We've all seen Obama's throughout history

[Enso]

Originally Posted by etech

Obama got how much money from Fannie/Freddie?

Less than McCain.

McCain $169,000 from directors, officers, and lobbyists
Obama $126,349 from employees

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...e-and-freddie/

Quit regurgitating old RNC talking points that aren't backed up by facts.

Trying to shed Obama as some sort of mystery man with ties to terrorist, with his name being Hussein, and with his suspect 'donor' list is pathetic and sketchy at best. I guess they want to try to make him out to some undercover Muslim Terrorist and scare people from voting for him. I don't think people are that stupid this time around. Last time they voted on fear we elected the worst President in our nation's history.

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by Enso

So, we got a Presidential candidate who is a lobbyist's best friend in a system that screwed over the people as a result of lobbyist corporatism...and people give a damn about someone who lives in Barack's neighborhood who he did work with as a community organizer....

Yeah..makes a bunch of sense to me.

Oh hey, it's Mr. Spiritually Confused once again ignorantly spouting off.

It's not just the work with Ayers at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, it's his working with ACORN, being funded by Khalid al-Monsour, funding Pfleger, and attending Wright's church.

You're also showing your ignorance on what Ayers' projects in the CAC actually were (radical education reform aimed at turning students into revolutionaries), that Obama thought him mainstream, endorsed a book of his, and according to Chicago mayor Daley they were friends.

Just lives in his neighborhood and did some "community organizing".

[steggie]

Originally Posted by enkaroxch

I'm more concerned about John McCain's connection to war criminal George W. Bush. Jus' Sayin'

Is there ANY conservative you wouldn't say the same thing about???

Posts like this are incredibly ignorant.

"Anyone who is a republican/conservative is in bed with Bush and loves and supports all his policies."

[GrokTheCube]

Originally Posted by Stizzel

People try to ignore the fact that every fascist coup in history has started as an anti-establishment socialist movement.

Funded quietly by big business, of course.

Just like Obama.

But he's different. He's for change. History is old and dumb, anyway.

Kinda like Dubya. He's a compassionate conservative! He cares about the people! You don't have to use the dirty "L" word when you talk about his psuedo-progressive economic policies! No nation building! Tax cuts for all! No nation building! Small government! This is the NEW Republican party, we're on your side! Vote for me, I'd be more fun to have a beer with than the other guy!

Do the facist trends of the modern Republican party concern you also? I mean, they're the only ones that actually have a history in the last 8 years of tossing civil rights and liberties out the window, in the name of "national security", and expanding the size and power of the government to such a degree that it's nearly historic.

Just saying. If one wants to grasp at straws to make ridiculous arguments, it can go in either direction.

[shaftoe]

Originally Posted by KhanPaulsen

You're also showing your ignorance on what Ayers' projects in the CAC actually were (radical education reform aimed at turning students into revolutionaries), that Obama thought him mainstream, endorsed a book of his, and according to Chicago mayor Daley they were friends.

you really need to accept that your slanted view of this is not fact and saying that everyone who doesn't concede to your view is ignorant. saying it 20 times per day doesn't make it any more true

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by shaftoe

you really need to accept that your slanted view of this is not fact and saying that everyone who doesn't concede to your view is ignorant. saying it 20 times per day doesn't make it any more true

It's not my slanted view, it was the findings of what was in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge archives.

Are you willing to quit showcasing your mangina, and start defending it? You disappeared in the other threads because you couldn't defend anything, and now you're back. Don't disappear again.

Let's play ball.

[steggie]

Originally Posted by CharlesV

Kinda like Dubya. He's a compassionate conservative! He cares about the people! You don't have to use the dirty "L" word when you talk about his psuedo-progressive economic policies! No nation building! Tax cuts for all! No nation building! Small government! This is the NEW Republican party, we're on your side! Vote for me, I'd be more fun to have a beer with than the other guy!

Do the facist trends of the modern Republican party concern you also? I mean, they're the only ones that actually have a history in the last 8 years of tossing civil rights and liberties out the window, in the name of "national security", and expanding the size and power of the government to such a degree that it's nearly historic.

Just saying. If one wants to grasp at straws to make ridiculous arguments, it can go in either direction.

