New Evidence Emerges On Obama's Background!!!

Originally posted by tektek2012
don't listen to republicans...seriously

cdn.theladders.net...

it says LECTURER, lol.

a reason why it wasn't sourced to a resume.

i've looked at this many times, it always said the same thing.

Thanks for pointing that out. "Senior Lecturer" looks about exactly as impressive as "professor" would have been any way. But maybe that is just me. Looking at the resume itself it looks like people were just making this up as they went along for no other purpose than to attack Obama.

Of course while the constitution gives the government permission to start up a post office, I don't see anything about starting up or running an insurance company, a retirement investment club (such as social security), and a large host of other things the US Federal government does. So, for maybe instead of worrying about the specific wording of the resume people should be worrying about the fact that he is taught constitutional law yet entirely ignores the constitution.

I worked in IT for a university, and instructor does not mean that one has less of an educational credential than a professor.

It can mean that one only has a master's degree, but it is also a designation that non-tenure folks with very high qualifications might have.

Case in point - we hired a very prominent doctor (PhD) who had worked for the CDC his entire life, and had done pioneering research into rickettsia, and he had retired. He wanted to teach some, PART-TIME, so we hired him. He was considered an instructor, he taught ONE class a semester.

So anyway, the author of this report builds a lot on that assumption, and I'm just saying, in my experience, that's not the way it always works.

Yes, most instructors are master's level, and many teach part time to work on their PhDs while the universities pay for their classes. It's not always that way though.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

No wonder he has spent nearly $2Million dollars to seal any and every imaginable record.

And thats another lie. People like you continue to make this claim with nothing to back it up. Where is the proof that his spending so much money? Why do you continue to make such claims with nothing to back them up? His not constitutionally obligated to release anything further especially considering the elections are over so why should he have to spend anything? Just because he refuses to respond to the demands of disgruntled voters doesnt mean his hiding anything or spending any amount.

Do you notice the amount keeps going up too? I will be willing to bet by the time that Obama leaves office these people are going to claim that half the national debt is actually Obama's defense fund.

reply to post by OldDragger


Welcome to ATS, where sourcing is nowhere near as vital as claiming. have you heard of David Icke or Zechariah Sitchen?

reply to post by Light of Night


The reason it sounds the same is because facts don't change. if I say "the sky is blue" and someone else some other time says "the sky is blue" it's not because we've got a coordinated effort going to deceive you. it's because the sky is actually blue, regardless of whether you want it to be a lovely mauve with cherry sprinkles

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Like I said find independent sources to verify his background. Those have been the same sources the left has been quoting since he started his campaign. Don't you find it a little bit strange that, only those few organizations have any background info on the president? Also his page at the University has been deleted, since he no longer works there.

I tell you for the most "transparent" administration in history, there really isn't much transparency. Look it doesn't exist the only info we have about his is what he wants us to know. If that wasn't the case then these articles about the White House Press Corp trading positive stories about Obama for inside access wouldn't be popping up. The facts are there, by more than just the Right Wing blog.

You keep regurgitating the same sources and holding them up as undeniable fact, and the truth is there is nothing out there to fact check the fact checkers. Also nationality, eligibility, never questioned it. You ad-hom attacked me, deal with it.

So please the challenge still stands, find information for independent sources that verify his background. It doesn't exist, the only things that exist is what has been propagated from those few websites that the left has been quoting since he was campaigning. Now that people are really starting to dig up some real info on his background that he hasn't allowed into the public he is starting to run scared.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Simple question then. Why can't you verify it outside of those few websites then? If the "facts" speak for themselves why do you have to keep going back to those same websites to prove your "facts". If they were indeed facts they would be verified independently by a multitude of sources. Especially with all the controversy surrounding him. The left would love nothing more than to have multiple sources to shove it down the throats of the people that disagree with him.

Originally posted by Light of Night
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

Like I said find independent sources to verify his background.

If you refuse official statements and sources from the state Hawaii, from the University of Chicago, from Politifact, then nothing else will satisfy you.

Those have been the same sources the left has been quoting

So your saying the University of Chicago Law school themselves are left wing? Even though the OP claims the University denied Obama's position there? You saying the state of Hawaii is leftwing biased even though they are the authorities on the birth certificate, on birth right? You do know what your saying here right? Your problem is that when the source doesnt suit your own biasness, your own assumptions, you dismiss them.

have any background info on the president?

Like the Health department director Dr Fukino? The one that has access to Obama's extended information? Like the officials at the University of Chicago? Really?

The facts are there, by more than just the Right Wing blog.

I tell ya what, get me a source that you have been reading that you think is not biased. Im curious as to where you've been going online.

eligibility, never questioned it.

