Obama Broke Illinois Ethics Laws As A State Legislator?

If you are a capable, could you please make your argument? :rolleyes:

Argument has been made over and over and it was pointed out in the video as well my comments. but as it stands i have noticed no matter what anyone proves to you and a few others you seem to think your never wrong.
 
Argument has been made over and over and it was pointed out in the video as well my comments. but as it stands i have noticed no matter what anyone proves to you and a few others you seem to think your never wrong.

The argument was poorly made. And has been repeated over and over. When someone confronts it with a logical challenge, there is not much attempt to defend it or counter the argument made against it. That is exceedingly rude to the person arguing against it.

Please, have the decency to actually debate. Not just act self rightious and indignant and refuse to debate.
 
The argument was poorly made. And has been repeated over and over. When someone confronts it with a logical challenge, there is not much attempt to defend it or counter the argument made against it. That is exceedingly rude to the person arguing against it.

Please, have the decency to actually debate. Not just act self rightious and indignant and refuse to debate.

The website as well as all the evidence speaks for itself Shag.
 
Washington Post
....Robert Bennett, the Washington lawyer and Democrat who served as special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee during the Keating Five investigation, which focused on whether McCain and other senators exercised improper political influence over the regulation of Keating's failed Lincoln Savings & Loan.

In an interview, Bennett said McCain should never have been dragged into the ethics case to begin with. He said that after his own lengthy investigation, he came to the conclusion that the case against McCain and former Sen. John Glenn (D-Ohio) "should have been dropped" because the evidence suggested that once McCain understood that the Justice Department was investigating Keating, he backed off any involvement. Dowd noted that McCain threw Keating,once a strong supporter, out of his office after Keating pressed him to intervene in his case.

Bennett said former Sen. Howell Hefflin (D-Ala.) insisted that the two be included in the formal public inquiry because otherwise there would have been a month of public hearings "with no Republicans in the dock." The other members of the Keating Five were Democrats.

"It was clear that McCain should not have been at the table nor should Glenn," Bennett said. "I felt it was unfair for McCain to be included as part of the Keating Five." Bennett stressed that he was not speaking as part of the campaign...
 
More info and links ASAP, please...:D

I am wondering what happened to the other two posts in this thread...:shifty:

I yanked them because I did not want yet another thread to be trolled off course.
And yes, I even yanked a moderators thread.

Had you been a regular participant in the past, I might have had a little more patience but the whole 'my guy is crap and see, your guy is crap too' is getting a little too tedious for all of us.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No its called Bias idiot for something that proves McSame was invloved in some bull:q:q:q:q and now since its actual facts on someone you choose it gets removed. As far as being a moron i think you have me beat totally idiot.

My daddy is bigger than your daddy.

Stincoln, use the New Thread feature or do a search before trolling. Thanks.
 
"It was clear that McCain should not have been at the table nor should Glenn," Bennett said. "I felt it was unfair for McCain to be included as part of the Keating Five." Bennett stressed that he was not speaking as part of the campaign...
But if Glenn and McCain weren't included, then who would they get to take their places? After all, you can't have a group called "The Keating Five" with only three guys in it, can you? It would have been confusing to people.
 
When did this become a McCain/Keating thread? I thought this was supposed to be about Obama violating ethics laws. Heck, I'm breathless with anticipation, waiting for Johnny to come in here and call OB1 a bald faced liar in large font.

Everybody else stop trolling.
 
When did this become a McCain/Keating thread? I thought this was supposed to be about Obama violating ethics laws. Heck, I'm breathless with anticipation, waiting for Johnny to come in here and call OB1 a bald faced liar in large font.

Everybody else stop trolling.

Well, WHEN an official bi-partisan investigation is launched, and IF they conclude that he in fact violated ethics law, and then IF he announces to the world after that conclusion was made public that he DIDN'T do any thing un-ethical, I will. But until then, all you have are un-founded accusations w/ no proof presented for the argument being made. Just the latest smear attempt since the false ACORN attacks backfired.
 
Just the latest smear attempt since the false ACORN attacks backfired.
If you repeat that long enough, maybe someone will believe that lie too.
What element of the ACORN story has been false??
They've barely cracked the surface on that story.
 
Unfortunately, ON TOPIC,
this is a story that won't go anywhere. For some reason, it's acceptable for Democrats to violate laws regarding compensation... In fact, it's even considered "unethical" when Republicans make money while in office though entirely acceptable and applauded when Democrats do it.

Remember when Newt Gingrich sold a book and was promised a $4.5M book advance? He was assaulted in the media, even Bob Dole attacked him for it. He ultimately relinguished the advance.

Yet, when Hillary wrote her book, she was given an $8M advance, yet there was no outrage. No one compelled or pressured her to give it back.

Same will apply here, even though Obama broke the rules, made a good six figure suppliment to his income, no one will care. If the MSM even mentions it, it'll be in a dismissive "everyone does it" fashion, and the story won't stick.

If McCain had done the same thing, the election would be over.
 
What element of the ACORN story has been false??

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/acorn_accusations.html

But so far ACORN itself has not been officially charged with any fraud. Aside from the heated charges and counter-charges, no evidence has yet surfaced to show that the ACORN employees who submitted fraudulent registration forms intended to pave the way for illegal voting. Rather, they were trying to get paid by ACORN for doing no work. Dan Satterberg, the Republican prosecuting attorney in King County, Wash., where the largest ACORN case to date was prosecuted, said that the indicted ACORN employees were shirking responsibility, not plotting election fraud.

And an outright lie from McShame:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/797/

Is it possible that ACORN and Project Vote were going about the same business in Illinois in 1992? Sure. Both groups have the stated goal of getting people to register to vote, especially low-income, minority and young voters.

But we find no evidence that Obama's 1992 work was for ACORN. We rate McCain's claim False.
 

There's no lie there.
At best you're provided schematics.
Those are lawyerly excuses, not honest answers.

Obama has a deep association with ACORN.
YES- the group that he ran, Project Vote was not formally a part of ACORN at the time, but ACORN later absorbed them. That's because they were closely affiliated and shared the same goals.

Obama did represent them in court.
Obama does court their political support.
And Obama does direct ALOT of money to ACORN. His campaign paid them over $800,000 for a "get out the vote" campaign.
And he's also been instrumental in getting the federal government to direct money to the organization as well.

Obama is very close to ACORN.
And ACORN is NOT a bipartisan organization.
 
Why do you guys like to throw factcheck.org into conversations?

Surely, you're aware that factcheck.org has ties to Obama, (and by extension to ACORN), right?

Taken to the extreme like those on the right always do, EVERYBODY has some ASSOCIATION with EVERYBODY else, so we are ALL doomed and NO ONE IS CREDIBLE EXCEPT GOD. Do you have a direct line to GOD? Tell me wise one, what does GOD say about this?

Instead of attacking the source w/ allegations of being un-credible, disprove it.

Calabrio said:
Obama did represent them in court. Nobody denied that.
Obama does court their political support. Obama courts everyone's political support, so does McCain, SO WHAT?
And Obama does direct ALOT of money to ACORN. His campaign paid them over $800,000 for a "get out the vote" campaign. Is there something illegal or immoral about encouraging Americans to exercise their freedom and right to vote?
And he's also been instrumental in getting the federal government to direct money to the organization as well. Good for him. Offsets a fraction of the $$ BuSh has directed to "faith-based initiatives" that pushes the conservative agenda.
 

Members online

Back
Top