I agree. Bush has quietly destroyed many of our rights. Look to the UK for our future, if we continue on this track (which, IMO, we will, no matter who is elected).

[Enso]

Originally Posted by KhanPaulsen

Oh hey, it's Mr. Spiritually Confused once again ignorantly spouting off.

It's not just the work with Ayers at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, it's his working with ACORN, being funded by Khalid al-Monsour, funding Pfleger, and attending Wright's church.

You're also showing your ignorance on what Ayers' projects in the CAC actually were (radical education reform aimed at turning students into revolutionaries), that Obama thought him mainstream, endorsed a book of his, and according to Chicago mayor Daley they were friends.

Just lives in his neighborhood and did some "community organizing".

Oh hi Mr. A$$ Hole. Still acting tough on the internet?

Get over yourself you dip ****.

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by Enso

Oh hi Mr. *******. Still acting tough on the internet?

Get over yourself you dip ****.

Acting tough? Hardly.

Calling you out for your incessant stupidity? Absolutely.

Being spiritual doesn't give you a license to be ignorant about Obama. Get with the times, man!

[Stizzel]

Originally Posted by CharlesV

Kinda like Dubya. He's a compassionate conservative! He cares about the people! You don't have to use the dirty "L" word when you talk about his psuedo-progressive economic policies! No nation building! Tax cuts for all! No nation building! Small government! This is the NEW Republican party, we're on your side! Vote for me, I'd be more fun to have a beer with than the other guy!

Do the facist trends of the modern Republican party concern you also? I mean, they're the only ones that actually have a history in the last 8 years of tossing civil rights and liberties out the window, in the name of "national security", and expanding the size and power of the government to such a degree that it's nearly historic.

Just saying. If one wants to grasp at straws to make ridiculous arguments, it can go in either direction.

Yes, the fascist path of this country is disturbing and will not change regardless of who wins the election in November.

That bailout was a big step towards fascism. Which candidate supported it? Oh, they both did. Along with Bush.

If you think I'm grasping at straws you might look up the countries that have been through fascism, and the campaigns that brought them into it.

Or continue to wallow in ignorance for your Messiah of Change. Up to you.

[Enso]

Originally Posted by KhanPaulsen

Acting tough? Hardly.

Calling you out for your incessant stupidity? Absolutely.

Being spiritual doesn't give you a license to be ignorant about Obama. Get with the times, man!

I'd put you on ignore, but you offer too much of a laugh. I don't think you realize just how stupid you come accross.

Not everyday you see someone so proud to be an ass of gigantic proportions on the internet lol.....

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by Enso

I'd put you on ignore, but you offer too much of a laugh. I don't think you realize just how stupid you come accross.

Not everyday you see someone so proud to be an ass of gigantic proportions on the internet lol.....

I don't think you realize how stupid people who claim they are spiritual come across, so I guess we're even. Maybe some day you'll realize how stupid your new-age beliefs are, maybe not.

I'll let you believe I'm an ass - because it makes you feel good just like your ridiculous beliefs, and nothing about anything you think, or believe is based on logic.

Good job man.

[shaftoe]

Originally Posted by KhanPaulsen

It's not my slanted view, it was the findings of what was in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge archives.

Are you willing to quit showcasing your mangina, and start defending it? You disappeared in the other threads because you couldn't defend anything, and now you're back. Don't disappear again.

Let's play ball.

we already went through this sufficiently. Your source is a guy who is on par with arianna huffington with regard to bias, there is no chance that he wasn't looking for material to meet what he had already made up his mind about being true.

you whole argument was 'i'm right because i'm right and you are an idiot for not seeing that'

As for disappearing it was 4 am and i had to get up for golf at 8.

[Enso]

Originally Posted by KhanPaulsen

I don't think you realize how stupid people who claim they are spiritual come across, so I guess we're even. Maybe some day you'll realize how stupid your new-age beliefs are, maybe not.

I'll let you believe I'm an ass - because it makes you feel good just like your ridiculous beliefs, and nothing about anything you think, or believe is based on logic.

Good job man.

You got anything relevant to say in regards to the thread or are you going to keep trying to attack my character?

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by shaftoe

we already went through this sufficiently. Your source is a guy who is on par with arianna huffington with regard to bias, there is no chance that he wasn't looking for material to meet what he had already made up his mind about being true.

