David Freddoso's book, "The Case Against Barack Obama"

[Sihouette]

This at first was my main objection to Obama, before I read the Sinclair issue.

I was stunned that a person so focused on and utilizing race and elevating minorities to promote himself had in the recent past utterly trounced them off the ballot in Chicago to run unopposed. He even went to lengths to have his team of lawyers comb through a perennial-loser candidate's petition "just to be sure", or more likely "to be even and fair". His main opponent then was a beloved black lady incumbant who he knew he couldn't beat by just his own substance, so he had her petitions challenged. In the interest of fairness he challenged all the others to make it look like he wasn't singling her out...which of course he was..

Chicago politicians...

Here's an excerpt or two from the Chicago Tribune article on the matter:
Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070403obama-ballot,0,1843097.story

The day after New Year's 1996, operatives for Barack Obama filed into a barren hearing room of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners.

There they began the tedious process of challenging hundreds of signatures on the nominating petitions of state Sen. Alice Palmer, the longtime progressive activist from the city's South Side. And they kept challenging petitions until every one of Obama's four Democratic primary rivals was forced off the ballot.

Fresh from his work as a civil rights lawyer and head of a voter registration project that expanded access to the ballot box, Obama launched his first campaign for the Illinois Senate saying he wanted to empower disenfranchised citizens.

But in that initial bid for political office, Obama quickly mastered the bare-knuckle arts of Chicago electoral politics. His overwhelming legal onslaught signaled his impatience to gain office, even if that meant elbowing aside an elder stateswoman like Palmer.

The pro-Obama-for-now-so-Hillary-doesn't-get-nominated media is already gearing up to "debunk" the facts in the case to make it seem like the four minorities running against Obama "deserved it".

No one combed through his petitions. And in fact if they took a sampling of petitions across the US for candidates they would find candidacy-killing flaws in each and every one of them. Obama's would be no exception. In fact, I'd like to see a team of lawyers comb through his petitions to get on the ballot for president for any flaws..

This issue was my original objection to Obama. I thought, "If he can do this to fellow minorities, all while pretending to care and uphold them, what else is he capable of?" The mind tends to wander. Then I read the Sinclair story and began to realize the potential gravity of those musings..

Freddoso's book was written from factual accounts. He wants people to see what really happened in Obama's past, a thing Obamabots and GOP strategists/BigMedia want us to ignore until after Denver. The GOP will (and you can mark your calendars on this one) wind up pulling quotes from Freddoso's book, to "blame" him as the source of smears for "their legitimate concerns about Obama" post-Denver.

Yes, that's right, the same people lambasting the book for the public to ignore due to it's "lack of credibilty" are simultaneously combing its pages to load their arsenal come September.

Politics, dont' you love them?

 

[Sihouette]

More excerpts from The Chicago Tribune article

Page two:

"We actually ran a terrific campaign up until the point we knew that we weren't going to have to appear on the ballot with anybody," Obama said. "I mean, we had prepared for it. We had raised money. We had tons of volunteers. There was enormous enthusiasm."

And he defended his use of ballot maneuvers: "If you can win, you should win and get to work doing the people's business."

At the time, though, Obama seemed less at ease with the decision, according to aides. They said the first-time candidate initially expressed reservations about using challenges to eliminate all his fellow Democrats.

"He wondered if we should knock everybody off the ballot. How would that look?" said Ronald Davis, the paid Obama campaign consultant whom Obama referred to as his "guru of petitions."

In the end, Davis filed objections to all four of Obama's Democratic rivals at the candidate's behest.

While Obama didn't attend the hearings, "he wanted us to call him every night and let him know what we were doing," Davis said...

...But Obama didn't gloat over the victories. "I don't think he thought it was, you know, sporting," said Will Burns, a 1996 Obama campaign volunteer who assisted with the petition challenges. "He wasn't very proud of it."

Now there's an interesting insight into Obama's true character (we are provided with so very few since we are in danger of being labelled "racist" if we inquire). Here is a man who knows that beating down fellow opponents on techincalities likely even he is guilty of on his petitions is inherantly bad juju, he still proceeds. In other words, this is a man who isn't acting from a neocon kneejerk meanness, but actually searches his soul, finds that what he is doing is wrong, hypocritical and ruthless, and then GOES AHEAD ANYWAY AND DOES IT IN THE NAME OF GETTING WHAT HE WANTS.

More character insights to follow...

 

[Sihouette]

Again, from the same Chicago Tribune link, page 4

Such tactics are legal and frequently used in Chicago. Ballot challenges eliminated 67 of the 245 declared aldermanic candidates in Chicago before this past February's elections, an election board spokesman said.

