, albeit too slow pulling the trigger.

This is no surprise. The fact that Democrats are increasingly "talking" to the press is the relevant issue.
When the crime families get along, and everyone is making money, and nobody's turf is infringed upon, this sort of story is on the back page, or the "Beck" burner. When it becomes front page news,
look out Obama! Corleone is having a meeting!

Originally posted by Angus123
I'm not surprised either...
Wait... yes I am. I'm surprised he's not being accused of setting kittens on fire at midnight while he does the Naked Satan Dance in the Oval Office.

Those dang Muslim, Nazi, Socialist, Communists love the Naked Satan Dance.

If this news story is true, does it bother you that this is happening?

Source is important here.

A far far right rag opinion piece using the comments by a person running for congress implying something said on a conspiracy/far right radio show that offers no specifics, will not speak about it beyond a unverified yes, and simply answered yes to a single lead in question. Also, if you ask the constituents in philly, it appears this longshot is in desperation mode and is trying to muddy the waters with anything he can now to try and gain any traction on a otherwise gimme campaign.

Interesting side note, he is extremely bitter at Obama for backing his competition, Specter.

Start a rumor unproven and let the rumor grow into a conspiracy with no grounding.

So, heres the facts...someone on a sinking ship said something, the white house denied it was said, most see this guy as in desperation mode, and even after he said yes, he did not comment on what he said yes to.

no proof beyond a initial speculation of a man in a bitter, sinking ship...I spose however it wont matter...if Rush Limbaugh went out tomorrow and said Obama may have offered him coc aine to stop talking on the radio, someone will believe him.

Meh, who needs facts when you can have speculation...grab the pitchforks folks

Originally posted by johnny2127

If this news story is true, does it bother you that this is happening?

I find most bothering is people taking the word of anyone with no proof whatsoever and a backround showing he has nothing to lose and everything to gain in making up rumors.

Shows that some people will gladly accept any lie or innuendo from anyone to justify their blameseeking

Not even the 10 minutes required to research the critical info on this particular case...just a hey...someone said something bad about the administration, must be true...get the rope.

deny ignorance my arse.

Originally posted by trueperspective
Why is it that nothing sticks to this guy. Everyone has been hurling mud at him and it just smears right off and he still all squeaky clean. I don't get it, I just don't get it. How can he be doing so many illegal and questionable things and no one is doing anything about it.

Everyone on the RIGHT is furiously throwing their stinking # at Obama. I'm too far left (well, ultimately beyond the right-left game) to support Obama 100% myself, he seems to cater to corporate/banking interests and war-mongering a bit too much for my tastes, HOWEVER, I will NOT buy into the manufactured smear-campaign propaganda of the right-wing against him. The reason why the # isn't sticking is 90% because it's absolute BULL. I can't believe you don't see how the right-wing is trying to destroy the Obama presidency at ANY cost, they've pulled out all of their spinster guns to call him every single thing in the book, accuse him of every single crime, it's all so disgustingly blatant and transparent yet people are falling for all the Glenn Beck crocodile tears. I'm sure this is all payback for the FAR GREATER crimes that the Bush admin was criticized for so frequently by the left. I'm not saying Obama is 100% innocent, he's definitely not and left-wingers criticize him often enough (especially fellow Anarchists). However, there's healthy criticism of government and then there's outright lying/propaganda, and being an Anarchist I'm much more anti-government than any right-winger and still I will not follow lies simply because it's critical of government, truth is my ultimate goal and I just don't buy all the lies and exaggerations about Obama, it just gets in the way of figuring out the truth about him.

As for this specific issue... it's disappointing if true. But I'm sure these sorts of things are common for the white house, I mean have we forgotten the FLOOD of such sweet-heart deals that the Bush admin doled out and NEVER got prosecuted for? We've seen MUCH worse and there is STILL no outcry by the "MSM". I don't mean to change the subject, I just think this should be put into holistic perspective if it turns out to be true. This sort of thing might be VERY common in the big picture, even though it's wrong and shouldn't be allowed, but it's possible this is nothing new. It's also possible that the current white house is doing less of it than previous admins (both Rep/Dem) it's also possible he's doing more of it. What's also possible is that this sort of thing isn't nearly as bad/damaging to our Democracy as other things the government does. So, once again, take the Obama-hate blinders off and just try to put this into sober perspective. I'm open to the facts no matter where they lead, but I think it's useless to objectivity to automatically assume the worst simply because you've been told to loathe Obama and "socialism". It's manufactured and expedient propaganda by the right so they can simply win positions, that's MOSTLY it. On the mountain of truth you never climb in vain, whether it reinforces your beliefs or totally destroys them.

Originally posted by johnny2127

Originally posted by Angus123
I'm not surprised either...
Wait... yes I am. I'm surprised he's not being accused of setting kittens on fire at midnight while he does the Naked Satan Dance in the Oval Office.

Those dang Muslim, Nazi, Socialist, Communists love the Naked Satan Dance.

If this news story is true, does it bother you that this is happening?

Of course it would. But most of these hysterical "bombshell stories" have turned out to be mostly hystrionics from dubious sources.

Originally posted by Erdna
reply to post by trueperspective

 

Why? Because he is the President. He is the binding force behind the nation. He is the law and has the power. He cannot do anything illegal.
Clinton had sexual relations in his office. He used an office paid by taxpayers for his own fun. Sure people smeared him but in the end, he did nothing wrong because he did it and cannot do anything wrong. He is always right. The guy's still loved by the public because you cant touch him. They have no power. They accepted in then and should do the same now.
President's can do what they want. Why don't people understand this?

Because that's not the way the United States is supposed to work. The President is not a King! For heaven's sake! What's wrong with you anyhow? It is supposed to be a Republic, a government run by the people. The President is only the executive, who is supposed to implement the LAWS enacted by the congress. It was never envisioned for the President to be above any law, never mind deciding the law. Why do you think the idea of Impeachment exists? Exactly!

Some of you Americans are so silly in your lack of understanding about your very own country, you need people from other countries to educate you on your own system.

Well, I've got news for you... the President takes an oath to defend the constitution, and the constitution does NOT give the President absolute control over anything, and Congress only has direct jurisdiction over the 10 sq./mile plot known as Washington, D.C. Each state is a sovereign government, able to decided it's own destiny with regards to everything that is not mentioned in the constitution, and it is only the states who can change the constitution. The Federal government is there to provide certain global services to all the states, such as a common defense, and to regulate a common currency, but beyond that, the states are to be the primary government each Citizen is accountable to.

Do you understand that you are a Citizen in the state where you reside? Do you call yourself a citizen of that state? If not, and if you don't know the constitution of that state, then you do not understand America... you should move to some other country that has only a single governmental body, since that is obviously more to your understanding and liking.

The people need to stop treating the President as a king, because he is nothing like a king, nor should he be. He is the hired executive, and you people are the "board of directors." People who want to serve a king are weak and infantile. Adults know how to govern themselves, and communities are fully capable of dealing with their own problems and challenges. Only immature "citizens" look for their king to provide all that they need. It is a grossly outdated and outmoded way of seeing government, based on a serf mentality that seeks to please the "lord of the manner."

Originally posted by Angus123

Originally posted by Common Good

Originally posted by spiritualzombie
Listen, guys, we had Valerie Plame outed, u.s. attorneys fired, warrantless wiretaps, and blatant manipulation of the American people to support a war in Iraq... and that's the that sh*t actually made it to mainstream media. What was the end result? Nada...

This Obama sh*t is so small by comparison... But good to know you guys suddenly care about such moralities.

Funny you say that.
I like Bush just about as much as the next guy, but..
Last I remembered, everyone was trying to prosecute Bush(And they still are).
The only thing I remember out of the Bush Era is the other side trying to take him out.

Now that it is your manin office, you are all silent.
I see no "ANTI WAR" groups that I saw before.
Just silent drones.

What you say is so hypocritical it aint even funny.

Nobody inside the US Gov is trying to prosecute Bush. No suits have been filed.
The Justice Dept. hasn't said boo.

Now a lot of people have called for investigations and prosecutions, but that's not the same thing.

Nobody inside the govt can prosecute Bush because they cant prove anything. That doesnt stop the left from trying to prosecute him every chance they can get though.
"Prosecute Bush"
"Impeach Bush"

Everytime Obama gets in trouble, the 'blame Bush' crowd' comes running out.

The difference between Bush and Obama- Obama got caught.

Now dont take this as me supporting Bush, cause I dont, I think he isjust as much of a crook as the next politician, if not more, but I(or anyone else) cant prove anything and neither can the US govt(Hense why they havent tried to prosecute him)as you stated.

Obama got caught committing a crime. He is no different from anyone else who would do such a thing, he SHOULD get proseuted not only for the crime, but for being sucha dumbass and getting caught.
He of all people should know that people ARE watching his every move, waiting for a reason to take him out of office, just like "the last administration". Only thing is, this administration isnt as slick.
I dont want a guy running our country who cant even cover his own tracks.

Oh cheese and crackers. They could prove all kinds of stuff. It's all in the public record. When you have Cheney himself on national TV saying he approved water boarding, an established war crime, and the Dem Congress yawns, it says they don't have the stones to do what needs to be done. Pelosi is a pathetic excuse for a speaker, and Obama knows the previous admins crimes were so bad they would rock the republic to it's foundations if he pursued justice.

Nothing will be done... but NOT because they can't prove anything.

reply to post by trueperspective


Because most of the population is brian washed and are more concerned about who is going to replace Simon Cowell when he leaves American Idol......

[edit on 23-2-2010 by seanizle]