Obama's Fallon Appearance Violated Campaign Law

reply to post by jibeho


Forget John Gatti! Obama is the 'Teflon Don'!!

Obama's had accusations made against him about many things (many true) yet nothing sticks; he's above the law. This is how gangsters in Chi-town operate. Obama reminds me of an infectious disease; he is highly contagious to those who are susceptible and he's hard to get rid of once he spreads.

Originally posted by stanguilles7


Your title is not a question. It's a statement. It is "Obama's Fallon Appearance Violated Campaign Law"

Because the T&C require you to use the title of the article as it appears. Which is the exact title of the article and how it appears.

It is a statement, and exactly as published. Changing it would be a violation of copyright law.

reply to post by jimmyx


No doubt at a personal level he is in fact a winner. We all however are losers. Only the insiders win when as personal Freedoms are stripped away.

Why was the Democratic Party so crazy as to not run anyone against Obama? Certainly you can do better than a man who can't even get a Budget passed in three years? You certainly can do better than a man who leads by dividing the country to win because he can't use his own record?

Yes he's a winner, but he is in a job he is not qualified for. That's the fault of the voters on the Democratic Parties side. You knew he had no leadership experience and no real world experience.

Community Organizer is not a job, it's an expert at feeding from the trough. He came into office with his only qualification being he knows how to dip into the taxpayer money and redistribute it. He's never produced anything or lead anything until he became President. He got his first elected office by disqualifying all opponents and winning by default. His whole life was handed to him. Talk about a genuine silver spoon who never earned anything the way the rest of us do.

Look how many of you are falling for the divide and conquer strategy of hate. Amazing anyone at all still supports this man. The entire Democratic Party is asleep and seemingly illiterate or blind.

reply to post by neo96

Ge owns nbc with big ties to the white house and immelt.

COMCAST OWNS 51 percent of the company.

You need to make comcast enemy number 1 now. Drop that marxist cable company and their internets.

Originally posted by Libertygal

Originally posted by stanguilles7


Your title is not a question. It's a statement. It is "Obama's Fallon Appearance Violated Campaign Law"

Because the T&C require you to use the title of the article as it appears. Which is the exact title of the article and how it appears.

But your statement was that 'no one is saying he broke the law', even thought the title you chose to use clearly states exactly that.

You are clearly backtracking.

But now that you have abandoned even TRYING to argue he broke the law, what is the rest of your argument? That jimmy fallon isnt funny and you dont like Obama? Is that about it?

LOL.

Seriously folks.

This is what you are worried about in terms of campaign corruption? REALLY?

Must have been a major talking point on Fox News today. I'm sure they talked about all the major corporate funding to GOP candidates and ALEC too right?

reply to post by MiddleClassWarrior


Yep but they owned a majority right up until 2011 well after the 2008 election which put Obama in office and Comcast owns msnbc as well as curren ttv.

marxist cable company i would have to agree and GE still owns 49%.

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by Libertygal

Originally posted by stanguilles7


Your title is not a question. It's a statement. It is "Obama's Fallon Appearance Violated Campaign Law"

Because the T&C require you to use the title of the article as it appears. Which is the exact title of the article and how it appears.

But your statement was that 'no one is saying he broke the law', even thought the title you chose to use clearly states exactly that.

You are clearly backtracking.

But now that you have abandoned even TRYING to argue he broke the law, what is the rest of your argument? That jimmy fallon isnt funny and you dont like Obama? Is that about it?

edit on 25-4-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)

No idea why you are directing this at me.

All I did was answer why the OP used the title as it was in the original article. He is required to, by ATS.

Thanks.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
This is a BIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGGGGGG stretch. The president makes appearances on tv all the time. Are they all illegal?

Appearing on a talk show is not campaigning, as much as you'd like it to be, and as much as they try to use it as such.

Adding to that, Presidential candidates make appearances on talk shows all the time. In fact, Letterman has touted that the road to the White House goes through his show. Well, since Presidential hopeful Richard Nixon appeared on Laugh-In, candidates have been making appearances without the equal time requirement.

Ron Paul appeared on Leno during the 2008 elections, for example.

The OP is mad now, since it's Obama.

Originally posted by Libertygal


All I did was answer why the OP used the title as it was in the original article. He is required to, by ATS.

Thanks.

Actually, that's not even true.

That only applies to 'breaking' news.

Originally posted by jibeho
No one said Obama violated the law. I asked the rhetorical question.

Really?

Your title:

Obama's Fallon Appearance Violated Campaign Law

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by Libertygal


All I did was answer why the OP used the title as it was in the original article. He is required to, by ATS.

Thanks.

Actually, that's not even true.

That only applies to 'breaking' news.

Oh, my bad, then.

I thought altering a title of a copyrighted article would be breaking copyright law.

I thought it applied across all of ATS, when posting articles that are copyrighted.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Well when the exact title of an article is used on here they always show up on google

so that users can find more information about that topic if they want.

In my opinion the headline of a article is copyrighted all content is.

Aside from a stellar opportunity for some wickedly biting political trollery, this is a pointless story.

why?

because you don't know if Fallon's people, or NBC, contacted the other candidates and invited them on. If the law says they must offer equal time, you can be sure they did just that. these networks have teams of lawyers, in house, to ensure they don't get sued six ways to sunday for everything they put on the air.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by jimmyx

 

Why was the Democratic Party so crazy as to not run anyone against Obama? Certainly you can do better than a man who can't even get a Budget passed in three years? You certainly can do better than a man who leads by dividing the country to win because he can't use his own record?

edit on 4/25/2012 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)

Exactly four budgets have been passed since 1960. Based on that, it appears that no President can get a budget passed.

Do you honestly think that Barrack Obama, Jimmy Fallon and NBC did not have an army of lawyers go over this with a fine tooth comb to determine legality beforehand? These people are professionals. They don't leave anything to chance. If there were even a hint that it was not perfectly legal, it would never have happened.

reply to post by N3k9Ni


of course they did but stating the obvious would only result in the inability to post politcal trolling posts.


Never let the truth get in the way of some good old fashioned political trolling

Originally posted by kosmicjack

Originally posted by jibeho
No one said Obama violated the law. I asked the rhetorical question.

Really?

Your title:

Obama's Fallon Appearance Violated Campaign Law

Read it again!

His APPEARANCE violated Campaign Law. The act of his appearance was an apparent violation committed by NBC as stated in the article that no one apparently read....

I asked this rhetorical question "Oops! Did I violate the law?" In Obama's voice...

Let's see if Romney's camp comments on whether they were invited or not... Obama could care less anyway. Rules and ethics are meaningless in his world.

reply to post by stanguilles7


Do you need a reading lesson too??

Originally posted by jibeho

Originally posted by kosmicjack

Originally posted by jibeho
No one said Obama violated the law. I asked the rhetorical question.

Really?

Your title:

Obama's Fallon Appearance Violated Campaign Law

Read it again!

His APPEARANCE violated Campaign Law. The act of his appearance was an apparent violation committed by NBC as stated in the article that no one apparently read....

I asked this rhetorical question "Oops! Did I violate the law?" In Obama's voice...

Let's see if Romney's camp comments on whether they were invited or not... Obama could care less anyway. Rules and ethics are meaningless in his world.

Except that the claim cannot be backed up, at all, until you know whether or not other candidates were efforted for the show.

Furthermore, it would have to be proven that this was a campaign appearance, and not simply an appearance on a talkshow.

The trolling around here these days is getting unbearable.