More Obama Scandal
Andrew McCarthy posted an article on National Review Online The Corner on National Review Online and refers to the original article posted in NewsMax Newsmax.com – Secret, Foreign Money Floods Into Obama Campaign by Ken Timmerman concerning the apparent illegal campaign contributions to the Obama campaign.
The contributions that are in question can be verified on a search of the Federal Election Commission website. Presidential Campaign Finance
None of these apparent illegal activities should surprise anyone as Obama’s character and his associations have always been questionable and he continually has to distance himself from some of his closet friends because of their radical statements, actions, and backgrounds.
Corruption, scandal, radical left-wing ideas is what comes with a vote for Obama.
That is not a change we need.
The contributions that are in question can be verified on a search of the Federal Election Commission website. Presidential Campaign Finance
None of these apparent illegal activities should surprise anyone as Obama’s character and his associations have always been questionable and he continually has to distance himself from some of his closet friends because of their radical statements, actions, and backgrounds.
Corruption, scandal, radical left-wing ideas is what comes with a vote for Obama.
That is not a change we need.
posted by Anonymous at 5:38 AM
22 Comments:
"Corruption, scandal, radical left-wing ideas is what comes with a vote for Obama."
Do your world view allow for any balance at all? You see everything in the world as either black or white, good or evil, on your side or against you. You seem to have such a compulsion to get your way at any cost. I wasn't sure I believed the people who said you were obsessed with getting Bryant Hanson out of the hospital just because you didn't like him. Now I have a lot more doubt about your accusations against him.
Here we go again; attacking HB for bringing up factual information.
Look at the sites. The information is all there and available to anyone who wishes to see it.
What is your compulsion to not acknowldge the concerns about Obama and the left wing cover up.
As for Bryant Hanson, HB did everyone a service and at least there are still people willing to call a spade a spade.
This all seems juvenile to me. Its nearly as if the high and mighty Rush himself has hi-jacked this blog that was at a time a good source for medical information, and a good insight to FMH.
So continue on Rush, type away with partisan name calling and finger pointing.
Maybe you can at some point take a break from this tired overplayed political swill and maybe just mention something about Breast Cancer Awareness month, and the recent advances in diagnosis, and treatment of this cancer that attacks up over 200,000 women every year, with up to 40,000 of them dying....
Public education is the key in fighting this, but of course if the democrats win, they will surely be sure to double those numbers, so keep fighting the left.
If the democrats get elected, health care as we know it will be hijacked and turned into another government run disaster. Have you been to a VA system recently. Try getting a test done through that system in any timely fashion
Looking at the link posted, there are literally 40 plus pages of donations from someone named "good will" contributing 25 and 50 dollars repeatedly. They do add up to far more than the contribution limit. The other examples are also accurate.
Obama continues to break the rules. But I guess he is above having to follow the same set as everyone else.
Now this is over the top hypcrisy...I see people on this blog complaining about the left wing media and now you're quoting NewsMax?? LMMFAO!!
To the first comment's point, this obsession with painting Obama as evil and corrupt and using half-truths and selective facts to demonize him is exactly what I saw Dr. Eichenberger do to Mr. Hanson when he was determined to get rid of him. I honestly don't think Dr. Dan realizes how blind he can be when he is on one of his crusades.
Personally, I won't be voting for Obama because of political philosophy differences. But to go to such an extent to destroy the character of a man is so mean spirited that I am repulsed by Dr. Dan's methods. I can tell you that Bryant Hanson was not the man that he was painted to be on this blog. Neither is Obama. For some reason, Dr. Dan seems unable to disagree with someone without attacking his character and motives. Hardly my idea of modeling Christian values.
ANON 03:38 hit the nail on the head. In observing Dr. Dan's behavior over the years, I have sometimes wondered if he suffers from some kind of mental or emotional imbalance. Most of the time he is quite sane, rational and congenial. But when he feels his opinions are threatened or when he has strong disagreements, he seems incapable of dealing strictly with the merits of issues and goes straight to personal attacks. I have seen this repeatedly and have always been taken aback by it. Maybe someone else can explain it better. All I know is that he seems to have some kind of split personality: one perfectly nice one for people he agrees with and another mean one for those he doesn't agree with or like.
It appears that you cannot get over your disdain for the good doctor.
He is posting commentaries written by other commentators and just making assessments on the facts.
Not a single negative poster today has even tried to defend the facts presented here.
How do you explain these campaign contributions?
How do you explain any of the postings this week about the concerns over Obama, his friends, his choices, or his character.
