OMG - Obama has got to be the most corrupt President we've ever elected

page: 6
96
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 





He's lied about his time as a "law professor".



Time magazine gushed in 2008 about Barack Obama's 12-year tenure as a law lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, saying, "Within a few years, he had become a rock-star professor with hordes of devoted students."

That may have been true during his first two years, when he ranked first among the law school's 40 instructors, with students giving him a rating of 9.7 out of a possible 10.

But law student evaluations made available to The Washington Examiner by the university showed that his popularity then fell steadily.


Can you explain how you came to the conclusion that he lied about his time being a law professor. The very article you are drawing your conclusion from is refuting what time magazine said not what he said. So how exactly is this Obama lying?

Your own article agrees with Time and says but his popularity fell after two years.

It seems like the OP is lying here.

I am sorry your candidate sucks and has a snowballs chance in hell of being elected but if you are going to start a thread try to be truthful.

At least you can keep your credibility then.

These new bash threads on Obama just show how desperate the right is.
edit on 21-9-2012 by Grimpachi because: add and spellcheck




posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


Any electorate gets what it deserves these days. Look at the UK. The US even managed to vote Bush in twice. Tyrants can only survive on the strength and endurance of their people. If people choose only to vote for main candidates that's all you will ever get.
Also, I agree with another poster. Can you please come up with some strong evidence of these lies please. I am getting fed up with the hatred and nastiness in this campaign. Particularly from the right. Not just rhetoricm whining and childish paint balling. Evidence. Anything else is heresay and food for only one candidate or the other.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 12:59 AM
link   
Instead of looking at it in terms of who is the most corrupt president, it's probably more fair to look in terms of which is the most corrupt government.

It's pretty bad right now, but compared to slavery and Native American extermination? Then segregation until the 60's?

Corruption didn't start four, eight, or twelve years ago. Mass media did.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by PatrickGarrow17
 


That's a very appropriate point to make.

An administration isn't just the President...it's his cabinet. It's his Congress, whether his party has/had a majority or not.

Most importantly, it's the voters who put them there. If we can't practice due diligence, we get what we deserve. It's nothing new, as you pointed out.

It's something we need to realize.




posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 01:23 AM
link   


OMG - Obama has got to be the most corrupt President we've ever elected


Bush was the most corrupt person who brought more war and destruction to the world.

Obama is a peaceful person and that is why war-mongers want to topple him down.

PS : don't label those who oppose him , but I say that war-machine is not satisfied.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 




Thank God. For only in American can a kid like that grow up to be president.That's what makes this country great. One savvy, gutsy kid takes it all on. People, this guy should be a great American folk hero. and I'm being serious.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


Isn't the Washington Examiner owned by Philip F. Anschutz, who is a conservative republican?

Also, maybe this too:


Political and Christian activism
-Often identified as "Christian billionaire Phil Anschutz",[36] he is a Republican donor who supported George W. Bush's administration. He has been an active patron of a number of religious and conservative causes:
-Helped fund Colorado's 1992 Amendment 2, a ballot initiative designed to overturn local and state laws that prohibit discrimination against individuals on the basis of sexual orientation but was invalidated by Romer v. Evans after it passed.[23]
-Contributed $70,000 in 2003 to the Discovery Institute, to specifically support the work of telecom guru George Gilder but not matters related to intelligent design. That fact was validated by Discovery President Bruce Chapman in a letter-to-the-editor to the Rocky Mounatain News, "Anschutz never gave that program a nickel,"[37]
-The Discovery Institute is a think tank based in Seattle, Washington that also promotes intelligent design and criticizes evolution.[38]
-Supported the Parents Television Council, a group that protests against television indecency.[38]
-Financed and distributed films with Christian themes, such as Amazing Grace and The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, for mass audiences through his two film production companies and ownership of much of the Regal, Edwards and United Artists theater chains.
-Financed The Foundation for a Better Life.
-In 2009 Anschutz purchased the conservative American oinion magazine The Weekly Standard from Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation.[29]
-Philip Anschutz and fellow board members of the American Petroleum Institute in Washington arecredited by Bush's energy secretary for theOval Office decision to kill the Kyoto Protocol in 2001.[citation needed]
-Financed the 2010 pro-charter school film, Waiting for Supeman.[39]
-Financed the 2012 pro-parent trigger film, Won't Back Down.[40]


