Barack HUSSEIN Obama is finished

The African American underclass has debilitating social pathologies that it is struggling with. They don't like to discuss these social pathologies because it is like airing one's dirty laundry.

But those social pathologies have an impact on all taxpayers. Thus, the social pathologies of the African American underclass need to be discussed and thoroughly examined in order to save taxpayer monies. Throwing money at problems no longer works.

This project of discussion and examination will take years to complete. People who make bad life choices shouldn't do so on taxpayers' dollar.

Do you see how this works?

 

it also made money for the people that bought stock in those companies, thats why I recommend buying S&W if you think obama is going to win.

 

I know Albert- and I am sad that you do. Truly I am sorry that you are so cynical and bitter.

 

you said you could prove everything in the article was a lie. you threw down a challenge, now, you can either live up to it or declare defeat and admit that the article paints an accurate picture of obama and his shady past. which is it, jeff?

Were you lying when you said you could refute the article?

 

Ok, you failed on the first two paragraphs. Here are the next two, you can either refute them or declare defeat for the second time.

Bernardine Dohrn just happened to be married to William Ayers, with whom she just happened to have hidden from the FBI at a San Francisco marina, along with Donald Warden, who just happened to change his name to Khalid al-Mansour, and Warden/al-Mansour just happened to be a mentor of Black Panther Party founders Huey Newton and Bobby Seale and a close associate of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, and al-Mansour just happened to be financial adviser to a Saudi Prince, who just happened to donate cash to Harvard, for which Obama just happened to get a critical letter of recommendation from Percy Sutton, who just happened to have been the attorney for Malcolm X, who just happened to know Kenyan politician Tom Mboya, who just happened to be a close friend of Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., who just happened to meet Malcolm X when he traveled to Kenya.

Obama, Sr. just happened to have his education at the University of Hawaii paid for by the Laubach Literacy Institute, which just happened to have been supported by Elizabeth Mooney Kirk, who just happened to be a friend of Malcolm X, who just happened to have been associated with the Nation of Islam, which was later headed by Louis Farrakhan, who just happens to live very close to Obama’s Chicago mansion, which also just happens to be located very close to the residence of William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, who just happen to have been occasional baby-sitters for Malia and Natasha Obama, whose parents just happen not to mind exposing their daughters to bomb-making communists.


Read more at Ammoland.com: http://www.ammoland.com/2012/10/03/the-obama-timeline/#ixzz28TfbNstB

 

Ok, you failed on the first two paragraphs. Here are the next two, you can either refute them or declare defeat for the second time.

Bernardine Dohrn just happened to be married to William Ayers, with whom she just happened to have hidden from the FBI at a San Francisco marina, along with Donald Warden, who just happened to change his name to Khalid al-Mansour, and Warden/al-Mansour just happened to be a mentor of Black Panther Party founders Huey Newton and Bobby Seale and a close associate of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, and al-Mansour just happened to be financial adviser to a Saudi Prince, who just happened to donate cash to Harvard, for which Obama just happened to get a critical letter of recommendation from Percy Sutton, who just happened to have been the attorney for Malcolm X, who just happened to know Kenyan politician Tom Mboya, who just happened to be a close friend of Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., who just happened to meet Malcolm X when he traveled to Kenya.

Obama, Sr. just happened to have his education at the University of Hawaii paid for by the Laubach Literacy Institute, which just happened to have been supported by Elizabeth Mooney Kirk, who just happened to be a friend of Malcolm X, who just happened to have been associated with the Nation of Islam, which was later headed by Louis Farrakhan, who just happens to live very close to Obama’s Chicago mansion, which also just happens to be located very close to the residence of William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, who just happen to have been occasional baby-sitters for Malia and Natasha Obama, whose parents just happen not to mind exposing their daughters to bomb-making communists.


Read more at Ammoland.com: http://www.ammoland.com/2012/10/03/the-obama-timeline/#ixzz28TfbNstB

 

As I have said three times before your history is that you will reject whatever I show not to be true. Each time you keep posting this pile of BS is just reinforces your disdain for the truth.

