Palin appeals to Oklahoma bull rider
Comments
82
By the Associated Press
Published: November 4, 2008
RENO, Nev. -- Among those joining Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin on the campaign trail is a bull rider from Oklahoma.
Advertisement
Related Topics:
U.S. State Government, U.S. Government, Politics, U.S. Politics, Elections and Voting, U.S. Presidential Election

Prev

Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
Thank you for joining our conversations on newsok. We encourage your discussions but ask that you stay within the bounds of our terms and conditions. Please help us by reporting comments that violate these guidelines. To review our rules of engagement, go to Commenting and posting policy.
Log in below or sign up (it's free).
We must back Obama 100% for him to be successfull. I believe the economy is first, Iraq War and national health care if we can afford
it however. Thre's so many problems to deal with but must take one at
time and be patient. Alternative energys must push forward to get off that 70% oil imports from the Middle East. If anything else happens in the Middle East such as another war oil will be rationed and gasoline at $9.00 per gallon and will threatened national security and hugh economy crash. Iran is a powdered keg ready to
explode at anytime. Let's all support Obama and everyone do what
they can to make this a better world. We are living in hard times
right now but the United States has always bounced back because
Americans are not quitters. We have always led the world toward
world peace and will always do this.
Dale, Bethany
By getting a tax break?
Just pray to God Mccain wins tonight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
obama civilian defense force
Why does he need a private defense force, 250,000 strong equal or greater to the US military.
CNN, ABC, CBS AND NBC have ruined their credability with our Nation.
News agencies are supposed to report the FACTS.
This did not happen. How can they report on Joe the Plumber and not reporet Obama had ethics violation while a Senator, as proven on his tax returns for Senators.
There is so much information on Obama that would have ruined his campaign that has been lookedover it is Damn scary.
google these terms
children sing to obama
obama hitler youths goose stepping
obama acorn agenda
obama odinga
obama rezco
obama redistrubitive wealth
obama chicage 2001 radio
I can go on and on
It is really scary people he was not vetted by anyone.
The big question is WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I won't be terribly disappointed if he wins because he isn't really a Bush type of Repub but god help us if Palin ever has to step in...She is an intelligent person for sure but it's also obvious she is in way over her head
Issued By: Anonymous
Jul 23, 2008 08:11:12
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
(Press Release) – Jul 23, 2008 – CHICAGO, Illinois - Anonymous announced that they have filed a complaint with the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission requesting an investigation into false statements and misrepresentations Barack Hussein Obama made on his own bar application.
The group cited information, which if true, would be grounds for disbarment. Anonymous accuses Mr. Obama of using illegal drugs and then concealing his drug use by lying about it on his bar application.
Either action could be an independent basis for disciplinary action against the Presidential nominee.
The group claims that an investigation would identify facts that demonstrate Obama has engaged in conduct which brings the courts or the legal profession into disrepute, engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, and engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.
Anonymous’ complaint alleges that by consuming illegal drugs Obama was violating New York Penal Law Sec. 220.06, which criminalizes cocaine use.[1] If proven, that level of drug use is a felony.
Commission of such a criminal act is ethically prohibited as it reflects adversely on the lawyer’s fitness to practice law. See Rule 8.4(a)(3).
The complaint further alleges that Obama engaged in multiple violations of Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (”Rules”), including Rule 8.1 which prohibits lawyers from making a statement of material fact in connection with a bar application that the applicant knows to be false; Rule 8.4(a)(4) which prohibits lawyers from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; Rule 8.4(a)(5) which bars lawyers from participating in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice; and Supreme Court Rule 771 which prohibits lawyers from engaging in conduct which brings the courts or the legal profession into disrepute.
The complaint also alleges that Obama had an obligation to report unpaid criminal citations, including parking violations where the fines totaled more than $200.00 or remained unpaid.[2][3]
Anonymous stated, “Instead of accepting responsibility and paying them off at the time he was asking to be a lawyer, he failed to disclose a single civil citation and or pay a penny in fines. About a decade later he finally paid, but only after adverse media reports forced his hand.”
If the factual allegations are determined to be true, then knowledge of his repeated violations when understood in conjunction with the plain language his bar application requesting disclosure of such violations would be a basis for the bar to find that Mr. Obama answered deceptively. This conduct would therefore constitute intentional misconduct.
Anonymous stated, “Obama himself has admitted illegal drug use prior to his bar application. Failing to disclose that on his bar application is enough to require the Illinois State Bar to investigate this matter.”
Anonymous continued, “Violations of the bar rules can lead to disbarment. The Illinois State Bar Association should investigate the matter without delay, as the American people are entitled to know if Obama, who promises to act ethically as President, has in fact acted unethically as a lawyer.” “No further evidence is needed to prove a presidential candidate unfit for office than for Obama to lose his bar license.”
[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/us/politics/09obama.html
[2] http://www.somervillenews.typepad.com/the_somerville_news/2007/03/obama_finally_p.html
[3] http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/08/obama_paid_late_parking_tickets/
KXMC ^ | October 19, 2008 | Staff
Posted on Sunday, October 19, 2008 4:14:03 PM by DaveLoneRanger
Apparently, on Obama’s released tax records, he discloses income from speaking fees. The problem? Accepting payment for speaking fees when you’re a legislator is against Illinois state law
Apparently, as an Illinois state legislator through 2004, Barack was prohibited from taking honoraria for speaking under the Illinois Governmental Ethics Act
But what about Barack Obama’s 2000 and 2002 tax returns?
2000: On his 2000 Schedule C-EZ, Barack reported that he received $16,500 as a “Foundation director/Educational speaker.”
2001: On his 2001 Schedule C-EZ, Barack reported $98,158 from a Chicago law firm, Miner, Barnhill, for “Legal services/attorney” (and nothing for speaking)
2002: On his 2002 Schedule C, Barack reported $34,491 for “LEGAL SERVCES / SPEAKING FEES.”
These “speaking fees” are in addition to the amounts that Barack was paid as an employee, a lecturer at the University of Chicago, reported on the first page of his 1040s.
That’s not change we can believe in.
Just to sum up, the media can find Joe the Plumber’s tax woes within 24 hours of his having dared to question The One’s narrative, but they can’t find a clear ethical violation in the released records of a man who has been campaigning for President for two years now.
Another truth-telling moment brought to you
Exactly what a Prez should do
The Economist polled 142 prominent economists and it was not good news for McCain
80% say Obama has a better grasp of the economy...81% said he would pick the better economic team and 71% from those not affiliated with either party
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12342127
Additionally, your comments in return you are doing exactly what you condemned him for, by not commenting on the article. It's either worth condemnation or it's not. Which is it?
And lastly, these forums are to encourage discussion. There isn't anything in the rules that say we cannot interact with each other. They do ask that we refrain from personal attacks, which apparently you did not do since your comment was deleted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbIm6NUftks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpAlGdZToCk