Superdelegate Bribes Obama for $20 Million

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Vic
Newsflash, people... people pay bribes to politicians NOT the other way around.

Gah... this upside-down world trolling by the rabid Obama haters is just getting to be a bit too much. What's next? Are you going to call it a bribe when Obama pays for a TV spot because the media says their advertising works?

A bribe is a two way street. One person gives money the other gives something in return. hate to tell you but yes politicians too can both give and take bribes.

Uh huh... but even in that case a bribe by definition requires an exchange for political favors like getting certain legislation passed or laws selectively enforced, etc.

Where is that here? That's right, nowhere.

Now if you need to look at what a bribe looks like, try Ted Stevens. Hell, he's not even denying that he took bribes, he's just denying that he failed to report them. Now that's corruption.

This OTOH is known as political campaigning. It would be literally impossible for a politician to run for political office if he did not pay people and organizations to help him attract voters. Seriously.

Yes I agree it is sad to see that Obama is already acting like politicians do in partaking in such shady deals. He is a good lawyer so I'm sure they saw too it that no laws were broken regardless of how dubious the whole thing looks.
Obama should have rebuked this guy for ever offering up his vote for money in the first place. It's disgusting. Instead what does he do? Looks for an opportunity to use this to his advantage and enters into a spoken contract with this man. This shady behavior shines a light on his intentions and motivations.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Vic
Newsflash, people... people pay bribes to politicians NOT the other way around.

Gah... this upside-down world trolling by the rabid Obama haters is just getting to be a bit too much. What's next? Are you going to call it a bribe when Obama pays for a TV spot because the media says their advertising works?

A bribe is a two way street. One person gives money the other gives something in return. hate to tell you but yes politicians too can both give and take bribes.

Uh huh... but even in that case a bribe by definition requires an exchange for political favors like getting certain legislation passed or laws selectively enforced, etc.

Where is that here? That's right, nowhere.

Now if you need to look at what a bribe looks like, try Ted Stevens. Hell, he's not even denying that he took bribes, he's just denying that he failed to report them. Now that's corruption.

This OTOH is known as political campaigning. It would be literally impossible for a politician to run for political office if he did not pay people and organizations to help him attract voters. Seriously.

Yes I agree it is sad to see that Obama is already acting like politicians do in partaking in such shady deals. He is a good lawyer so I'm sure they saw too it that no laws were broken regardless of how shady the whole thing looks.
Obama should have rebuked this guy for ever offering up his vote for money in the first place. It's disgusting. Instead what does he do? Looks for an opportunity to use this to his advantage. This dubious behavior shines a light on his intentions and motivations.

He did rebuke the guy when it was about offering up his superdelegate vote for money.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Vic
Newsflash, people... people pay bribes to politicians NOT the other way around.

Gah... this upside-down world trolling by the rabid Obama haters is just getting to be a bit too much. What's next? Are you going to call it a bribe when Obama pays for a TV spot because the media says their advertising works?

A bribe is a two way street. One person gives money the other gives something in return. hate to tell you but yes politicians too can both give and take bribes.

Uh huh... but even in that case a bribe by definition requires an exchange for political favors like getting certain legislation passed or laws selectively enforced, etc.

Where is that here? That's right, nowhere.

Now if you need to look at what a bribe looks like, try Ted Stevens. Hell, he's not even denying that he took bribes, he's just denying that he failed to report them. Now that's corruption.

This OTOH is known as political campaigning. It would be literally impossible for a politician to run for political office if he did not pay people and organizations to help him attract voters. Seriously.

Yes I agree it is sad to see that Obama is already acting like politicians do in partaking in such shady deals. He is a good lawyer so I'm sure they saw too it that no laws were broken regardless of how shady the whole thing looks.
Obama should have rebuked this guy for ever offering up his vote for money in the first place. It's disgusting. Instead what does he do? Looks for an opportunity to use this to his advantage. This dubious behavior shines a light on his intentions and motivations.

He did rebuke the guy when it was about offering up his superdelegate vote for money.

Rebukes him and then goes on to do business with him?
How does being two-faced make it any better?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Well I have a pretty good record of being right while the "experts" are either late or wrong.

Well if that's the case the bet I've offered to you still stands. You've never responded to it before, but if you're so certain what's the holdup?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Rebukes him and then goes on to do business with him?
How does being two-faced make it any better?

Keep back tracking, you're getting closer.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Perry404

Rebukes him and then goes on to do business with him?
How does being two-faced make it any better?

Keep back tracking, you're getting closer.

Snappy comments do not constitute an argument.
Little difficult to defend a mans character when he's acting like a stereotypical politician isn't it?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Perry404

Rebukes him and then goes on to do business with him?
How does being two-faced make it any better?