Critisizing the good doctor makes highlights the fact that these things Obama is doing are indefensible
I'd have to admit that reading the anonymous comments attacking HB is doing exactly what they accuse the doctor of doing.
The only problem is; he is open and allowing other dissenting opinions and taking a lot of heat for it. This certainly is the antithesis of your comment he seems incapable of dealing strictly with the merits of issues and goes straight to personal attacks.
I'd have to say from watching all of this, it is you doing the attacking. Not a single one of you has the guts to put your name with your comments.
I'd say this is the real personality flaw.
Dr. E. is one sick puppy.
Unbelievable comments here attacking the good doctor.
The only thing really unusual is the ability of the doctor to continually allow these type of personal attacks by anonymous posters.
It takes an extremely strong individual with very grounded principles to continually allow this.
Personally, I think he should just post the blogs and remove the ability for anyone to comment.
None of you here have even tried to actually make any useful remarks about the facts presented on the blog
Dr. E doesn't care about "facts" in general, only those particular ones which serve his purpose. If you don't believe that, get him to explain why he is certain that the universe was created in exactly seven earth days and that Noah's Ark contained two of every living creature on earth and that, really, he can give you the "facts" to show that the earth is only a few thousand years old... and that men and dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time. He is just so clever with "facts."
This comment has been removed by the author.
sounds as if we have a anti-Christian bigot posting now.
I am pretty certain he/she will be voting for Obama.
Very typical.
And your assumption ANON 08:34 is wrong! I will not be voting for Obama. But even though we will be voting for the same person, I still think Dan Eichenberger is one looney-tunes flake. He is flat weird!!
It isn't anti-Christian bigotry to call someone on their creationist beliefs—most Christians accept deep geological time and evolution. The Roman Catholics accept it, all the mainline Protestant churches accept it, and many Baptists and other Evangelicals accept it. See the book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief by the famous geneticist Francis Collins. He's an Evangelical believer and he's an evolutionist.
By the way, you can believe in Genesis as true, if you can take it as non-literal. Here's the idea: What Genesis 1-3 consist of are creation myths bearing many similarities to other ancient Near Eastern myths. But there are some striking differences. The main difference is that the writers of Genesis 1-3 take great pains to show God as the Creator and everything else as created by Him. They go so far as to refer to the Sun and Moon and the greater and lesser lights in the sky—to avoid their proper names, which were the names of ancient deities. The message is this: Don't worship things like the Sun and the Moon, they're just created objects. Only worship God. The other message of Genesis is that God created because it was good, and He expects us to do what is good. The other ancient creation myths are filled with vain, petty gods who are really very human in personality. But God in Genesis follows the same rules He expects us to follow, rules meant for our good. This is the beginning of ethical monotheism. So, read properly as poetry, Genesis tells a story that is entirely true. God did create the Universe—to follow beautiful mathematical laws—and life. We can understand the universe and do science, because God is good and fair and rational. But he used evolution to create life, which is a beautiful arrangement, because under evolution, life designs itself.
Anon 9:09
It is funny that you think a person who gives you "facts" is weird. What are facts other than showing Truth. HB has been showing all of us the Truth of these situations. I do not understand how someone can be considered a "looney-tunes flake" when giving us Truth.
We'll leave the creationism debate for a later time after the election.
Until then, let's try to deal with the Obama issues, controversies, and concerns. There is certainly enough of these topics to talk about.
By the way, where has Michelle Obama been lately. They certainly have kept her from giving many public speeches, haven't they?
Diverting the topics to other areas does not eliminate the concerns about Obama.
anon 5:03
Your response is bigoted. Look up the definition.
HB may believe in a 7 day creation and you may not. He has acknowledged a number of times on this blog as well as others where his belief lies.
There is science supporting both views but science cannot prove or disprove either. Your intolerance to his belief makes your response bigoted.
Hells bells, I dont really like either of the slippery candidates.
But since we continue to support what is basically only a two party system (Indi's, greenies, and consti's dont stand a snowballs chance in hell in presidential elections).
But we have to decide which presents the lesser of two evils for us. We are sitting in the midst of a world shaped by 8 years of GOPism, and lack of action from the Dems to counter.
Our political system from the bottom up is trashed....
Michelle Obama?
On Tuesday, she was at the Jacksonville Commons Recreation Center, in Jacksonville, North Carolina. Yesterday, she was at Keene State College in New Hampshire. She appeared on the "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" show last night. She was also on Larry King yesterday.
If creationism has science on its side, Barrack Obama is George Wallace's love child.
Post a Comment
<< Home