Obama grassroots beats ours?

Those links make no mention of an expansion of troops into Iraq. If anything you continue to prove that you are not reading anything about the issues, and nit-picking whatever you think suits you.

It appears Obama is going to expand the size of the military, not the presence in Iraq. I'm against expansion, but his way of doing so, through service as payment for college, is not entirely contrary to some of my beliefs.

Excuse me? This is the first time I posted in this thread. So what exactly do you mean I continue to to prove I am not reading anything...?

I'm against expansion, but his way of doing so, through service as payment for college, is not entirely contrary to some of my beliefs.

So that's fair... blood for money for college? What's the use of college if you come home with only a torso?

And you said "he has not mentioned he would increase troop levels by 50,000."

You DID NOT say 'increase troop levels in IRAQ by 50,000' and neither did amonasro.

I don't recall him ever saying he would increase troop levels by 50,000.

I gave you the evidence you asked for.
 
The argument and debate appears to be that Obama does not have a grassroots that is as effective as Ron Pauls.

I disagree.

First they say I'm wrong.
Then they call me a socialist.
Then they blame the media (which would negate me being wrong?)
Then they are back to calling me a socialist.

Regardless, I'm still correct. His money comes from millions of small donors.
Sheeples or not, this is the voice of America, against the fat cats and the fascist right. It is the organized youth. They can insult them all they want, they are the future leaders.

What will he do to change things?


Or Is he a hired Puppet?


A puppet, just like Bush, Bill Clinton, Obama, Hillary, McCain. If CNN and FOX hype you up, your a war mongering idiot. Period.

Obama has said:

I will not hesitate to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...ory?coll=la-headlines-nation&track=crosspromo

As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations . (and dramtically increase the military size)
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/01/obama_says_pakistan_must_act_against_taliban/

Obama stated that as President he would consider military action in Pakistan in order to attack al-Qaeda, even if the Pakistani government did not give approval.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6926663.stm

He was not in office to vote for the iraq war, but he voted to fund it for over 300 billion dollars.

Obama also will not guarantee a Iraqi troop pullout until at least 2013. http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/content/2013/obamarecord/

Sen. Barack Obama said Friday the use of military force should not be taken off the table when dealing with Iran, which he called a threat to all of us.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/281249,CST-NWS-OBAMA03.article

Senator Barack Obama yesterday defended his votes on behalf of funding the Iraq war, asserting that he has always made clear that he supports funding for US troops despite his consistent opposition to the war.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/22/obama_defends_votes_in_favor_of_iraq_funding/

Oh and he refuses to mention the trillions of dollars of debt this nation is in and how he will get the money to create his big spending programs (like giving each college student 4000 dollars). Cough cough PRINT THE MONEY FROM THE FEDERAL RESERVE cough cough.....inflation......
 
What will he do to change things?


Or Is he a hired Puppet?


A puppet, just like Bush, Bill Clinton, Obama, Hillary, McCain. If CNN and FOX hype you up, your a war mongering idiot. Period.

Obama has said:

I will not hesitate to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...ory?coll=la-headlines-nation&track=crosspromo

As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations . (and dramtically increase the military size)
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/01/obama_says_pakistan_must_act_against_taliban/

Obama stated that as President he would consider military action in Pakistan in order to attack al-Qaeda, even if the Pakistani government did not give approval.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6926663.stm

He was not in office to vote for the iraq war, but he voted to fund it for over 300 billion dollars.

Obama also will not guarantee a Iraqi troop pullout until at least 2013. http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/content/2013/obamarecord/

Sen. Barack Obama said Friday the use of military force should not be taken off the table when dealing with Iran, which he called a threat to all of us.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/281249,CST-NWS-OBAMA03.article

Senator Barack Obama yesterday defended his votes on behalf of funding the Iraq war, asserting that he has always made clear that he supports funding for US troops despite his consistent opposition to the war.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/22/obama_defends_votes_in_favor_of_iraq_funding/

Oh and he refuses to mention the trillions of dollars of debt this nation is in and how he will get the money to create his big spending programs (like giving each college student 4000 dollars). Cough cough PRINT THE MONEY FROM THE FEDERAL RESERVE cough cough.....inflation......

I don't know. I'm not a 100% supporter. I would prefer to see Ron Paul in the presidency.

I just have three choices, so I informed myself.
 
I gave you the evidence you asked for.

I took it to mean expansion into Iraq. If military and civil service increases the number of troops as a result, I'm okay with that. It's not as bad as a foreign war that had no bearing on terrorism.

Again, I'm not a full supporter. I'm just straightening out the fallacies.
 
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/22/681/

But the Illinois Democrat’s policy of shunning money from lobbyists registered to do business on Capitol Hill does not extend to lawyers whose partners lobby there.

Nor does the ban apply to corporations that have major lobbying operations in Washington. And the prohibition does not extend to lobbyists who ply their trade in such state capitals as Springfield, Ill.; Tallahassee, Fla.; and Sacramento, though some deal with national clients and issues.




You wanna talk more facts Kade???
 
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/22/681/

But the Illinois Democrat’s policy of shunning money from lobbyists registered to do business on Capitol Hill does not extend to lawyers whose partners lobby there.

Nor does the ban apply to corporations that have major lobbying operations in Washington. And the prohibition does not extend to lobbyists who ply their trade in such state capitals as Springfield, Ill.; Tallahassee, Fla.; and Sacramento, though some deal with national clients and issues.