Davis recalled telling Obama: "If you can get 'em, get 'em. Why give 'em a break?

"I said, 'Barack, I'm going to knock them all off.'

"He said, 'What do you need?'

"I said, 'I need an attorney.'

"He said, 'Who is the best?'

"I said, 'Tom Johnson.' "

Obama already knew civil rights attorney and fellow Harvard Law graduate Thomas Johnson, who had waged election cases for the late Mayor Washington and had offered Obama informal legal advice since the days of Project Vote.

With Johnson's legal help, Obama's team was confident. They piled binders of polling sheets in the election board office on the second floor of City Hall, and on Jan. 2, 1996, began the days-long hearings that would eliminate the other Democrats.

 

[Sihouette]

Weird the right posters here have no comment on Freddoso's book or one of its sources, The Chicago Tribune article..

From page 1. Here's a profile of one of the candidates Obama cleared from the ballot on petty petition infractions to run unopposed:

America has been defined in part by civil rights and good government battles fought out in Chicago's 13th District, which in 1996 spanned Hyde Park mansions, South Shore bungalows and poverty-bitten precincts of Englewood.

It was in this part of the city that an eager reform Democrat by the name of Abner Mikva first entered elected office in the 1950s. And here a young, brash minister named Jesse Jackson ran Operation Breadbasket, leading marchers who sought to pressure grocery chains to hire minorities.

Palmer served the district in the Illinois Senate for much of the 1990s. Decades earlier, she was working as a community organizer in the area when Obama was growing up in Hawaii and Indonesia.

 

[Pandora]

This at first was my main objection to Obama, before I read the Sinclair issue.

Good objection, I think both are valid!

 

[Sihouette]

That was then. This is now.

Politics is like that. If Obama was running against Clinton, I'd be on his butt like flies on dookie.

But in today's reality (a place I like to call "home"..lol..) we have two candidates. Obama is the lesser of two evils.

 

[Pandora]

That was then. This is now.

Politics is like that. If Obama was running against Clinton, I'd be on his butt like flies on dookie.

But in today's reality (a place I like to call "home"..lol..) we have two candidates. Obama is the lesser of two evils.

even if you have changed, Obama has not. So forgive me but I cant stop talking about it, not now not after Nov 4th (should he be elected by voter fraud )

 

[AbeLincoln]

"The People vs. Barack Obama: The criminal case against the Obama Administration" by Ben Shapiro.

I will look into Freddoso's book. Thank you.

There's a to US problem, though. Hillary isn't the one.

 

[AbeLincoln]

This at first was my main objection to Obama, before I read the Sinclair issue.

I was stunned that a person so focused on and utilizing race and elevating minorities to promote himself had in the recent past utterly trounced them off the ballot in Chicago to run unopposed. He even went to lengths to have his team of lawyers comb through a perennial-loser candidate's petition "just to be sure", or more likely "to be even and fair". His main opponent then was a beloved black lady incumbant who he knew he couldn't beat by just his own substance, so he had her petitions challenged. In the interest of fairness he challenged all the others to make it look like he wasn't singling her out...which of course he was..

Chicago politicians...

Here's an excerpt or two from the Chicago Tribune article on the matter:
Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070403obama-ballot,0,1843097.story



The pro-Obama-for-now-so-Hillary-doesn't-get-nominated media is already gearing up to "debunk" the facts in the case to make it seem like the four minorities running against Obama "deserved it".

No one combed through his petitions. And in fact if they took a sampling of petitions across the US for candidates they would find candidacy-killing flaws in each and every one of them. Obama's would be no exception. In fact, I'd like to see a team of lawyers comb through his petitions to get on the ballot for president for any flaws..

This issue was my original objection to Obama. I thought, "If he can do this to fellow minorities, all while pretending to care and uphold them, what else is he capable of?" The mind tends to wander. Then I read the Sinclair story and began to realize the potential gravity of those musings..

Freddoso's book was written from factual accounts. He wants people to see what really happened in Obama's past, a thing Obamabots and GOP strategists/BigMedia want us to ignore until after Denver. The GOP will (and you can mark your calendars on this one) wind up pulling quotes from Freddoso's book, to "blame" him as the source of smears for "their legitimate concerns about Obama" post-Denver.

Yes, that's right, the same people lambasting the book for the public to ignore due to it's "lack of credibilty" are simultaneously combing its pages to load their arsenal come September.

Politics, dont' you love them?

The Chicago Tribune page cannot be found!!!! Hmmm... I'm curious now.