Did Obama really have gay sex and smoked crack in a Limo?

[Sihouette]

Yeah, keep up the good work fellow GOP/Obamabot-poser! (Keep up the mantra that Clinton cannot possibly get the nomination! )

As to making Edward's scandal seem true...you folks are missing the point. The similarity between the Edward's scandal and the coming-soon Sinclair/Obama scandal is that both were known of for some time and the Edward's scandal was "held back" even though it was known...

The same is true for the Obama/Sinclair scandal. It may very well be true. Or then again it may not. But the GOP is already gearing up to sell it as a true story.

THAT is what should alarm democrats. When the GOP makes up its mind to sell a story a certain way, their media buddies jump right in and perform on cue. All that really matters where the election is concerned from a strategic standpoint concerning democrats is that if the story is made to seem true to a significant number of swayable voters, then the election is lost right now.

So that's why I encourage democrats to do their homework and come up with BELIEVABLE alibis and a defense for Obama before-the-fact. They've got their work cut out for them with a passed polygraph test and a ton of other circumstantial evidence that will make the GOP's coming task a cakewalk..

 

[top gun]

Yeah, keep up the good work fellow GOP/Obamabot-poser! (Keep up the mantra that Clinton cannot possibly get the nomination! )

Tick TOCK... Tick TOCK... times running out on you S. Best to come up with some off the wall cover story now (you know... coulda woulda shoulda) to save a little face. Only about 2 weeks.

 

[Sihouette]

If it turned out that Obama wasn't guilty of the Sinclair stuff and that the GOP "wouldn't stoop so low" as to make it seem like he was and all my predictions here turned out to be crap, I'd be OK with that.

I have no connection to being right or wrong, only prepared.

 

[Pandora]

Tick TOCK... Tick TOCK... times running out on you S. Best to come up with some off the wall cover story now (you know... coulda woulda shoulda) to save a little face. Only about 2 weeks.

I think it could be longer than two weeks. I dont think the story will come mainstream till after the convention but I think it will hit in mid to late October.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

When Obama wins, and the Election comes and goes and there is nothing...sad part it you people will just shrug it off and believe the next dumb story.

 

[Pandora]

When Obama wins, and the Election comes and goes and there is nothing...sad part it you people will just shrug it off and believe the next dumb story.

What exactly is it you want people to do? You seem so offended when any one even thinks to question Obama on anything from his voting record to his personal life.


If a person just can not swollow socialism, what do you want them to do?

quietly go away and say nothing?

Pretend they actually like socialism Obama and what ever he "the one" stands for?

What can people who can never agree with Obama do that you wont have a problem with?

 

[top gun]

If it turned out that Obama wasn't guilty of the Sinclair stuff and that the GOP "wouldn't stoop so low" as to make it seem like he was and all my predictions here turned out to be crap, I'd be OK with that.

I have no connection to being right or wrong, only prepared.

Oh NO! You've promoted that lie. You loved that smear. It's you who started out pushing the Sinclair story as the truth.

And I hope you will be OK with it because all your predictions will be crap. In about 2 weeks Senator Obama will be the official Democratic nominee for President of the United States of America... not Hillary Clinton. And the Sinclair non-event hasn't even been a respectable lie since he failed the polygraph and came clean, apologized and admitted he'd never even met Senator Obama.

In about two weeks on a scale of 1 to 10 your credibility score after all the senseless, needless, made up trash talk against your own Parties presumptive nominee............ -3.

 

[Sihouette]

Go back and read my first posts on this thread, idjit.

Wait, you're probably too busy figuring out how to use more colored fonts so let me do it for you...

Re: Did Obama really have gay sex and smoked crack in a Limo?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree. It's tripe like this that serves to distract from the real and actual problems with Obama.

Knock it off. You won't derail real and meaningful discussions with tabloid gossip aimed at making legitimate critics of Obama seem lumped in with tripe-peddlers.

Nice try though.~ Silhouette Page 1, this thread

See, what happened was that I, like most reasonable people, assumed this Sinclair story was a smear tactic. So intially, you and I were in agreement on this. But since I started looking into the matter more and more, from curiosity and moreso from a "can the GOP make this stick" strategic homework assignment, I started to see some glaring circumstantial evidence that raises more suspicions than lays them to rest.

And this worries me for many reasons.

Paramount of which is that the GOP can derail a democratic hope for a win, and it fits too perfectly into The Obama Trap, which I knew they were going to pull from just how hard their media buddies fought to keep Hillary from appearing to win in June. The fit was too good.

The other thing that bothers me, and not necessarily in this order, is that if Obama had a hand in what is alleged via Sinclair, Barack Obama is morally unfit for the office of President of the US, moreso than any candidate or incumbant scandal I've heard of to date..

My conclusions come from a progression of at first thinking this was a load of crap, a smear campaign and then finding that there was more apparent truth to the Sinclair story than I cared to admit. Then finally I admitted it to myself as plausible and began to examine the ramifications of what that plausibility meant.

Immediately my mind went to The Obama Trap, and when anything looks like a spring for that, it becomes my foremost pet cause. And hence my later posts..

 

[UShadItComing]

Do you mean that you're going to let this go now Sihouette?

We can hope!

 

[Sihouette]

No offense to the disabled, but are you mentally retarded UShad?

I said that once I pick up a whiff of what I think might be a spring for The Obama Trap, I make it my pet project. I'm not the one gearing up to release the story. I'm preparing other people for it's release...namely "la la" land democrats who somehow hold out hopes that the repulicans aren't going to do to Obama what they just got finished doing, via proxies of course , to Edwards.

Let it go? Ask The Conservative Voice about letting the Sinclair issue go.

 

[top gun]

Go back and read my first posts on this thread, idjit.

Wait, you're probably too busy figuring out how to use more colored fonts so let me do it for you...



See, what happened was that I, like most reasonable people, assumed this Sinclair story was a smear tactic. So intially, you and I were in agreement on this. But since I started looking into the matter more and more, from curiosity and moreso from a "can the GOP make this stick" strategic homework assignment, I started to see some glaring circumstantial evidence that raises more suspicions than lays them to rest.

LOL !!! Now that's some energetic backtracking there!!!

But still in about 2 weeks you're a negative three on the credibility scale. There just isn't enough water to tread. You've promoted far to many lies & smears and you'll soon be drowning in them.

I agree you "started off" being almost fair minded but your misguided logic on the whole Hillary Clinton thing took over and you yourself became the smear merchant. Your posts turned to things like this & much worse and none, ZERO, notta bit of it will come to pass. That's your credibility on the line.

Maybe you should go to font color white... because that's about how much standing you'll have very soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sihouette
Yes, after examining the information about the Obama gay sex/drug/murder scandal I have accepted that Clinton will make the superior nominee for an actual win in November.

It isn't hard to accept actually.

 

[UShadItComing]

It's against the rules to call me mentally retarded Sihoette and I have reported you for same.

 

[Pandora]

Med check !

 

[Sihouette]

Ushad can dish it out but s/he can't take it.

Your name "Ushaditcoming" is against the "rules" and I've reported you for same...lol...

And to TopGun's "support" of Obama, s/he forgets that what is relevant is not my or his credibility, but rather what actually is factual in the situation.

We have to date:

1. Bill O'Rielly and Tony Snows cliffhanger about the story "in play" that everyone knows about in media.

2. The amassing circumstantial evidence pro-Sinclair's credibility (the only that will matter in this issue).

3. The Edward's scandal, just over. (Edwards was in the top 10 of Obama VP choices and might've tipped the scales in November for Obama).

4. The Conservative Voice article touting Sinclair as, well, just read my signature below..

5. Just last night on O'Rielly's show again he began making comments about how "we're going to really get to know Obama's background soon." While he could barely contain his laughter...

******

Topgun, you don't support Obama, just own it. You're not fooling anyone. It's quite obvious, due to your vehement stance against our sure-winner, Hillary Clinton, that she scares the carp out of you. And no, I don't buy for an instant that it is because of some inherant Clinton-flaw she possesses. Unless of course you're referring to her and her husband's record of the best economy in US history?

No, you're deathly afraid of Hillary Clinton because her nomination would spell certain defeat for republicans, your ilk, and an end to BigOil domination and REAL CHANGE for americans in a positive direction.

Yes, that would mean more funding for social programs, resulting in more stimulation to our capitalism (didn't make that connection, did you? ) and yes, it would mean that filthy filthy rich would have to cut into one of their string of yachts to supply funding for the poor. (Oh, God forbid!).

It doesn't mean an end to capitalism. It means an end to monopolies and the dangerous division of classes and a restoring of life to our backbone: the Middle Class.

You have a problem with that? Go get counselling..

 

[UShadItComing]

Sihouette wrote:

Your name "Ushaditcoming" is against the "rules" and I've reported you for same...lol...

No, the admins have already decided that my name's o.k. and why shouldn't it be when it reflects the truth as even many americans now see it.

Just because you can't behave yourself doesn't meant that you need to go promoting a vendetta against me because you don't like my name.

Take a deep breathe and count to ten dear, then we'll continue with your silly conspiracy theories.