You wanna talk more facts Kade???

Yes, I do. So long as you stop pretending you are actually linking to anything of substance.
 
for william jennings bryan to win that nomination, in 1896... it was an upset.
it was a total surprise. his backers then expected a likewise come the election!
neither john mccain or ms. hillary clinton has been corronated at all. in time, in the
next few months, you all could be told a vote for ron paul elects barack obama.
you may be told by old fashioned g.o.p people that its almost political suicide for
the republican party to desert john mccain in his hour of need! i see this looming!
i think the old time g.o.p guard underestimates barack obama and yearns for a
repeat of the 1990s all over again. we see the FED dropping its rates, i spotted a
eustace mullins thread. when eustance mullins seems totally cogent, REALLY worry...
we are looking at a set of banking controls not being there that were set in place
by FDR. our stock markets have few brakes for speculative bubbles or severe crashes...
 
for william jennings bryan to win that nomination, in 1896... it was an upset.
it was a total surprise. his backers then expected a likewise come the election!
neither john mccain or ms. hillary clinton has been corinated at all. in time, in the
next few months, you all could be told a vote for ron paul elects barack obama.
you may be told by old fashioned g.o.p people that its almost political suicide for
the republican party to desert john mccain in his hour of need! i see this looming!
i think the old time g.o.p guard underestimates barack obama and yearns for a
repeat of the 1990s all over again. we see the FED dropping its rates, i spotted a
eustace mullins thread. when eustance mullins seems totally cogent, REALLY worry...
we are looking at a set of banking controls not being there that were set in place
by FDR. our stock markets have few brakes for speculative bubbles or severe crashes...

Agreed. I would still prefer to see Obama over Clinton or McCain.
 
Yes, I do. So long as you stop pretending you are actually linking to anything of substance.

You are in denial. Look at his campaign's forms, it clearly even says that he takes lobbyist money.

Those are all facts I am linking. You are just denying them

Keep pimping up your war-mongering lobbyist-whore candidate Obama.
 
You are in denial. Look at his campaign's forms, it clearly even says that he takes lobbyist money.

Those are all facts I am linking. You are just denying them

Keep pimping up your war-mongering lobbyist-whore candidate Obama.

I'm in denial? I haven't said anything contradictory. You said LARGE percentage and you are wrong.

I'm not pimping for him, I'm decrying stupidity.
 
mitt romney compulsively tossed in 42 million of his own money
so his spending could equal obama's and hillary clinton's... then he
quit the race. this is one of the bigger political stories this year.


ron paul and mike huckabee were never in the same spending range.
this makes the end phase of this race most interesting. mccain's comeback
included! big money drove the start of the race, small donations gave
obama a vigorish unlike the others in the race. ron paul's campaign is unique.
 
""n Obama's eight years in the Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he raised for his campaigns -- $296,000 of $461,000 -- came from PACs, corporate contributions, or unions, according to Illinois Board of Elections records. He tapped financial services firms, real estate developers, healthcare providers, oil companies, and many other corporate interests, the records show."

5 percent, wtf are you talking about.

People, Kade is the perfect example of someone who just picks a candidate and defends blindly. There are thousands of facts you can look at, but you refuse to. Go research Obama.
 
Though Obama has returned thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from registered federal lobbyists since he declared his candidacy in February, his presidential campaign has maintained ties with lobbyists and lobbying firms to help raise some of the $58.9 million he collected through the first six months of 2007. Obama has raised more than $1.4 million from members of law and consultancy firms led by partners who are lobbyists, The Los Angeles Times reported last week. And The Hill, a Washington newspaper, reported earlier this year that Obama's campaign had reached out to lobbyists' networks to use their contacts to help build his fund-raising base.
 
Last edited:
ron paul's sum plus huckabee's sum is almost equal to romney's own 42 million dollar decision!
 
""n Obama's eight years in the Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he raised for his campaigns -- $296,000 of $461,000 -- came from PACs, corporate contributions, or unions, according to Illinois Board of Elections records. He tapped financial services firms, real estate developers, healthcare providers, oil companies, and many other corporate interests, the records show."

5 percent, wtf are you talking about.

People, Kade is the perfect example of someone who just picks a candidate and defends blindly. There are thousands of facts you can look at, but you refuse to. Go research Obama.

You have got to be kidding me.... I never denied, nor has Obama denied, that he used that money for his State Senate seat. This is a presidential election, not a U.S. Senate seat, not a STATE SENATE seat. WTF is wrong with you?

Reading is your friend man, chill.
 
Though Obama has returned thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from registered federal lobbyists since he declared his candidacy in February, his presidential campaign has maintained ties with lobbyists and lobbying firms to help raise some of the $58.9 million he collected through the first six months of 2007. Obama has raised more than $1.4 million from members of law and consultancy firms led by partners who are lobbyists, The Los Angeles Times reported last week. And The Hill, a Washington newspaper, reported earlier this year that Obama's campaign had reached out to lobbyists' networks to use their contacts to help build his fund-raising base.

Okay, stop.

Here is the issue:

Obama has raised a LARGE percentage of his total money for the Presidential Race from Lobbyist.

Prove it.
 
folks, if you suspect $10,ooo,ooo or $1,ooo,ooo can become quiet river~lettes of pure slush
via the ability to send TWO HUNDRED DOLLAR incriaments out to the faithful many, so as to circumvent
all bookkeeping, do enlighten me! its not impossible! yet we do have the official numbers!!!!
 
Back
Top