) I would be glad to show the lies in the article- but frankly I think you will reject any legitimate source that disagrees with what you believe. Tell me that you will accept information from a legitimate news source or government agency that says that one of the claims is BS and I will waste my time on it.

But frankly your history is that you reject any information that doesn't agree with your firmly held convictions.

So my challenge to you is this cajun:

Confirm you will accept any legitimate source- legitimate news source, government published account, etc- not blogs, not opinion pieces- and I will go find the lies in the article.

Clearly you aren't willing to commit yourself to the truth.

Otherwise, I am not going to waste my time. I have already shown over and over that you have no consideration with the truth- like your claim that there was never a government ban on birth control.

 

As I have said three times before your history is that you will reject whatever I show not to be true. Each time you keep posting this pile of BS is just reinforces your disdain for the truth.

) I would be glad to show the lies in the article- but frankly I think you will reject any legitimate source that disagrees with what you believe. Tell me that you will accept information from a legitimate news source or government agency that says that one of the claims is BS and I will waste my time on it.

But frankly your history is that you reject any information that doesn't agree with your firmly held convictions.

So my challenge to you is this cajun:

Confirm you will accept any legitimate source- legitimate news source, government published account, etc- not blogs, not opinion pieces- and I will go find the lies in the article.

Clearly you aren't willing to commit yourself to the truth.

Otherwise, I am not going to waste my time. I have already shown over and over that you have no consideration with the truth- like your claim that there was never a government ban on birth control. Read more at Ammoland.com: http://www.ammoland.com/2012/10/03/the-obama-timeline/#ixzz28TfbNstB[/QUOTE]

 

Here is why I am not willing to waste my time debunking your claims Cajun- because you dont' care whether what you post is true or a lie- and even when it is proven to be a lie, you will not accept it.

Once again:

Here is what you claimed:
"If I am proven wrong I will admit it."


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
we were aware of hillary's and McCain's background. Hillary's Rose law firm records were made public. .
Here was your original claim:
Clinton showed his college records, so did Gore, McCain, Kerry, Edwards, Gore, and Hillary.

Though you have now admitted that neither Hilary or McCain showed us their college records, you will not admit that you were flat out wrong. Instead you get all weasely like your statement above 'aware of hilary's and McCain's background'. Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?

Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Obama did travel to pakistan when americans were warned not to. I gave you a cite on that.
Your Claim:
tell us what he did in pakistan when US citizens were banned from traveling to that country.

And I showed to you that this was false- with both a NY Times article about travel in Pakistan in 1981 and the State Department travel advisory- so once again your claim was Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?

Then you changed it from 'banned' to 'discouraged'
when obama went to pakistan (according to what he wrote in his book) americans were discouraged from going to that country,

And I showed to you that this was false- with both a NY Times article about travel in Pakistan in 1981 and the State Department travel advisory- so once again your claim was Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Obama has paid Perkins Coie LLP, to keep his records from public view, that has been proven many times. .
Actually it has been disproven over and over. There is not one bit of evidence that Barack Obama has paid a cent to keep any records hidden from public. Since you feel that posting from a Birther blog is relevant, I will refer to a well written explanation of exactly how stupid the claim is

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/...as-legal-fees/

There have been exactly 3 cases where Barack Obama was named as one of the defendents. As Doc Conspiracy points out:

So we have a total of 44 pages for the two federal lawsuits, and an unknown number of pages in the state suit, some of which were donated by the attorney. No reasonable price per page gets us into the million-dollar range, and some work in California was pro bono.

But if you feel otherwise- Perkins was the Obama campaign's attorney and was indeed paid millions for campaign work. Prove if you would like that they were paid 1.4 million dollars to 'keep his records from public view'- it would be amusing when it is so clearly FALSE again.


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Just because you choose to ignore the questionable background of your hero does not mean that the rest of us have to ignore it. The truth will come out and you will be eating crow.
'The truth'? The truth is that I have pointed out now 4 times when you have abused the Truth
You lied or were gullible enough to falsely claim that Hilary and McCain released their college records
You lied or were gulllible enough to claim that there was a ban on travel to Pakistan
You lied or were gullible enough to claim that payment of 1.4 million dollars was made to Perkins to conceal records.

And
You lied when you said you would admit it if you were proven wrong.

So far Obama appears to be a shining light of Truth and Veracity compared to what you post.

Not that any of this BS has anything to do with whether or not Obama gets re-elected.

 

[/QUOTE]

I have agreed to look at your refutation of the article paragraph by paragraph. If you can show something from a reliable source the proves that the writer is lying about obama and his past, I will take it under serious consideration. So far all you have done is post crap from biased sources like the NY times.

You said you could prove the article false------now is the time to put up or shut up.

 

Don't characterize other members of the forum. Besides, sadness is of no utility within our context.

 

I have agreed to look at your refutation of the article paragraph by paragraph. If you can show something from a reliable source the proves that the writer is lying about obama and his past, I will take it under serious consideration. So far all you have done is post crap from biased sources like the NY times. You said you could prove the article false------now is the time to put up or shut up.[/QUOTE]

And this is my point 'post crap from biased sources like the NY Times'- You posted a completely unsupported claim that travel to Pakistan was banned- you have provided not one bit of evidence to support this claim- not even from a 'biased source'- nothing- nada- zip. But you refuse to accept what a 1981 article in New York Times said, and you still haven't even acknowledge that I also posted a State Department travel advisory.

You will not accept any evidence or source as proof if you don't agree with it.

But you will accept any unsupported allegations or innuendo- like an opinion piece from Ammo land without any qualms.

You just want to leave yourself weasel room to refuse to accept anything contrary to what you believe.

got to run- I probably won't look at this until tomorrow- you want to grow a pair and accept information from credible sources let me know- otherwise I will just keep posting my last post of the claims you made that I have already proven were false.

 

And this is my point 'post crap from biased sources like the NY Times'- You posted a completely unsupported claim that travel to Pakistan was banned- you have provided not one bit of evidence to support this claim- not even from a 'biased source'- nothing- nada- zip. But you refuse to accept what a 1981 article in New York Times said, and you still haven't even acknowledge that I also posted a State Department travel advisory.

You will not accept any evidence or source as proof if you don't agree with it.

But you will accept any unsupported allegations or innuendo- like an opinion piece from Ammo land without any qualms.

You just want to leave yourself weasel room to refuse to accept anything contrary to what you believe.

got to run- I probably won't look at this until tomorrow- you want to grow a pair and accept information from credible sources let me know- otherwise I will just keep posting my last post of the claims you made that I have already proven were false.[/QUOTE]








I told you that I would look at evidence from credible sources, not the NY times or MSNBC or huffpuff post.

You said that you could prove the article wrong, you made that claim. now either back it up or admit that the article is probably correct.

I will be here tomorrow, waiting for your proof.

 

OK, sfjeff, next two paragraphs for you to point out lies. since you failed to find any problems in the first 4 paragraphs, maybe you will just read these and begin to come to the realization that obama is not who he claims to be.

fter attending Occidental College and Columbia University, where he just happened to have foreign Muslim roommates, Obama moved to Chicago to work for the Industrial Areas Foundation, an organization that just happened to have been founded by Marxist and radical agitator Saul “the Red” Alinsky, author of Rules for Radicals, who just happened to be the topic of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s thesis at Wellesley College, and Obama’s $25,000 salary at IAF just happened to be funded by a grant from the Woods Fund, which was founded by the Woods family, whose Sahara Coal company just happened to provide coal to Commonwealth Edison, whose CEO just happened to be Thomas Ayers, whose son William Ayers just happened to serve on the board of the Woods Fund, along with Obama.




Obama also worked on voter registration drives in Chicago in the 1980s and just happened to work with leftist political groups like the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and Socialist International (SI), through which Obama met Carl Davidson, who just happened to travel to Cuba during the Vietnam War to sabotage the U.S. war effort, and who just happened to be a former member of the SDS and a member of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, which just happened to sponsor a 2002 anti-war rally at which Obama spoke, and which just happened to have been organized by Marilyn Katz, a former SDS activist and later public relations consultant who just happened to be a long-time friend of Obama’s political hatchet man, David Axelrod.


Read more at Ammoland.com: http://www.ammoland.com/2012/10/03/the-obama-timeline/#ixzz28WVFdMyb

 

are you kidding me?

 

Here is why I am not willing to waste my time debunking your claims Cajun- because you dont' care whether what you post is true or a lie- and even when it is proven to be a lie, you will not accept it.

Once again:

Here is what you claimed:
"If I am proven wrong I will admit it."


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
we were aware of hillary's and McCain's background. Hillary's Rose law firm records were made public. .
Here was your original claim:
Clinton showed his college records, so did Gore, McCain, Kerry, Edwards, Gore, and Hillary.

Though you have now admitted that neither Hilary or McCain showed us their college records, you will not admit that you were flat out wrong. Instead you get all weasely like your statement above 'aware of hilary's and McCain's background'. Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?

Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Obama did travel to pakistan when americans were warned not to. I gave you a cite on that.
Your Claim:
tell us what he did in pakistan when US citizens were banned from traveling to that country.

And I showed to you that this was false- with both a NY Times article about travel in Pakistan in 1981 and the State Department travel advisory- so once again your claim was Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?

Then you changed it from 'banned' to 'discouraged'
when obama went to pakistan (according to what he wrote in his book) americans were discouraged from going to that country,

And I showed to you that this was false- with both a NY Times article about travel in Pakistan in 1981 and the State Department travel advisory- so once again your claim was Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Obama has paid Perkins Coie LLP, to keep his records from public view, that has been proven many times. .
Actually it has been disproven over and over. There is not one bit of evidence that Barack Obama has paid a cent to keep any records hidden from public. Since you feel that posting from a Birther blog is relevant, I will refer to a well written explanation of exactly how stupid the claim is

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/...as-legal-fees/

There have been exactly 3 cases where Barack Obama was named as one of the defendents. As Doc Conspiracy points out:

So we have a total of 44 pages for the two federal lawsuits, and an unknown number of pages in the state suit, some of which were donated by the attorney. No reasonable price per page gets us into the million-dollar range, and some work in California was pro bono.

But if you feel otherwise- Perkins was the Obama campaign's attorney and was indeed paid millions for campaign work. Prove if you would like that they were paid 1.4 million dollars to 'keep his records from public view'- it would be amusing when it is so clearly FALSE again.


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Just because you choose to ignore the questionable background of your hero does not mean that the rest of us have to ignore it. The truth will come out and you will be eating crow.
'The truth'? The truth is that I have pointed out now 4 times when you have abused the Truth
You lied or were gullible enough to falsely claim that Hilary and McCain released their college records
You lied or were gulllible enough to claim that there was a ban on travel to Pakistan
You lied or were gullible enough to claim that payment of 1.4 million dollars was made to Perkins to conceal records.

And
You lied when you said you would admit it if you were proven wrong.

So far Obama appears to be a shining light of Truth and Veracity compared to what you post.

Not that any of this BS has anything to do with whether or not Obama gets re-elected.

And to continue with the BS- you ask me to disprove something from "Ammoland" but refuse to accept New York Times or the States Department posts.

You will accept any source which you agree with(Ammoland) and reject every source that doesn't say what you refuse to believe.

 

Uhhh, No. Did you read the article? Can you find anything untrue in it? SFjeff has given up, so I guess he believes what the article says about obama's past. If you have proof that anything in the article is untrue, please post it.

 

OK, Jeff, I accept your concession of defeat. Obama is finally being vetted and its not a pretty picture for you obamabots.

 

Here is why I am not willing to waste my time debunking your claims Cajun- because you dont' care whether what you post is true or a lie- and even when it is proven to be a lie, you will not accept it. Keep posting the conspiracy theory BS and I will keep pointing out your willingness to post lies.



Once again:

Here is what you claimed:
"If I am proven wrong I will admit it."


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
we were aware of hillary's and McCain's background. Hillary's Rose law firm records were made public. .
Here was your original claim:
Clinton showed his college records, so did Gore, McCain, Kerry, Edwards, Gore, and Hillary.

Though you have now admitted that neither Hilary or McCain showed us their college records, you will not admit that you were flat out wrong. Instead you get all weasely like your statement above 'aware of hilary's and McCain's background'. Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?

Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Obama did travel to pakistan when americans were warned not to. I gave you a cite on that.
Your Claim:
tell us what he did in pakistan when US citizens were banned from traveling to that country.

And I showed to you that this was false- with both a NY Times article about travel in Pakistan in 1981 and the State Department travel advisory- so once again your claim was Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?

Then you changed it from 'banned' to 'discouraged'
when obama went to pakistan (according to what he wrote in his book) americans were discouraged from going to that country,

And I showed to you that this was false- with both a NY Times article about travel in Pakistan in 1981 and the State Department travel advisory- so once again your claim was Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Obama has paid Perkins Coie LLP, to keep his records from public view, that has been proven many times. .
Actually it has been disproven over and over. There is not one bit of evidence that Barack Obama has paid a cent to keep any records hidden from public. Since you feel that posting from a Birther blog is relevant, I will refer to a well written explanation of exactly how stupid the claim is

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/...as-legal-fees/

There have been exactly 3 cases where Barack Obama was named as one of the defendents. As Doc Conspiracy points out:

So we have a total of 44 pages for the two federal lawsuits, and an unknown number of pages in the state suit, some of which were donated by the attorney. No reasonable price per page gets us into the million-dollar range, and some work in California was pro bono.

But if you feel otherwise- Perkins was the Obama campaign's attorney and was indeed paid millions for campaign work. Prove if you would like that they were paid 1.4 million dollars to 'keep his records from public view'- it would be amusing when it is so clearly FALSE again.


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Just because you choose to ignore the questionable background of your hero does not mean that the rest of us have to ignore it. The truth will come out and you will be eating crow.
'The truth'? The truth is that I have pointed out now 4 times when you have abused the Truth
You lied or were gullible enough to falsely claim that Hilary and McCain released their college records
You lied or were gulllible enough to claim that there was a ban on travel to Pakistan
You lied or were gullible enough to claim that payment of 1.4 million dollars was made to Perkins to conceal records.

And
You lied when you said you would admit it if you were proven wrong.

So far Obama appears to be a shining light of Truth and Veracity compared to what you post.

Not that any of this BS has anything to do with whether or not Obama gets re-elected.

And to continue with the BS- you ask me to disprove something from "Ammoland" but refuse to accept New York Times or the States Department posts.

You will accept any source which you agree with(Ammoland) and reject every source that doesn't say what you refuse to believe.

 

SFjeff

repeating the same thing multiple times and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.

Why not just man up and admit that the article is correct about obama's past?

 

that's absolutely false

it's a joke

you have to be clueless to post from a source like that

 

OK, I'm new here, and I'm not lookin' to get shot between the eyes right away, but I guess it'll happen anyway.

Cajun, I have to give you credit for standing your ground, over and over and over. I'm just at a huge loss as to why anyone would want to vote for Barry (as he once called himself). It's so obvious to me, also, and has been since 2008, that what he wants is the decline of America. And, he has been successful in this so far. You're right - his upbringing, record, background, friends, mentors, 20-year church affiliation, past speeches (with a different cadence!!), contributors (George Soros's many many organizations), everything only points to this objective.

Does anyone here know that he and his dear wife have been disbarred in Illinois?

What about his relationship with the real estate crook in Chicago?

How about the many times that he has "changed his mind" on the issues? He hasn't changed his mind at all; it's what he has always believed. He just didn't say so because it wasn't politically useful - abortion (including killing babies during the procedure), gay marriage, etc., etc. It's disgusting. This country was founded on principles that protect life, not destroy it! Gay marriage - don't even get me started.

Anyway, I'm praying that this country will be given another chance to get things straight again, and that won't happen if this guy is re-elected.

So go ahead - shoot.

 

I obviously plagiarized the Einstein quote.

If the article is a joke, then tell us what statements in it are inaccurate. If you cannot refute it then--------------------------it must be accurate. I know that its hard for you obamabots to accept who your hero really is, but maybe its time that you woke up to reality.