The Obama campaign themself only responded to the findings by calling Kurtz "A slimy character assassin", and by trying to interrupt a WGN interview. They were unable to find anything wrong with anything he's said. If the findings of the archives were false, then the Obama campaign could've easily proved the falsity of the findings.

But they didn't. They went after Kurtz's character instead. Smooth.

you whole argument was 'i'm right because i'm right and you are an idiot for not seeing that'

As for disappearing it was 4 am and i had to get up for golf at 8.

I'm right because my source is the only journalist that's had access to the archives, which makes him the authority.

CNN/fact-check didn't even have that privelege, so they in fact, cannot "fact-check" anything as they lack the resources.

Let me know when you're ready to start disputing the facts. Until then you're the equivalent of the Obama campaign - vacuous.

[GrokTheCube]

You seem confused. I'm not voting for him.

I'm voting Baldwin.

I'm playing devil's advocate, and I feel like the McCain supporters need to be poked more than Obama's do today, because they have more silly things to say.

He's not my "Messiah of Change", though I think anyone who's been paying attention over the last 8 years could understand why that platform is so popular that even a black man with a Muslim name can win an election on it.

Just my two cents.

Originally Posted by Stizzel

Yes, the fascist path of this country is disturbing and will not change regardless of who wins the election in November.

That bailout was a big step towards fascism. Which candidate supported it? Oh, they both did. Along with Bush.

If you think I'm grasping at straws you might look up the countries that have been through fascism, and the campaigns that brought them into it.

Or continue to wallow in ignorance for your Messiah of Change. Up to you.

[Spartan1414]

Most of these folks are ignorant sheeple if they didn;t here it on tv it didn't happen. Never mind that there is an actual law suit in the court system in the system to determine whether or nor Obama bin laden is even eligible to become president. He is unable to produce a birth certificate for some darned reason like he wasn't born in this country. In Kenya actually according to this article.

On September 29, 2008 US District Court Judge R. Barclay Surrick, the federal magistrate for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ruled in the matter of Philip J. Berg vs Barack Hussein Obama, et al as the world was distracted by the $700 billion subprime mortgage crisis. Obama signed a breathe of relief as the mainstream media chose to ignore the question: "Can Senator Barack Hussein Obama legally seek the office of President of the United States?"


The flap began in June when National Review's Jim Geraghty raised the question and asked the Obama Campaign to release a copy of his birth certificate in order to prove that he actually was born in the United States. (Reports had previously surfaced claiming that Obama's Kenyan grandmother, Sarah Hussein Obama, told reporters that Obama was not born in Hawaii, but in Kenya. She reportedly told reporters that when her son, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. returned to Kenya he was accompanied by a pregnant white wife who was close to term.)


Obama's family did not take to Stanley Ann Dunham Obama well according to Sarah Obama because she was white. Shortly after she arrived in Kenya Stanley Ann decided to return to Hawaii because she did not like how Muslim men treated their wives in Kenya. However, because she was near term the airline would not let her fly until after the birth of her baby. Obama's grandmother said the baby was born in Kenya and that shortly after Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. was born, Stanley Ann returned to Hawaii.


Purportedly, when she arrived back in Hawaii, Stanley Anne registered her son's live birth as an event which had just happened?in Hawaii. This supposition is based on the appearance, shortly after Nov. 6, 2007, of a Hawaiian birth certificate that was issued, as a duplicate birth certificate, by the State of Hawaii to a US Senator who requested it.


While the Internet screamed that the birth certificate, which appeared on the Obama Campaign's "Fight The Smears" website and was also downloaded and used by far left blogger Markos Zuniga on his website, Daily Kos, it was not an electronic image concocted by Daily KOs as was hypothesized by a self-described cyvbersleuth who uses the cyber pseudonym Techdude. It was the real McCoy?even if it was issued as a political favor to a prospective Democratic presidential candidate by a Democrat official in Hawaii. The county clerk who issued the document, which purports to be a copy of an original document, was date stamped "Nov. 6, 2007" on the reverse side of the birth certificate in blue ink which bled through and is visible on the front of the electronic image.