Keep back tracking, you're getting closer.

Snappy comments do not constitute an argument.
Little difficult to defend a mans character when he's acting like a stereotypical politician isn't it?

Because his opponent wasn't one of the Keating 5? :roll:

It's difficult to defend ANY position when the person doing the attacking lives on a different planet, as you must.

Tell ya what, when you can find a BETTER politician with a legitimate chance to win the election, then I will vote for that politician. Guaranteed.
In the meantime, when your only post-rationalization for voting for a dripping slimeball of corruption like McCain is because Obama isn't Jesus H. Christ Himself... well, there's no point arguing with that kind of self-dishonesty like you are displaying.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Perry404

Rebukes him and then goes on to do business with him?
How does being two-faced make it any better?

Keep back tracking, you're getting closer.

Snappy comments do not constitute an argument.
Little difficult to defend a mans character when he's acting like a stereotypical politician isn't it?

No, it's not difficult at all. I've already done it several times in this thread. I think you simply don't understand the issue and are unwilling to learn.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Vic
Newsflash, people... people pay bribes to politicians NOT the other way around.
-snip-

Politicians do pay bribes, It's just that they use OUR money when paying.

Fern

 

[Fern]

I don't like the sound of this scheme whatsoever.

Smacks of vote buying and has too much potential for fraud. I'm particularly concerned that they are targeting mail-in votes.

If you can't be bothered to show up in person and produce a valid ID, or go down to your local elections office and get an absentee ballot, I really don't think you should vote, because you obviously don't give a damn and are uninformed.

Nobody works 24/7/365.

Fern

 

[RY62]

Originally posted by: Fern
I don't like the sound of this scheme whatsoever.

Smacks of vote buying and has too much potential for fraud. I'm particularly concerned that they are targeting mail-in votes.

If you can't be bothered to show up in person and produce a valid ID, or go down to your local elections office and get an absentee ballot, I really don't think you should vote, because you obviously don't give a damn and are uninformed.

Nobody works 24/7/365.

Fern

Like I said in the beginning, this story stinks on many levels.

There is the issue of the superdelegate selling his vote which also contains elements of bribery and extortion. There's the fact that Obama gave in to the demand in order to recieve the super vote and then there's the issue of possible vote fraud on the Hispanic mail-in scheme. There is a story in the news today, from my state, that illustrates this potential for vote fraud.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2...-spreading-in-alabama/

Alabama was the cradle of the civil rights movement, where much of the battle for voting rights was waged more than 40 years ago, but now there are growing allegations of voter fraud across the state.

The claims have surfaced in eight counties in Alabama, and they include allegations that absentee ballots were sold and traded for cash, crack-cocaine and even piles of driveway gravel.

?They get them, and say, ?I will give you 40 or 50 dollars,? so a lot of people are unemployed and will jump for that,? voter Wanda Sanders said.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: RY62


Like I said in the beginning, this story stinks on many levels.

I'd say your post stinks on many levels.

There is the issue of the superdelegate selling his vote

He wasn't selling his vote. Selling his vote is asking for money for him to put in his pocket. That did not happen.

He was asking for a program to receive funding, which is very different.

What if he'd said that he'd cast his vote for the candidate who promised to fund alternative energy research? That's called picking the candidate whose policies you like.

This story isn't quite as clean as that because it's putting a very narrow program ahead of the larger policy issues, but it's a far cry from what you said.

which also contains elements of bribery and extortion.

Wrong. Again, use the alternative energy example, and get a clue that selecting candidates who will fund the programs you think are important is politics.

Again, you can fairly attack this guy's judgement for making such a narrow program so central to his vote, which does inch in the direction of corruption, but it far from your hyperbole about extortion and bribery. The fact it was somewhat unsavory is why the candidates refused to fund his program for his vote in their race.

There's the fact that Obama gave in to the demand in order to recieve the super vote

You're just lying. Had Obama done that, he'd have done it when the vote had the little value it did when Hillary was in the race. You have ZERO evidence that Obama's motive was to get this super-delegate vote in a race he's already won, and the facts say the opposite of what you said.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Fern
I don't like the sound of this scheme whatsoever.

Smacks of vote buying and has too much potential for fraud. I'm particularly concerned that they are targeting mail-in votes.

If you can't be bothered to show up in person and produce a valid ID, or go down to your local elections office and get an absentee ballot, I really don't think you should vote, because you obviously don't give a damn and are uninformed.

Nobody works 24/7/365.

Fern

How does it have potential for fraud? The funny thing is that even the link RY62 uses in his OP says "Obama can certainly not be criticized for the commitment of funds to outreach programs".

If this is a plan for voter fraud, it's the stupidest voter fraud plan in history.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fern
I don't like the sound of this scheme whatsoever.

