Debate reveals real Obama : Videos
Debate reveals real Obama : Photo Gallery
Debate reveals real Obama : Latest News, Information, Answers and Websites
Real name of anti-Muslim filmmaker revealed - CBS News Video
Sep 28, 2012 ... CBS News video: Real name of anti-Muslim filmmaker revealed - Prosecutors in ... Video Lessons for each from Obama, Romney debate body ...
Joan E. Dowlin: Romney Reveals True Self in PBS Remark
1 day ago ... 1k · Bill Maher On Obama's Debate Performance: 'Looks Like He ..... http://www. huffingtonpost.com/social/Viper1st/romney-reveals-true-self- ...
During the debate, how many times did Obama say, "I agree with Hillary." and others to that effect?
Obama did it again. The debate showed how Obama practically "plagiarized" Clintons plans and programs. While watching, I cant help but get dismayed how he credited himself for plans and programs or solutions that Hillary had been saying since she started campaigning for the nomination.
He was given the first chance to make proposition on the economic issue and he rattled off statements which were very similar to what had already been announced long before by Clinton when she started campaigning. His statements on employment, tax credits, education, social reforms and immigration were all Clinton originals. You would notice how his voice go down low when saying "Ive been working on that before" or statements like that? That low voice is a sign of inaccuracy because it is so. Check it out.
The Austin debate revealed that Mr. Obama was a good spokesman of Hillary Clintons plans and programs or solutions for the countrys real change back to prosperity.
This is the first time he said those things. He had many different plans before which he revise to make it similar to Hillarys like college education, immigration, border protection, employment and many other which for the first time he said in the Austin debate.
Answer: I agree with you. I also don't understand a lot of the hate that goes on whenever Hillary's name is brought up. I think that both candidates have participated in some name-calling and it's stupid. BUT I also think that Hillary is getting canned a lot more than him over nothing. Some of the things Obama says just baffle my mind ... his whole viewpoint on the war is completely irrelevant. It is easy to say you were for or weren't for something when you have no voting record to prove or disprove it. It is also easy to throw around the word change. It is completely awful that Florida and Michigan aren't being counted when it was Obama and Edwards own choice to not campaign and to take their names off the ballot in Michigan. It was a bad move on their behalf and will probably effect the November election. Florida is a huge deal and has swung elections before ... the democrats will need it to win. For someone who speaks about making a difference in America and progressive change like Obama, he sure doesn't show it by not helping to demand that 1.7 million voters voices be heard. To completely shun these AMERICANS is ridiculous and shows that the DNC has already made up their mind who the democratic nominee will be.
Category: Elections
By Obama not letting all people into his gatherings,(not rallies) where he doesnt let people ask questions..
McCain and Clinton let all people in that agree or disagree.
Isnt it obvious that he doesnt want people to ask questions that require some explanation of "how" he will help change the country? Is he studying up on his issues for debates in the future? Will he even have another debate? Whomever is tutoring Obama in all these subjects had better know a good way to "explain" as much as possible without revealing too much of his true agenda. But, then again, arent all his cronies good at this? I mean REAL GOOD.
Why have I heard most of his gatherings are by invitation only.
Are they all ignorant? Joan L, I would like for you to explain for me *exactly* how Obama will change the country. Any example will do.
step by step
Answer: Are you asking if Obama has town hall meeting. Yes he does. His town hall meetings hole any where for 5,000 to 75 thousand people and yes they ask questions. Not where I'm from.
Change to take out the lobbyists and how Washington is doing Business. Change from the tax loop holes out so Big Business will pay their fair share.
If you really want to know about his changes go to his web site.
I would like to have my Country back. I don't want to be lied to again about war. I don't want our children to die in a war that is all about Profits.
Category: Elections
Real Obama Revealed In Bumbling Debate Performance
2012 Campaign: President Obama's abysmal performance was a shocking revelation to many who saw it. Why were they surprised? The Barack Obama the media have nurtured, promoted and protected isn't the real one.
US BudgetWeek: Obama,Romney Debate Reveals Fiscal Policy ...
–Obama Repeats Call For 'Balanced' Approach W/Spending Cuts and Revs –Romney Says Spending Cuts, Econ Growth Only Options, Rules Out New Rev. By John Shaw. WASHINGTON (MNI) – The debate this week ...
Many Charter Schools, Varied Grades
In the world of education, it was the equivalent of the cool kids table in the cafeteria. Executives from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, McKinsey consultants and scholars from Stanford and Harvard mingled at an invitation-only meeting of the New Schools Venture Fund at a luxury hotel in Pasadena, Calif. Founded by investors who helped - By TRIP GABRIEL
Is "Yes We Can" a real issue?
I am baffled how Obama followers use "Yes We Can" one minute and "Youre racist" the next. I know Im overgeneralizing. It is only for effect. My question is what would happen if North Korea started moving in on South Korea? Would Barack Obama go over there and blast a wil i am video in their face and call it a day? I want to know how Barack Obama will react when Ahmedinajad invades Iraq. Will Barack give Iran some Hope and Change and maybe throw in "I had a dream? Just words?" and call it a day? Baracks answer is he doesnt want to debate and give me a good reason to vote for him because his little wittle pillow wasnt fluffy wuffy enough last time. I am sure alot of people feel the same way I do. Cowards dont whine when they get hit by a hardball. They put some ice on it and keep going. The fact is there are too many negatives for me to ever vote for him and a debate would and has revealed that already.
Answer: Yes we can has replaced "we shall overcome"
Category: Elections
The real Obama, revealed: debate pulls back curtain - I4U News
The Issue: The performance of the presidential candidates during their first debate on Wednesday. *** Mitt Romney knew exactly what he had to do in the debate ...
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR; How Democracy Became Halal
Tel Aviv IN the Western study of medieval Islamic history, the institution of iqta -- land grants from the sovereign to his soldiers -- once loomed large, because scholars searched for reasons behind the Muslim failure to develop feudalism, and with it the contractual relationships that eventually led to constitutional government. But looking for - Reuel Marc Gerecht Op-Ed article, in light of protests in Egypt, traces historical and intellectual process by which Democracy became palatable idea in Arab world; drawing (M) - Reuel Marc Gerecht, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a former Middle Eastern specialist in the C.I.A.s clandestine service, is the author of the forthcoming book The Wave: Man, God and the Ballot Box in the Middle East. - By REUEL MARC GERECHT
Dutch Pull-Out From War Expected After Government Collapse
A day after his government collapsed, Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende said Sunday that he expected Dutch troops to come home from Afghanistan before the end of the year. A last-ditch effort by Mr. Balkenende to keep Dutch soldiers in the dangerous southern Afghan province of Oruzgan instead saw the Labor Party quit the government in the - By NICHOLAS KULISH; Dexter Filkins contributed reporting from Kabul, Afghanistan, Scott Sayare from Paris, and Thom Shanker from Washington.
Bush on Bush
DECISION POINTS By George W. Bush Illustrated. 497 pp. Crown Publishers. $35. They call themselves, smugly, 41 and 43, meaning the 41st and 43rd presidents of the United States. Youre supposed to prefer the father, all graciousness and handwritten little notes, over the son, who -- even in memoirs written at age 64 after two terms as - Michael Kinsley is a columnist for Politico. - By MICHAEL KINSLEY
There is no reason to fear the race and IQ debate, so why is it supressed by the liberal mainstream media?
Let me show you an extract from a brilliant article about race and IQ:
"The debate over racial differences in IQ represents perhaps the greatest scientific controversy of the past half-century. The facts are not in serious dispute: blacks score, on average, significantly lower than whites in IQ tests in the United States, Britain and beyond.
Some argue that the only plausible response is to accept that blacks are naturally less intelligent than whites, a view that causes outrage among equal rights campaigners. But is there an alternative explanation for these puzzling statistics and what would it mean if there were not?
All too often the liberal establishment has stifled debate on the issue by pretending that it does not exist. It is asserted, for example, that the concept of intelligence is culturally relative. Even if this is (relatively) true, it does not alter the fact that the kind of intelligence revealed by IQ tests is crucial to one’s prospects in the modern world. It hardly helps the cause of racial equality to argue that, although blacks do worse at IQ tests, they have the kind of intelligence that is useful in preindustrial societies.
The reluctance of liberals to engage in real debate has left the impression that there is an inconvenient truth about IQ differences that is being suppressed by political correctness. This has bolstered the phenomenon of black skin being used subconsciously as an information-bearing trait, so that blacks are judged as a group rather than as individuals. This has prejudiced blacks in finding jobs and amounts to de facto affirmative action for whites.
But need liberals have been so paranoid about the possibility of natural IQ differences between the so-called races? Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that whites have a genetic advantage in IQ over blacks. Would this sanction the kind of policies favoured by the far Right, such as segregationist schooling or a bar on blacks entering university?
It is not difficult to spot the logical fallacy. Even if the average black had a naturally lower IQ than the average white this would not mean that all blacks had lower IQs than all whites. There would still be a significant overlap such that if a white person and a black person were chosen at random there would be a fair chance that the black would have a higher IQ. This demonstrates that even in a hypothetical society with genetically based racial differences in IQ it is sensible to treat people as individuals rather than as group members.
Of course, if the far Right were sincere in its motivation for the different treatment of blacks it has a far more effective policy at its disposal. Why not set a mandatory IQ test and then divide people into high, medium and low IQ? Anecdotal evidence suggests that a disproportionate number of the far Right would find themselves in the lowest category and ripe to be bossed around by intelligent black masters.
This ought to demonstrate to all shades of opinion that apartheid is an evil whether it is based upon colour, IQ or anything else. The fear of the Left over possible natural differences between the so-called races is understandable but exaggerated. It is founded upon the idea that political equality is derived from some actual equality that we all share. The truth is that political equality is a moral abstraction, not an empirical discovery. Grasping this important truth should enable us to celebrate our differences rather than cower in fear of them"
Here is the link to the full article: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article2267671.ece
By the way the person who wrote the article is a big supporter of Barack Obama, and Muhammad Ali if you read his other articles.
Answer: the race and IQ debate is being suppressed because the liberal media knows that it cannot win the debate. the statistics do not lie.
Category: Media & Journalism
How the Liberal Media Ruined Obama
First Published in the American Thinker 10/6/12 It's not an “Incumbent Curse,” as MSNBC would call Obama's performance at Wednesday's first presidential debate. It was not Obama's fear of coming across as the angry black ...
Do you think McCain needs a integrity check?
For me, this surreal moment - like the entire surrealism of the past ten days - is not really about Sarah Palin or Barack Obama or pigs or fish or lipstick. Its about John McCain. The one thing I always thought I knew about him is that he is a decent and honest person. When he knows, as every sane person must, that Obama did not in any conceivable sense mean that Sarah Palin is a pig, what did he do? Did he come out and say so and end this charade? Or did he acquiesce in and thereby enable the mindless Rovianism that is now the core feature of his campaign?
So far, he has let us all down. My guess is he will continue to do so. And that decision, for my part, ends whatever respect I once had for him. On core moral issues, where this man knew what the right thing was, and had to pick between good and evil, he chose evil. When he knew that George W. Bushs war in Iraq was a fiasco and catastrophe, and before Donald Rumsfeld quit, McCain endorsed George W. Bush against his fellow Vietnam vet, John McCain in 2004. By that decision, McCain lost any credibility that he can ever put country first. He put party first and his own career first ahead of what he knew was best for the country.
And when the Senate and House voted overwhelmingly to condemn and end the torture regime of Bush and Cheney in 2006, McCain again had a clear choice between good and evil, and chose evil.
He capitulated and enshrined torture as the policy of the United States, by allowing the CIA to use techniques as bad as and worse than the torture inflicted on him in Vietnam. He gave the war criminals in the White House retroactive immunity against the prosecution they so richly deserve. The enormity of this moral betrayal, this betrayal of his countrys honor, has yet to sink in. But for my part, it now makes much more sense. He is not the man I thought he was.
And when he had the chance to engage in a real and substantive debate against the most talented politician of the next generation in a fall campaign where vital issues are at stake, what did McCain do? He began his general campaign with a series of grotesque, trivial and absurd MTV-style attacks on Obamas virtues and implied disgusting things about his opponents patriotism.
And then, because he could see he was going to lose, ten days ago, he threw caution to the wind and with no vetting whatsoever, picked a woman who, by her decision to endure her own eight-month pregnancy of a Down Syndrome child in public, that he was going to reignite the culture war as a last stand against Obama. Thats all that is happening right now: a massive bump in the enthusiasm of the Christianist base. This is pure Rove.