Attorney Philip J. Berg, the former head of the Montgomery County. Pennsylvania Democratic Party and a former member of the Democratic State Convention and, reportedly a Hillary Clinton supporter, wanted to learn the truth from the myriad of rumors that also suggested that Sen. Obama may also have been a citizen of Indonesia. The only consistent part of the story was Stanley Ann returning to Hawaii to claim he had been in the United States and was a US citizen. In his ruling, Judge Surrick noted that the "...cause came before the United States District Court Judge, Honorable R. Barclay Surrick on defendant Barack Hussein Obama and the Democratic National Committee's motion to dismiss." The order continued, "Having reviewed the motion and plaintiff's opposition to said motion and for good cause shown, it is hereby ordered that the motion to dismiss pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) is denied. It is further order of this court that the following discovery is to be turned over to plaintiff within three (3) days.


1. Obama's "vault" version (certified copy of his "original" long version) birth certificate; and


2. a certified copy of Obama's Certificate of Citizenship;


3. a certified copy of Obama's oath of allegiance."


In his original filing, Berg specifically asked for those three items. Berg told the court that "...at the time Plaintiff's complaint was filed, Plaintiff was requesting protections from the court in order to stop Obama from being nominated by the DNC as the Democratic Presidential Nominee as Obama is not eligible to serve as President of the United States. However, Obama was nominated by the DNC...For that reason, Plaintiff must amend his complaint and will be amending this complaint to file a First Amendment complaint...."


Berg argued that he felt it was the role of the Federal Election Commission to ensure that presidential and congressional candidates are eligible to hold the positions for which they were seeking, and that those candidates run a fair and legitimate campaign. "In vetting the presidential candidate," Berg argued, "the DNC and the FEC are required to ensure the eligibility requirements pursuant to our Constitution are met and the Presidential nominee, if elected, is qualified and eligible to serve pursuant to our United States Constitution. In order to be eligible to run for the Office of President of the United States, you must be a "natural born" citizen.


"There appears to be no question that Defendant Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was a US citizen. It is also undisputed, however, that his father, Barack Obama, Sr., was a citizen of Kenya. Obama's parents, according to divorce recorded, were married on or about February 2, 1961.


"Defendant Obama claims he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii. on August 4, 1961 and it is uncertain in which hospital he claims to have been born. Obama's grandmother on his father's side, his half-brother and half-sister all claim Obama was born not in Hawaii but in Kenya. reports reflect that Obama's mother traveled to Kenya during her pregnancy; however, she was prevented from boarding a flight from Kenya to Hawaii. at her late stage of pregnancy (which apparently are normal restrictions, to avoid births during flights). By these reports, Stanley Ann Dunham Obama gave birth to Obama in Kenya, after which she flew home and registered Obama's birth. There are records of a "registry of birth" for Obama, on or about August 8, 1961 in the public records office in Hawaii."


Berg's investigators revealed that Obama's own half-sister Maya Soetoro?with whom he was raised?seemed not to know where her own brother was born. In the Nov., 2004 interview by the Rainbow Newsletter Maya Soetoro said Obama was born on Aug. 4, 1961 at Queens Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii. In February, 2008 Maya was interviewed by the Star Bulletin. This time she told reporters that Obama was born on August 4, 1961 at the Kaliolani Medical Center for Women and Children. On June 9, 2008 Wayne Madsen, a journalist with Online Journal published an article in which he said a research team went to Mombassa, Kenya and located a Certificate registering the live birth of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. to his father, a Kenyan citizen and his mother, a US citizen.
Berg's argument to the court was that under the US Nationality Act of 1940, Section 317 (b), a minor child follows the naturalization and citizenship status of his or her custodial parent. In Obama's case, Berg argued, a minor child follows the naturalization and citizenship status of his or her custodial father. Obama's Indonesian stepfather, Lolo Soetora signed a statement acknowledging Obama as his son, giving Obama natural Indonesian citizenship, which explains the name "Barry Soetoro" and his citizenship listed as Indonesian. Loss of US citizenship, under US law in effect in 1967 required that foreign citizenship be achieved through "application." Which, according to Berg, is precisely what happened to Obama when his mother married Soetoro and the family moved to Indonesia.