If he mass promotes Christian ideas, films, etc. why wouldn't he do the same for a political agenda?
edit on 21-9-2012 by roblot because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:34 AM
link   
“There are no morals in politics; there is only expedience. A scoundrel may be of use to us just because he is a scoundrel.”

~Vladimir Lenin quote

It's a miracle when there are any politicians that can't be bought and paid for!



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:36 AM
link   
reply to post by On the Edge
 
if you cant beat them join them



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by EXCON
 


It's probably worse than that!...

"Join them or suffer the consequences!"



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Three words: Hidden * Global * Agenda (HGA). No matter who is president, the HGA will be forwarded. Think about it: two people and their supporters spend HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to gain an office that pays a salary of $450,000.00 per year? If I recall correctly, during the 2008/09 economc collapse, a wealthy bankster threw a BIRTHDAY PARTY for his daughter in excess of $7,000,000.00. Think. About. This. The President makes $450,000.00/year. One bankster birthday party was $7M. One Hollywood actor makes $20M per film. Yes, there are "benefits" to being President. But... there must be more to it than we can know about because no one in the world who has any common sense would spend HUNDREDS OF MILLONS OF DOLLARS to get a job that pays only $450,000 a year. HGA. Hidden. Global. Agenda. Romney? Obama? Doesn't matter. Whowever "wins" will only serve to continue the HGA.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by Valhall
 





He's lied about his time as a "law professor".



Time magazine gushed in 2008 about Barack Obama's 12-year tenure as a law lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, saying, "Within a few years, he had become a rock-star professor with hordes of devoted students."

That may have been true during his first two years, when he ranked first among the law school's 40 instructors, with students giving him a rating of 9.7 out of a possible 10.

But law student evaluations made available to The Washington Examiner by the university showed that his popularity then fell steadily.


Can you explain how you came to the conclusion that he lied about his time being a law professor. The very article you are drawing your conclusion from is refuting what time magazine said not what he said. So how exactly is this Obama lying?

Your own article agrees with Time and says but his popularity fell after two years.

It seems like the OP is lying here.

I am sorry your candidate sucks and has a snowballs chance in hell of being elected but if you are going to start a thread try to be truthful.

At least you can keep your credibility then.

These new bash threads on Obama just show how desperate the right is.
edit on 21-9-2012 by Grimpachi because: add and spellcheck


He states he was a "constitutional law professor". No he wasn't. THAT's what he lied about. I'm sorry your candidate is a tremendous liar who has fabricated his childhood, his pre-political career, and political activities, but you don't really have to resort to attacking those who are pointing it out. Or the other candidate. Romney didn't make him lie.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
He states he was a "constitutional law professor". No he wasn't. THAT's what he lied about. I'm sorry your candidate is a tremendous liar who has fabricated his childhood, his pre-political career, and political activities, but you don't really have to resort to attacking those who are pointing it out. Or the other candidate. Romney didn't make him lie.


This stuff gets so stupid. The school I guess lied too.

UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School’s Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


I'm replying to a comment from a now closed thread on the same topic:

From an article quoted in the aforementioned thread:



Twenty-two of 40 faculty members ranked higher than Obama.


OMF'nG! Obama, as a fairly new and inexperienced law professor only ranked slightly below half the other law professors as lecturers! And how did the Texas Rangers rank under Bush II's ownership?