 

no, you're just not smart enough to check facts before you post



Insanity Is Repeating the Same Stupid Cliche Over and Over - July 31, 2008

One of the worst cliches is the claim, frequently though almost certainly incorrectly attributed to Albert Einstein, that “insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” This is, of course, false and trivially false at that.

Whenever I hear people say something along those lines, I wonder what they expect to happen if they flip a coin. Say, they flip a coin once and it comes up heads. Do these folks expect all future coin flips to come up heads until the end of time?

In fact there are so many counterexamples to this particular claim, that its hard to understand how it ever became popular cliche (unless the attribution to Einstein was sufficient).

Update – May 2009: This phrase seems to originate in a 1983 novel by Rita Mae Brown.

http://brian.carnell.com/articles/2008/insanity-is-repeating-the-same-stupid-cliche-over-and-over/



here's the real definition of insanity:

the state of being seriously mentally ill; extreme foolishness or irrationality

 

How would you know whether it is correct or not? You shown utter disregard for the truth.

Here is why I am not willing to waste my time debunking your claims Cajun- because you dont' care whether what you post is true or a lie- and even when it is proven to be a lie, you will not accept it. Keep posting the conspiracy theory BS and I will keep pointing out your willingness to post lies.



Once again:

Here is what you claimed:
"If I am proven wrong I will admit it."


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
we were aware of hillary's and McCain's background. Hillary's Rose law firm records were made public. .
Here was your original claim:
Clinton showed his college records, so did Gore, McCain, Kerry, Edwards, Gore, and Hillary.

Though you have now admitted that neither Hilary or McCain showed us their college records, you will not admit that you were flat out wrong. Instead you get all weasely like your statement above 'aware of hilary's and McCain's background'. Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?

Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Obama did travel to pakistan when americans were warned not to. I gave you a cite on that.
Your Claim:
tell us what he did in pakistan when US citizens were banned from traveling to that country.

And I showed to you that this was false- with both a NY Times article about travel in Pakistan in 1981 and the State Department travel advisory- so once again your claim was Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?

Then you changed it from 'banned' to 'discouraged'
when obama went to pakistan (according to what he wrote in his book) americans were discouraged from going to that country,

And I showed to you that this was false- with both a NY Times article about travel in Pakistan in 1981 and the State Department travel advisory- so once again your claim was Once again- completely FALSE- and you will not admit it.

Question: Did you knowingly lie or were you just ignorant and gullible?


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Obama has paid Perkins Coie LLP, to keep his records from public view, that has been proven many times. .
Actually it has been disproven over and over. There is not one bit of evidence that Barack Obama has paid a cent to keep any records hidden from public. Since you feel that posting from a Birther blog is relevant, I will refer to a well written explanation of exactly how stupid the claim is

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/...as-legal-fees/

There have been exactly 3 cases where Barack Obama was named as one of the defendents. As Doc Conspiracy points out:

So we have a total of 44 pages for the two federal lawsuits, and an unknown number of pages in the state suit, some of which were donated by the attorney. No reasonable price per page gets us into the million-dollar range, and some work in California was pro bono.

But if you feel otherwise- Perkins was the Obama campaign's attorney and was indeed paid millions for campaign work. Prove if you would like that they were paid 1.4 million dollars to 'keep his records from public view'- it would be amusing when it is so clearly FALSE again.


Originally Posted by ragin cajun
Just because you choose to ignore the questionable background of your hero does not mean that the rest of us have to ignore it. The truth will come out and you will be eating crow.
'The truth'? The truth is that I have pointed out now 4 times when you have abused the Truth
You lied or were gullible enough to falsely claim that Hilary and McCain released their college records
You lied or were gulllible enough to claim that there was a ban on travel to Pakistan
You lied or were gullible enough to claim that payment of 1.4 million dollars was made to Perkins to conceal records.

And
You lied when you said you would admit it if you were proven wrong.

So far Obama appears to be a shining light of Truth and Veracity compared to what you post.

Not that any of this BS has anything to do with whether or not Obama gets re-elected.

And to continue with the BS- you ask me to disprove something from "Ammoland" but refuse to accept New York Times or the States Department posts.

You will accept any source which you agree with(Ammoland) and reject every source that doesn't say what you refuse to believe.