When Obama and his mother moved to Indonesia, Obama had already been enrolled in school?something that could not have happened under Indonesian law if Soetoro had not signed an acknowledgment (the application) affirming that Obama was his son, it deemed his son to an Indonesian State citizen. (Citizenship of Republic of Indonesia, Law No. 9 of 1992 dated 31 mar. 1992, Indonesia Civil Code): "...State children of Indonesia include: (viii) children who are born outside of legal marriage from foreign State citizen mother who are acknowledged by father who is Indonesian State citizen as his children and that acknowledgment is made prior to children reaching 18 years of age or prior to marriage; Republic of Indonesia Constitution, 1945." Furthermore, under Indonesian law, if a resident Indonesian citizen married a foreigner?in this case, Lolo Soetoro marrying Stanley Ann Obama?she was required to renounce her US citizenship.



In his lawsuit, Berg demanded a copy of Obama's Certificate of Citizenship, a document Obama must have applied for to regain his citizenship?which was lost in Indonesia. He will have that document only if the proper paperwork was filed with the US State Department when Obama returned to Hawaii in 1971 since that is the only way Obama could regain his US "natural born" status. Berg is convinced that Obama was never naturalized in the United States after his return. Obama returned to his maternal grandparents in Hawaii without his mother. Since she is the only one who could have filed for the reinstatement of his citizenship, it is unlikely it ever happened. If it did, his Certificate of Citizenship would affirm his right to seek the office of President. Without it, Barack Obama is just another resident alien who can't legally hold his seat in the
US Senate.

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by Enso

You got anything relevant to say in regards to the thread or are you going to keep trying to attack my character like your looser candidate?

Already did. I know you struggle to read, because it doesn't make you feel good like your spiritual beliefs do.

Oh hey, it's Mr. Spiritually Confused once again ignorantly spouting off.

It's not just the work with Ayers at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, it's his working with ACORN, being funded by Khalid al-Monsour, funding Pfleger, and attending Wright's church.

You're also showing your ignorance on what Ayers' projects in the CAC actually were (radical education reform aimed at turning students into revolutionaries), that Obama thought him mainstream, endorsed a book of his, and according to Chicago mayor Daley they were friends.

Just lives in his neighborhood and did some "community organizing".

[GrokTheCube]

Ahh, I see. So, there's only one source, that is admitedly biased, and we should just take his findings at face value? That's what you're saying?

Originally Posted by KhanPaulsen

The Obama campaign themself only responded to the findings by calling Kurtz "A slimy character assassin." They were unable to find anything wrong with anything he's said.



I'm right because my source is the only journalist that's had access to the archives.

CNN/fact-check didn't even have that privelege, so they in fact, cannot "fact-check" anything as they lack the resources.

Let me know when you're ready to start disputing the facts. Until then you're the equivalent of the Obama campaign - vacuous.

[Enso]

Originally Posted by KhanPaulsen

Already did. I know you struggle to read, because it doesn't make you feel good like your spiritual beliefs do.

What are you trying to accomplish by mocking my religious beliefs?

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by CharlesV

Ahh, I see. So, there's only one source, that is admitedly biased, and we should just take his findings at face value? That's what you're saying?

The Obama campaign, if the findings are false, would easily be able to disprove them.

Obama, afterall, was the one being investigated.

Instead, they went after Kurtz's character, and made a directed effort to interrupt him discussing the information at WGN.

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by Enso

What are you trying to accomplish by mocking my religious beliefs?

I mock them because it shows your spiritual beliefs, just like your views on Obama, are equally ignorant. All they're about is making you feel good.

[shaftoe]

Originally Posted by KhanPaulsen

The Obama campaign themself only responded to the findings by calling Kurtz "A slimy character assassin", and by trying to interrupt a WGN interview. They were unable to find anything wrong with anything he's said. If the findings of the archives were false, then the Obama campaign could've easily proved the falsity of the findings.

But they didn't. They went after Kurtz's character instead. Smooth.

I'm right because my source is the only journalist that's had access to the archives, which makes him the authority.

CNN/fact-check didn't even have that privelege, so they in fact, cannot "fact-check" anything as they lack the resources.