Yes you did, you are just running away from that comment. Questioning Obama's backround and insisting you did not get enough information during the elections is all about eligibility.

find information for independent sources

I did, from the Hawaiian government officials, from the University of Chicago themselves, from politifact which is an independent source. You just dont like what your hearing and dismissing the cold hard facts as they stand.

Maybe you can show me your independent sources that you feel are more accurate than the state of Hawaii, than the University of Chicago, because surely they are more independent right?

reply to post by kozmo


woah now. I just want to commet on one thing here. you think that after just over a year Obamba is gonna change the US after Bush took a sh!t on it. cmon man you can't be that ignorant! the economy has already improved.
I'm sick of people talking bad about Obama. atleast wait 4 years and then decide if you can put down Obama.

with all do respect

Obama = www.youtube.com...

Obama = Barry Soetoro: www.snopes.com...

I said SOETORO: www.youtube.com...

Why...you must think we are stupid...www.telegraph.co.uk... html





Meet the Soetoros. 9 year old Barry (Obama) Soetoro is on the right. Isn't that precious?

I do not know about the truth to the claim that "Obama" was born in Hawaii...and frankly I do not care. This guy is CIA trained and protected -he's crooked, a definite liar and a phony. I don't need a birth certificate to tell me all that.

Additional sources: Corcoran, Monica. "Barack Obama Went Hawaiian Casual at Occidental College in L.A." Los Angeles Times. 18 January 2009.

Gordon, Larry. "Occidental Recalls 'Barry', Obama." Los Angeles Times. 29 January, 2007.

[edit on 6-4-2010 by 051r15]

Oh Jeebuz Cripes blowing bubbles... This "evidence" is just someone making accusations.
Just keep flinging poo at the president you despise. Sooner or later something will stick... right?

reply to post by Angus123


I dont see any proof to the contrary. And we all know how many agents frequent forums and troll, so I have said my piece.


It sure would have been nice to know this stuff before the elections took place...RIGHT? "Soetoro"? Right? Whatever.

[edit on 6-4-2010 by 051r15]

reply to post by 051r15


You do realize that those links to snopes that you posted show that these claims are false...right?

Your own sources are contradicting you.

reply to post by kozmo


Obama is Osama as Osama is Obama.

"It will be 911 times 2356"....Kim Jong Ill in "Team America"



Peace

Originally posted by 051r15
Obama = www.youtube.com...

Obama = Barry Soetoro: www.snopes.com...

I said SOETORO: www.youtube.com...

Why...you must think we are stupid...www.telegraph.co.uk... html

You must be a pro-obama person trying to make the haters look like idiots. Why else would you link to objective proof of your statements' basis being nothing more than tripe? You aren't needed here, the OP has already been utterly debunked.

On the other hand

Best,
Skunknuts

All USA presidents since Kennedy - were just placed there by those with real power. What's new ?

One thing that pops up time and time again is the generalizing and demonizing tactic used by both Pro-Obama and Anti-Obama people, dividing the people through black/white thinking. Distorted perception, kinda like when you say stupid stuff when you're in a heated fight coz your perception is compromised by high emotions.

How people can be so emotional about Obama is beyond me, regardless of whether it's adoration or disgust.

To me, he is merely a multi-facetet public relations Trojan Horse in service of the multinational corporations and the banker's cartels behind them that run the world whichever way they want.

Originally posted by 051r15
reply to post by Angus123

 

I dont see any proof to the contrary. And we all know how many agents frequent forums and troll, so I have said my piece.


It sure would have been nice to know this stuff before the elections took place...RIGHT? "Soetoro"? Right?

Whatever.

[edit on 6-4-2010 by 051r15]

I could call you a thief, liar and kitten stomper.
I don't see any proof to the contrary.
So it must be true.

Really...? You were serious with that crap?

I wish he didn't have all those names.

I tend not to trust people with a lot of name changes. Like, I figure someone with a lot of name changes is either a spy or a criminal.

Threads like this always remind me of the Clinton years. To be fair, many Americans didn't know how precarious the US economy was back then, but the writing was on the wall.
So we had Clinton trying to balance the budget, but the most noise was 1 smear after another until finally it was what he did with his knob that worked. Now we all know the economy is broken, but just how broken? Obama is borrowing to keep the USA afloat: the most noise is personal smear.
The 2 most pertinent parts of this situation are:
1) Obama is POTUS. People's opinion on that doesn't matter until the next election.
2) If McCain had won, he too would be pumping money he didn't have into the US economy, because no country has ever pulled out of recession without spending. The current US tax regime & economy doesn't provide the fed govt with enough cash for what's needed, so it must be borrowed.
Y'all need to be arguing about where that money goes, not where Obama came from. What's ironic is that if Obama succeeds, hardly anyone will know, because what is at stake is staving off a 30s style depression, leaving merely a double-dip or prolonged period of slow growth to complain about in its place.