Smacks of vote buying and has too much potential for fraud. I'm particularly concerned that they are targeting mail-in votes.

If you can't be bothered to show up in person and produce a valid ID, or go down to your local elections office and get an absentee ballot, I really don't think you should vote, because you obviously don't give a damn and are uninformed.

Nobody works 24/7/365.

Fern

How does it have potential for fraud? The funny thing is that even the link RY62 uses in his OP says "Obama can certainly not be criticized for the commitment of funds to outreach programs".

If this is a plan for voter fraud, it's the stupidest voter fraud plan in history.

How do election officials know who filled out the mail-in ballot?

Answer: They don't.

Try going to a polling place and showing them your ID, then tell them the other guy is going to go cast your ballot for you.

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fern
I don't like the sound of this scheme whatsoever.

Smacks of vote buying and has too much potential for fraud. I'm particularly concerned that they are targeting mail-in votes.

If you can't be bothered to show up in person and produce a valid ID, or go down to your local elections office and get an absentee ballot, I really don't think you should vote, because you obviously don't give a damn and are uninformed.

Nobody works 24/7/365.

Fern

How does it have potential for fraud? The funny thing is that even the link RY62 uses in his OP says "Obama can certainly not be criticized for the commitment of funds to outreach programs".

If this is a plan for voter fraud, it's the stupidest voter fraud plan in history.

How do election officials know who filled out the mail-in ballot?

Answer: They don't.

Try going to a polling place and showing them your ID, then tell them the other guy is going to go cast your ballot for you.

Fern

While it is true that the mail in ballot is the preferred method of voter fraud, (one reason why the voter ID laws are so silly) both political parties engage in registrations in this way, and have done so for a really long time. The association between Obama and this guy is obviously very public, if you're going to commit voter fraud you have to stay below the radar. So, a public appeal for funding to commit a crime would be again... probably the stupidest voter fraud scheme in history.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Perry404
Well this pretty much destroys any argument that Obama is different or that he'll bring "change" to Washington.
This resembles third world politics.
I can't image there is a more corrupt, anti-democratic and dishonest behavior than illegally buying votes.
He should have come out and announced that even the idea that someone might sell their vote is repugnant.
Instead he buys it.
Sickening bought & sold politician.

Please explain how he is buying votes and furthermore please explain how this is different then how campaigns are run the world over.

Please explain how this is buying votes? Are you intentionally being obtuse?
This is a form of treason that 50 years ago might have been deserving of the death penalty.

Of course this is no different than campaigns the world over. It's disgusting. Americans are supposed to have an HONEST system.
People have no clue what national sovereignty means today.
Our forefathers who fought and died for this nation would have been repulsed by this. They would have screamed for Obamas head on a platter. This guy was arrested for merely attempting to sell his vote on ebay BECAUSE IT IS WRONG AND TREASONOUS!
Yet Americans are becoming so brainwashed that now we'll accept it?
What sickening mindless boobs we have become.

You did not answer his question. Try again. You should not need more than 1 sentence.

If you give me this $$$ much money, I will give you my vote. = Bribe
Obama = Ok here is the money = accepted bribe.

What part of 1+1 do you not understand?

You braindead bullmilker THE PRIMARY IS OVER.

Clear enough for you?

It doesn't matter whether he's a superdelegate in the primaries or voting as one man in the presidential election the principle is the same. The man bribed Obama and Obama gave him money for his vote and to pander to the Latinos.
Why is this simple concept so difficult for you to understand?
However you you look at it or minimize it Obama bought into a bribe.
Our future president accepted a bribe.
If he will do this now, what will he be capable of as president?

Again, you braindead bullmilker, the bribe was for his superdelegate vote in the primary.

THE PRIMARY IS OVER

So is this thread

Your stupidity is breathtaking

 

[RY62]

Originally posted by: Craig234
The fact it was somewhat unsavory is why the candidates refused to fund his program for his vote in their race.

There's the fact that Obama gave in to the demand in order to recieve the super vote

You're just lying. Had Obama done that, he'd have done it when the vote had the little value it did when Hillary was in the race. You have ZERO evidence that Obama's motive was to get this super-delegate vote in a race he's already won, and the facts say the opposite of what you said.

You, sir, have no right or reason to call me a liar. I have presented facts. That these facts do not go along with your opinions does not make them false.

Fact- Obama has not yet won.
Fact- Obama did not win enough delegates to secure the nomination during the primaries.
Fact- Hillary did not concede. She suspended campaigning and maintains control of her delegates.
Fact- The votes of superdelegates will decide the nominee at the convention.
Fact- Obama needs the votes of superdelegates to secure the nomination.
Fact- This superdelegate demanded $20 million in return for his vote.
Fact- Obama paid the demand of $20 million and will recieve the vote.
Fact- The promised mail-in votes are ripe for ptential fraud.

It is still possible that Obama could lose the nomination at the convention. The supers will be expected to cast their votes for the most electable candidate.

Obama has not been able to poll higher than 50% and lately his numbers have been falling until he is tied with McCain.

Obama was expected to bring new people into the party but the number of registered Democrats are falling since he became the presumptive nominee.
Number of Democrats in US Declines

If these numbers continue to drop, Obama's nomination could be in serious jeopardy as the supers could still decide to nominate Hillary. Even the conservatives are worried about that possibility.

http://www.familysecuritymatte.../id.772/pub_detail.asp

Should Barack Obama continue his slide into ego's abyss, his campaign of arrogance, naively buying his own marketing scheme, should he continue to alienate the loose association of factions that make up the total of his base,
he risks fiddling as his Rome burns; he risks facilitating the migration of superdelegates from his candidacy to Hillary Clinton's. Remember, she suspended her campaign, she didn't end it.

Should this scenario occur it would not only usurp "Dewey Defeats Truman" as the biggest media failure in American history, it would create a solid field of Leftist support for Hillary Clinton. Liberal and Progressive-Left feminists will be
drunk with determination. Those who defected from her camp originally will work twice as hard to make amends and prove their loyalty (come on, who is stupid enough to cross a Clinton in power?). Those who backed Obama will work
twice as hard for Hillary to cleanse themselves of their political naivety. And Democrats in general will still have their "history making" event in the nomination of the first female nominee to head a national party ticket.

To put it succinctly, if Obama folds because of his arrogance, because of his ego, it will be twice as hard to stop Hillary Clinton from attaining the White House.

Stop calling me a liar and try to be honest with yourself.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: RY62

Originally posted by: Craig234
The fact it was somewhat unsavory is why the candidates refused to fund his program for his vote in their race.

There's the fact that Obama gave in to the demand in order to recieve the super vote

You're just lying. Had Obama done that, he'd have done it when the vote had the little value it did when Hillary was in the race. You have ZERO evidence that Obama's motive was to get this super-delegate vote in a race he's already won, and the facts say the opposite of what you said.

You, sir, have no right or reason to call me a liar. I have presented facts. That these facts do not go along with your opinions does not make them false.

Fact- Obama has not yet won.
Fact- Obama did not win enough delegates to secure the nomination during the primaries.
Fact- Hillary did not concede. She suspended campaigning and maintains control of her delegates.
Fact- The votes of superdelegates will decide the nominee at the convention.
Fact- Obama needs the votes of superdelegates to secure the nomination.
Fact- This superdelegate demanded $20 million in return for his vote.
Fact- Obama paid the demand of $20 million and will recieve the vote.
Fact- The promised mail-in votes are ripe for ptential fraud.

It is still possible that Obama could lose the nomination at the convention. The supers will be expected to cast their votes for the most electable candidate.

Obama has not been able to poll higher than 50% and lately his numbers have been falling until he is tied with McCain.

Obama was expected to bring new people into the party but the number of registered Democrats are falling since he became the presumptive nominee.
Number of Democrats in US Declines

If these numbers continue to drop, Obama's nomination could be in serious jeopardy as the supers could still decide to nominate Hillary. Even the conservatives are worried about that possibility.

http://www.familysecuritymatte.../id.772/pub_detail.asp

Should Barack Obama continue his slide into ego's abyss, his campaign of arrogance, naively buying his own marketing scheme, should he continue to alienate the loose association of factions that make up the total of his base,
he risks fiddling as his Rome burns; he risks facilitating the migration of superdelegates from his candidacy to Hillary Clinton's. Remember, she suspended her campaign, she didn't end it.

Should this scenario occur it would not only usurp "Dewey Defeats Truman" as the biggest media failure in American history, it would create a solid field of Leftist support for Hillary Clinton. Liberal and Progressive-Left feminists will be
drunk with determination. Those who defected from her camp originally will work twice as hard to make amends and prove their loyalty (come on, who is stupid enough to cross a Clinton in power?). Those who backed Obama will work
twice as hard for Hillary to cleanse themselves of their political naivety. And Democrats in general will still have their "history making" event in the nomination of the first female nominee to head a national party ticket.

To put it succinctly, if Obama folds because of his arrogance, because of his ego, it will be twice as hard to stop Hillary Clinton from attaining the White House.

Stop calling me a liar and try to be honest with yourself.

Calling you a liar is charitable. What you are is a moron.

"This constitutes a bribe because it involved the same person, and Obama may still lose the nomination, and because there are messicans involved and oh dear god I am so stupid I just forgot to breathe...."

You make perfect sense.