Let me know when you're ready to start disputing the facts. Until then you're the equivalent of the Obama campaign - vacuous.

dude I know all this. Do you not think I wouldn't have read it after arguing the other day if I hadn't already seen it before? I know who kurtz is and I read his article on the NRO. He is not a reliable source and the fact that he is the only one to have read the documents does not make him moreso. I cannot speak to the campaign not refuting his 'facts' but I gotta tell you even if what he wrote was only half of what is to be seen in those papers it doesn't warrant labelling the obama as a terrorist because he played down his relationship with ayers.

He wasn't paying for ayers to produce militants to become domestic terrorists he was involved in a committee that was focusing on education reform and before you link me skewed version of exactly what was being done, I read it, I'm aware and still think you are wrong.

[Enso]

Originally Posted by KhanPaulsen

I mock them because it shows your spiritual beliefs, just like your views on Obama, are equally ignorant.

In other words, you can't debate on a mature level and are just a stereotypical punk who thinks that talking tough on the internet makes him strong.

Perhaps you should spend more time on analyzing the source of your own displeasure with things than mocking someone on the internet. Talk about a waste of time.

[Stizzel]

Originally Posted by CharlesV

You seem confused. I'm not voting for him.

I'm voting Baldwin.

I'm playing devil's advocate, and I feel like the McCain supporters need to be poked more than Obama's do today, because they have more silly things to say.

He's not my "Messiah of Change", though I think anyone who's been paying attention over the last 8 years could understand why that platform is so popular that even a black man with a Muslim name can win an election on it.

Just my two cents.

I thought that might be the case, I just decided to make an assumption and go with it this time

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by shaftoe

dude I know all this. Do you not think I wouldn't have read it after arguing the other day if I hadn't already seen it before? I know who kurtz is and I read his article on the NRO. He is not a reliable source and the fact that he is the only one to have read the documents does not make him moreso. I cannot speak to the campaign not refuting his 'facts' but I gotta tell you even if what he wrote was only half of what is to be seen in those papers it doesn't warrant labelling the obama as a terrorist because he played down his relationship with ayers.

Nobody is claiming Obama is a terrorist. Holy ****, are you incapable of reading comprehension?

What people are claiming is that Obama actively worked together with Ayers at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, appropriating funding to Ayers' radical education reform projects. Obama, who kicked off his political career at Ayers' house, Obama who called Ayers "mainstream", Obama who endorsed a book by Ayers.

Ayers is still a terrorist last I checked, a very unrepentent one at that. You don't take issue with what he did in the past by actively working with him in current projects.

Oh yeah, and Chicago mayor Daley said, "They're friends. So what?"

The bottomline is it isn't a relationship with a guy, "Who just lives in my neighborhood."

He wasn't paying for ayers to produce militants to become domestic terrorists he was involved in a committee that was focusing on education reform and before you link me skewed version of exactly what was being done, I read it, I'm aware and still think you are wrong.

Obama was chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and specifically was the one appropriating funding to his projects. It isn't just education reform - it is radical education reform aimed at turning students into revolutionaries.

Where am I wrong? This is all **** found easily in Ayers' views on education reform.

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by Enso

In other words, you can't debate on a mature level and are just a stereotypical punk who thinks that talking tough on the internet makes him strong.

Cry me a river. I could care less if you think I'm trying to drum up some kind of e-persona.

You're yet to demonstrate you can intellectually cope with information on Obama that doesn't jive with your predispositions.

Perhaps you should spend more time on analyzing the source of your own displeasure with things than mocking someone on the internet. Talk about a waste of time.

Your spiritual beliefs are a waste of time - mocking you not so much.

[GrokTheCube]

Originally Posted by Stizzel

I thought that might be the case, I just decided to make an assumption and go with it this time

Hehe, I can understand that.

[durmelandson]

Originally Posted by etech

I agree, there is just no way a jr. senator from the Chicago political machine, ties to Acorn, etc. should be the presidential nominee, but he is.

How can people ignore what can be found of his past.

John F kennedy was a Junior senator with FAMILY ties to moonshiners and rum runners.

[KhanPaulsen]

Originally Posted by durmelandson

John F kennedy was a Junior senator with FAMILY ties to moonshiners and rum runners.

Are you forgetting his military history, and the fact that moonshiners/rum runners are viewed in a relatively positive light since Prohibition failed?