I'm no defender of Obama, but citing these ridiculous reasons for thinking him a bad president are just plain mega-ridiculous. If these are your best arguments against Obama, then clearly you got nothing on him, and it says more about your candidate and your warped reality than anything else. But, hey, keep on grasping at straws.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 05:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Juggernog
Be prepared for the floods of "youre just a racist" posts to come pouring in


After this many pages you should be forced to eat all the stars you got for that failed prophecy.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


George W. Bush was the most corrupt president we never elected. His crime family stole the 2000 election in Florida and the 2004 election in Ohio.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by guohua

Originally posted by thepresident

Originally posted by Ghost375
C'mon Obama supporters, here's your chance!
Vote Romney!!!!! That way Obama will be the second most corrupt president we've ever elected!


Sorry, the guy before him who lied to start the longest and
Most expensive war in US history is the most corrupt .
Romney would have to invade Mexico to win

Sorry,,, But you're Wrong as usual.
The most expensive war in an unknown number of lives world wide and in cost is,,,,,,,,,,
The War on Drugs wins hands down.
I haven't noticed your Messiah stop these war or Pardon any one in prison for petty drug charges,,, have you?


Great argument.
I am going to vote Republican now because they are going to stop the drug war.
Oh wait they wont either?
So that kind of cancels that out huh?



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall




Can't someone arrest this man and prosecute him?



all that could be done is to censure or impeach him for the obvious treasonious acts he does...
favoring Islam over Christians (as in the Muslim Only prayer vigil held at the democrat convention)

then there is the derilection of duty... concerning the Embassies not having adequate protection, unloaded security weapons, and the intentional dismissal of warnings (3 days prior to 9/11/'12) by officials in Libya

incompetence is not a justified cause for removal... but intentionally disregarding his "Oath Of Office" to both Protect And Defend The Constitution IS !!



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrInquisitive
reply to post by Valhall
 


I'm replying to a comment from a now closed thread on the same topic:

From an article quoted in the aforementioned thread:



Twenty-two of 40 faculty members ranked higher than Obama.


OMF'nG! Obama, as a fairly new and inexperienced law professor only ranked slightly below half the other law professors as lecturers! And how did the Texas Rangers rank under Bush II's ownership?

I'm no defender of Obama, but citing these ridiculous reasons for thinking him a bad president are just plain mega-ridiculous. If these are your best arguments against Obama, then clearly you got nothing on him, and it says more about your candidate and your warped reality than anything else. But, hey, keep on grasping at straws.


Can you not read? He was not a law professor. He did not publish a single paper, he was not a professor, he was an adjunct lecturer who didn't attend any workshops, any faculty peer reviews...he was there for 3 classes to lecture and nothing else (but building deals and working a political career on the backside). AND, he was there 12 years. He ranked in the top favored by students at FIRST and then over the 12 years he didn't do jack crap he was in the bottom half.

Anything else you want to revise?



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
washingtonexaminer.com...

10-part Series

The Obama you don't know....I'm speechless.

Here's some nuggets to chew on:

He's lied about his childhood. He's lied about his time as a "law professor". He's lied about his time as a "civil rights lawyer" (he was actually negotiating deals with real estate investment firms that left a major portion of the poor black community in South Chicago homeless). His 1997 speech on Valentine's Day shows that his entire strategy in to enslave the poor to buy their votes. He's worked with and accepted donations from about a half dozen people who have either ended up in prison for corruption/bribery or are attached to terrorism. He raped the pension plans in Illinois for the benefit of cronyism and getting donations/power. And lastly he continued all this corruption into office with the UAW bail-out for GM and padding his donators/connections with the energy funds.

Can't someone arrest this man and prosecute him?



Romney can say all he wants about how he will help everybody, But the simple fact of the matter is that Romney truly represents the rich.. No longer do I want wealth to be the staple in which the rich get into power. I would rather have Jesse Ventura and a Ron Paul ticket. because that would be a step in eliminating the Federal Reserve and the Lobbyist. But being that they will not get in, my vote is for Obama.

edit on 21-9-2012 by thetiler because: spelling and additional thought





new topics
top topics
 
96
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join