Why Are We Easily Misled by Obama
by findthesource, Thu Jan 31, 2008 at 09:49:11 AM EST
I feel that Obama supporters are so misinformed, its incredible. Obama is practically the same as Clinton in every respect. He is far from being anti-status quo.
Keep in mind the following FACTS, all from Obama's words & actions, as well as from objective sources:
(1) Obama voted in favor of funding the war on several occasions while US Senator. He admits to this (download 11/15/07 debate available on youtube.com, you will see discussion of this in the debate). This means that when we as a country found out for sure that there were no WMDs, Obama kept voting in support of this directionless, pointless war. This is just as bad as Clinton's voting for the war in 2002. Obama uses Clinton's voting for the war against Clinton, but Obama is just as guilty.
(2) Obama wants to aggresively 'conquer' al-qaeda. He mentioned it at the end of his speech in NH (after primary). He gave a long speech about it in the summer of 2007. (see news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/692663.stm) . He was also involved in appearance in pakistan along with G. W. Bush, where pakistan anti-war protestors protested intrusion of Obama and Bush (see sourcewatch.org and do a search for Obama & Pakistan). In a nutshell, all this means that, basically, Obama wants to bring the troops home from Iraq and then pretty much immediately redirect them to Pakistan "if the president of pakistan does not cooperate." (Again, see his direct quote in the BBC article). He is very aggressive about this and wants to continue the war on terror. So, again, how is this 'anti-status quo.'???
(3) Also, Obama is in trouble for his own 527s. (See NY Times of 1/30/08. It's in the actual newspaper, not online, in a tiny article). Apparently, a group called Vote for Hope is his illegal 527. For whatever reason, the media does not make a big deal about this.
(4) Obama receives more corporate funding than Clinton, including funding from health insurance companies. (See www.fec.gov......click on candidate "Obama for America." This are actual candidate filings) So why do people believe him when he lies and says he gets no corporate funding.
(5) He lied and said "I was never a muslim," but then in one of his books (it may have been Audacity of Hope) he admits to having been raised muslim.
(6) He shipped in voters from Illinois (residents of Illinois!!) to cross into Iowa, got them to register to vote in Iowa, and to immediately vote for him in Iowa caucus. Apparently, Iowa allows for late registrations with no proof of address. This was all over a news article in cbsnews.com on January 2, 2008(do a google search for proof of this).
(7) HE IS ENDORSED BY THE ALCOHOLIC KENNEDY WHO KILLED A WOMAN!!! Hillary is at least endorsed by RFK, Jr, which is much better.
(8) And finally, Rezko - which is the least of Obama's corruption and lies.
So....given all of the above evidence, how can this man call himself anti-status quo? How dare he lie and say he is not part of washington political system. How can he claim that he is candidate for change?
I am not sure I am voting for Clinton, but I am happy at least that I am not a sucker to Obama's bullshit.