Yes, McCain made a decision that revealed many appalling things about him. In the end, his final concern is not national security. No one who cares about national security would pick as vice-president someone who knows nothing about it as his replacement. No one who cares about this countrys safety would gamble the security of the world on a total unknown because she polled well with the Christianist base. No person who truly believed that the surge was integral to this countrys national security would pick as his veep candidate a woman who, so far as we can tell anything, opposed it at the time.
McCain has demonstrated in the last two months that he does not have the character to be president of the United States. And that is why it is more important than ever to ensure that Barack Obama is the next president. The alternative is now unthinkable. And McCain - no one else - has proved it.
Answer: Sounds like you are on the DNC payroll.
Obama has done NOTHING in the senate and his voting record or lack thereof proves it.
Talk about integrity and you have to ask why Obama hasn't shown his birth certificate? Why hasn't he denounced his mentor the racist Rev. Wright or his neighbor the terrorist Ayers?
You question McCain because he didn't vote for Kerry? You made a mistake there by the way in your post. Kerry was and is a complete idiot, McCain was right.
The only unthinkable alternative is electing an unexperienced, racist and somehow non-citizen like Obama.
Category: Politics
Beyond Guantánamo, a Web of Prisons
WASHINGTON -- It is the other Guantánamo, an archipelago of federal prisons that stretches across the country, hidden away on back roads. Today, it houses far more men convicted in terrorism cases than the shrunken population of the prison in Cuba that has generated so much debate. An aggressive prosecution strategy, aimed at prevention as much as - Network of federal prisons stretching across United States houses far more men convicted in terrorism cases than controversial prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; Congress has reignited debate over whether military justice is more appropriate for terrorism suspects, but criminal justice system has absorbed surge of terrorism cases since 2001 without calamity and without international criticism that Guantanamo has attracted for holding prisoners without trial. Graph, Photos (L) - By SCOTT SHANE
HELP! i need help understanding this article! thank you so much!?
I need help understanding this article, because i need to read it and summarize it for a hug grade in my social studies class....but i honestly dont understand it and its making me feel stupid so please! if you can, please please help me!!
i copied and pasted the article at the bottom; but heres the link incase you guys want to see the actual web page. once again thanks!!!
http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/12/kundnani.clash.civilizations/index.html?iref=storysearch
Since the end of the Cold War, conservatives have argued that the world should be seen through the lens of a clash between civilizations. The world could be divided, they argued, on the basis of different cultures and their distance from Western values.
Countries where the majority of the population is Muslim were grouped together as the Islamic world and seen as culturally prone to fanaticism and violence. Revolution there could only mean Islamic revolution along the lines of Iran in 1979. Democracy could only emerge if imposed by force from outside, as disastrously attempted in the Iraq War.
Liberals had their own version of such thinking, particularly after 9/11. Rejecting the necessity of a clash between civilizations, they spoke of a dialogue between civilizations. But they shared with conservatives the assumption that culture was the primary driving force of political conflict.
There was something of this thinking in President Obamas famous 2009 speech in Cairo, addressed to "the Muslim world." Liberals like Obama thought it possible that dialogue could allow for the peaceful co-existence of cultural differences between Muslims and the West. Conservatives, on the other hand, feared that no dialogue was possible with Islam, and it was better for the West to ready itself for inevitable conflict.
Muslims and Christians have marched together on the streets.
--Arun Kundnani
RELATED TOPICS
Islam
Egypt
Religion
Barack Obama
These have been the terms of debate between liberals and conservatives since 9/11.
Significantly, both sides in the debate assumed that the fundamental divisions in the world were cultural rather than political.
In the case of the Middle East, conflict was seen as rooted in a cultural failure of Islam to adapt itself to modernity, rather than a political aspiration to freedom from regimes the West was backing.
The Egyptian revolution has finally demonstrated in practice that this cultural assumption no longer holds. Popular sovereignty, not Gods sovereignty, has been the basis of the revolution. Muslims and Christians have marched together on the streets. The slogans have been universal demands for rights, dignity and social justice. At the same time, the Muslim Brotherhood has been one among the many strands of the movement, accommodating themselves to its democratic and pluralist thrust.
All of this confounds the "clash of civilizations" thesis which holds that the Islamic world has necessarily "bloody borders." It also confounds the "dialogue of civilizations" approach, which seeks to address the people of the Middle East as a culturally distinct "Muslim world" rather than as populations whose demands are political and universal.
It is no surprise that the Obama administrations response to the fall of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt has been muddled; its working assumptions about the Muslim world have collapsed as a result of the revolutionary movements in Tunisia and Egypt.
Equally, the confused response of conservatives reflects the fact that their framing of the Middle East as a hotbed of fanaticism has been revealed to be a myth. And they are exposed for backing an autocrat for narrow strategic reasons linked to protecting Israel. For all their rhetoric, the real fear of conservatives is not the "Muslim fanatic" but genuine political freedom for the Arab nations -- which is now suddenly imaginable.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Arun Kundnani.
Answer: I think that what he is saying is that people should not be stereotyped. The old myths, based on generalizations about the Middle East are not apt, and the Egyptian Revolution is a testament to the fact that these stereotypical views are not holding up. He also seems to be trying to say that people can use stereotypes about different cultures as a means to inflict a malicious or self-serving agenda, as he believes the conservatives in the United States have tried to do. He cites examples of how different groups have been played against each other as polar opposites, when, in reality, they share many common characteristics. For example, both conservatives and liberals appear to have adopted a clash of cultures view of the Middle East in relation to North America. Even our previous notions regarding the Muslim Brotherhood itself need to be reassessed. People need to use their heads and deal with people and ideas as unique mixtures of elements rather than as situation of "either/or". Otherwise their response with be legitimately "confused".
Category: Media & Journalism
Why are we suckers for crisis-politics?
Some examples:
(you dont have to read all of these)
CLINTON ADMIN: "If you want to enlarge government, you find a crisis that demands a program, from Medicare to ClintonCare. If you want to shrink it, you find a countervailing crisis that demands deregulation, tax cuts, or fiscal austerity." (quote from political column during the Clinton era, 1998)
IRAQ: "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help develop their own." - Bush
PATRIOT ACT: "Declaring the Patriot Act a vital tool in the war on terror, Congress would place the nation at greater risk of attack if it fails to renew the law’s wide-ranging law enforcement powers." - Bush
TARP: "Drastic intervention will cost American families far less than the alternative. The financial security of all Americans ... depends on our ability to restore our financial institutions to sound footing." - Paulson
ERRA: "We start 2009 in the midst of a[n economic] crisis unlike any we have seen in our lifetime, a crisis that has only deepened over the last few weeks." - Obama
GLOBAL WARMING: All across the world, in every kind of environment and region known to man, increasingly dangerous weather patterns and devastating storms are abruptly putting an end to the long-running debate over whether or not climate change is real. Not only is it real, its here, and its effects are giving rise to a frighteningly new global phenomenon: the man-made natural disaster. - Obama
ENERGY CRISIS: We can watch helplessly as the price of gas rises and falls because of some foreign crisis we have no control over, and uncover every single barrel of oil buried beneath this country only to realize that we dont have enough for a few years, let alone a century. We can watch other countries create the industries and the jobs that will fuel our future, and leave our children a planet that grows more dangerous and unlivable by the day. - Obama
HEALTH CARE: "The President has vowed that the health reform process will be different in his Administration – an open, inclusive, and transparent process where all ideas are encouraged and all parties work together to find a solution to the health care crisis." - whitehouse.gov
SWINE FLU: Thirty to 50 percent of the entire U.S. population could be infected with swine flu this fall and winter, according to a report from the Presidents Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. "Were going to have people hospitalized and we will, unfortunately, have more deaths."
END OF THE REPUBLIC: "Just the same, this is the beginning of the end of our Constitutional Republic as we know it. My contempt for the stupidity of the American voter and the inept fecklessness of the Republican Party which allowed this to happen, knows no bounds. It is way past time for us to recognize that we have an active, widespread, domestic conspiracy – yes, conspiracy damn it – within our very own borders, whose purpose it is to destroy this country from within, as Lenin predicted." - Political commentary on Obama election
Answer: Fear is the primary human motivator.
Category: Politics
Since someone "plagiarized" platforms, will you vote for Hillary, the original, or Obama, the xerox?
Again, the debate showed how Obama practically "plagiarized" Clintons plans and programs. While watching, I cant help but get dismayed how he credited himself for plans and programs or solutions that Hillary had been saying since she started campaigning for the nomination.
He was given the first chance to make proposition on the economic issue and he rattled off statements which were very similar to what had already been announced long before by Clinton. His statements on employment, tax credits, education, social reforms and immigration were all Clinton originals. You would notice how his voice go down low when saying "Ive been working on that before" or statements like that? That low voice is a sign of inaccuracy because it is so. Check it out.
The Austin debate revealed that Mr. Obama was a good spokesman of Hillary Clintons plans and programs or solutions for the countrys real change back to prosperity.
Answer: Obama has no plan. I have reviewed his website, reviewed his voting record. Listened to his speeches and he has nothing to offer. The only thing he is is popular.
I find him smug. Xerox copies are like that though, always having to be cockier than the original to stand out.
Category: Elections
President Barack Obama on Debate: That Was Not The Real Mitt ...
1 day ago ... President Barack Obama On Debate: That Was Not The Real Mitt ... debate performance, President Barack Obama reveals to supporters in ...
Real Obama Revealed In Bumbling Debate ... - Free Republic
Real Obama Revealed In Bumbling Debate Performance · Investor's Business Daily ^ | Oct 4, 2012 | IBD Editorial. Posted on 10/05/2012 9:50:22 AM PDT by ...
Talk radios freedom being threatened ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to be common knowledge that our government is trying to silence conservatives. Read this, and see what you think.......
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Obama blueprint for silencing talk radio exposed
New book warns of commissar committees to censor speech
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: April 13, 2009
8:49 pm Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
WASHINGTON – As popular opposition to the reinstitution of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" mounts, Barack Obama and the Democrat-dominated Congress will end-run critics with legislation that will curb dissent on talk radio through the imposition of "localism" rules and community watchdog boards across America, charges a new book by a former NBC Westwood One talk-show host.
In "Shut Up, America! The End of Free Speech," author Brad OLeary says the plan amounts to the development of party-approved "commissar committees" to censor the kind of lively and free-wheeling debate America has known since the scrapping of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" by President Reagans Federal Communications Commission in 1987.
By demanding radio stations answer to local community watchdog boards to ensure programming is "balanced," "fair," "diverse," "tolerant" and "serving the public interest locally," OLeary says the rules and legislation being planned will once again make talk radio accountable to politicians, political activists and bureaucrats at the FCC.
Tell your government to stay away from censoring talk radio and manipulating news coverage: Sign WNDs Petition to Block Congressional Attacks on Freedom of Speech and Press now!
The ultimate threat over the heads of radio stations is license renewal, he explains. "Far-left groups such as ACORN [Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now] stand at the ready to pressure these boards into silencing conservative talk radio programs, either through intimidation or the loss of broadcast licenses," says OLeary, who, during the presidential campaign, wrote the best-selling book, "The Audacity of Deceit: Barack Obamas War on American Values."
The book points out there were only 75 radio talk shows in America during the last year of the "Fairness Doctrine" rules. Today, there are more than 3,000.
"The liberals once-dominant media forum is fading fast, in part because Americans have discovered real diversity of ideas elsewhere," OLeary writes. "The enemies of free speech know this. They also know that, if they are to accomplish their goal of stifling all debate, they will have to control all media outlets."
While the Obama administration and some Democratic congressional leaders have denied efforts to reinstate the "Fairness Doctrine," none have denied efforts to stack the FCC with appointees open to the idea of reining in talk radio.
"Under the rubric of broadcast localism, it is clear the commission is proposing no less than a sweeping takeover by Washington bureaucrats of broadcast media," wrote Rep. John Boehner, House minority leader, in a letter to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin as far back as last June. "The proposals and recommendations for commission action contained in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking amount to the stealth enactment of the Fairness Doctrine, a policy designated to squelch the free speech and free expression of specifically targeted audiences."
Those regulations would specifically "reinstitute advisory boards to regulate broadcast content and revive a host of other rules the commission dropped more than 20 years ago," explained Boehner.
Also revealed in "Shut Up, America" is evidence that Obamas new FCC chairman wants to create a "Fairness Doctrine" for the Internet to regulate and censor online speech.
Julius Genachowski, an Obama friend from Harvard Law School and the mastermind behind Obamas online fundraising machine, is an ardent supporter of so-called "net neutrality" regulations, perceived by OLeary as a first step toward "Fairness Doctrine"-style regulations on content for the Internet. Genachowski would have government decide what content Internet operators and network owners must provide.
"Incredibly, he claims this is to keep the Internet free and open to all," says OLeary. "In reality, his goal is to usher the heavy hands of federal regulators into the tent. Genachowski would give federal regulators editorial authority over what private operators must provide."
Genachowski also advocates creating new media ownership rules that promote a diversity of voices on the airwaves. In fact, Genachowski is credited with helping craft the Obama technology agenda, which states: "Encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest
Answer: Obama's first 100 days should be a clear indication as to what is yet to come!
We are losing our rights and a whole lot more!
Little by little, we will begin to see things, never thought possible in this country! It is the beginning of the end for this great country, we call America, home of the brave, land of the free...
Category: Current Events
Finally, the definitive definitive reason for Obama's poor debate ...
Finally, the definitive definitive reason for Obama's poor debate performance is revealed. Tweet. I noted yesterday that Obama's excuse for his poor debate showing — raise your hands if you lost your office pool because you had either “Bush” or “The Stafford Act” — was, in fact, a refreshingly candid one: Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney made .... In other words it may be true that he can't get past it all being beneath him, his celeb, his supposed political genius. Narrcisists ...
Real Obama Revealed In Bumbling Debate Performance - Care2 ...
President Obama's abysmal performance was a shocking revelation to many who saw it. Why were they surprised? The Barack Obama the media have nurtured, promoted and protected isn't the real one.
New York Poll Finds Wariness for Muslim Site
Two-thirds of New York City residents want a planned Muslim community center and mosque to be relocated to a less controversial site farther away from ground zero in Lower Manhattan, including many who describe themselves as supporters of the project, according to a New York Times poll. The poll indicates that support for the 13-story complex, - By MICHAEL BARBARO and MARJORIE CONNELLY; Marina Stefan, Dalia Sussman and Megan Thee-Brenan contributed reporting.
Should America demand that Obama face Hillary in a one on one debate?
I understand that many say they are sick of debates so I could suggest they not watch but many of us do want a debate as Hillary has suggested. This to me is the most important election for President we have had in a long time . We are in a war and recession and and I really struggle with the idea of handing over the reins to someone that has no real experience and seems unwilling to answer some very tough questions . I think such a debate as has been suggested would reveal a lot about character and some truths as well THAT Americans need to know.
As I said the Obama hopefuls could watch Doodle Bops while its going on
Answer: There have been 21 of them. The last one was a hit job. I don't blame Obama for declining. They didn't ask useful questions about the economy or the other issues facing this country. Half of it was spent asking questions about things that Obama had already talked about in his speeches. George Stephanopolus once worked for the Clintons. It was totally unfair.
Hillary likes debates because they're free advertising, and her campaign can't manage its funds. Obama would rather address the public at open forums. If you care to hear him speak, attend some of them.
I'm voting for Obama!
Category: Elections
Real Obama Revealed In Bumbling Debate Performance - Christian ...
excerpt: 2012 Campaign: President Obama's abysmal performance was a shocking revelation to many who saw it. Why were they surprised? The Barack Obama the media have nurtured, promoted and protected isn't the real ...
The real Obama, revealed: debate pulls back curtain - NYPOST.com
23 hours ago ... The Issue: The performance of the presidential candidates during their first debate on Wednesday.***Mitt Romney knew exactly what he had to ...
On the Road to Detroits Big Pileup
If General Motors were any other company, it would probably be dead by now. In the summer of 2008, nearly a year before G.M. filed for bankruptcy, its executives were growing desperate. Rick Wagoner, its chief executive, secretly proposed a merger with Ford, while Bill Ford courted the future president, Barack Obama, in an attempt to safeguard his
Building a Better Mitt-Bot
Your story about dust regulation captures my interest, Mitt Romney said to the farmer, sounding as if he actually meant it. It was a late October afternoon in Treynor, Iowa, the setting for one of those campaign meta-events at which a presidential candidate enjoys a casual moment with real people that is in fact carefully staged and dutifully - Robert Draper article examines reasons behind decision by Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romneys campaign to portray him as a fixer and a business man, rather than someone voters would feel comfortable having a beer with. Photos (L)a - By ROBERT DRAPER
Real Obama Revealed By Bumbling Debate Performance With ...
2 days ago ... 2012 Campaign: President Obama's abysmal performance was a shocking revelation to many who saw it. Why were they surprised?
Do Americans still think Muslims were behind 9/11?
Over here in the UK there is a misconception that ALL Americans are stupid.
I for one believe that unfortunately the majority actually are or have revealed to me to be so. I mean graduates from university are intellectual in what they studied or their profession but when it comes to overall common sense and knowledge this is completely lacking.
So to my point, after visiting and living in the USA for work a few times I made some close friends and being someone who is open to debate and interested in world politics I was surprised by some of the American’s views I encountered.
When Osama Bin Laden was “apparently” killed, I was surrounded by American who were all celebrating in jubilation that after so long and so many lies from previous president Bush they still believe their current president, Obama.
Not soon after over dinner with friends I asked the question “how many of you guys believe that muslim fanatics or Osama Bin Laden” was actually responsible for 9/11
Not surprisingly they all believed this was the case and I argued that there was more proof nailing Israel/Jews.
Anyway it came apparent that American’s in general are so controlled by media and believe everything told to them that they feel no need to read independent news articles or non American news to actually get the real facts.
Sadly this same thing is happening in the UK where I am born and bred where the UK government has already jumped once to US demand.
My question therefore is are there actually any Americans who do not believe Bush/Obama/US government when they implicate Islamist in previous terrorists attacks and also in general how do American’s feel or do they even realise that their country is bowing down to Israel demands constantly???
This was bought up with the very recent news that USA is looking for approval from other countries to attack Iran, because Israel wishes it. (also worked in Iran btw and various other middle east locations)
p.s. just to add I am not Muslim (in fact very against the teachings) and I am not obviously a Jew. I am very neutral and therefore open to the facts and the truth
Answer: YES
to make it an excuse to invade Muslim country and steal, and loot the oil wealth that belongs to Muslims.
Without 9/11, there won't be millions of Muslims death and mass killings on the name of WOT.
There can't be any justification that, for just catching OBL, you destroyed whole Afghanistan and killed millions of civilians just for one man.
Same for Iraq, there is no justification and there can't be any that, just to bring down the Saddam regime, you killed 1/3rd of the countries population, bombed Iraq and Afghanistan with bombs containing depleted uranium and nuclear waste.
The real agenda is clear to the world. It was war for oil, following the strategy of 'blood and bombs for oil'
Category: Current Events
WHY did Obama pay $1.4 million to fight "crazy" people?
OK... the conversations just wont go away. WAS or WASNT Obama born in the US.
In his book, "Obamanation", Jerome Corsi wrote hundreds of pages of research and wrote (very clearly) of the laws which apply to the issue.
Im not going to debate MY view on this.... as it is NOT the point of this question.
The FACT is.... for a "certificate" that can be accessed for literally $12, Barack Obama has instead spent in excess of $1.36 MILLION dollars to keep his records sealed, and keep the issue from going to court.
Have you ever wondered WHY? (besides ASSUMING he is guilty!)
In a legal preceding, one stage of a trail is DISCOVERY. In the Discovery phase, ALL RECORDS are eligible for subpoena and will become PUBLIC RECORD.
It is THIS that Obama fears. DISCOVERY would not only reveal his BIRTH records (which Liberals are delighted to ignore)... but would also expose.....
1. Mothers (lack of) registration in ANY HI hospital.
2. How "Barry Soetoro - Indonesian citizen" magically flew out of Indonesia and landed in Hawaii as "US citizen, Barack Obama"
3. WHO paid for his college education?
4. WHO paid for his Harvard education?
5. WHAT is his REAL official citizenship status? (Natural born, Naturalized, or Indonesian?)
With all these VALID questions... is there a REASON why Liberals can continue to dismiss "birthers" as simply "crazy people" and/or not want to have these questions answered, if ONLY to protect and preserve the Constitution??
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95772
Legal fees to fight lawsuits over his birth certificate
Answer: Don't lump the "birthers" in with conservatives. We aren't the wackos that are pushing this.
I know we are stuck with this pathetic, arrogant, clueless LIAR until January 2013 when he's unemployed!
Category: Politics
Film About the Hunt for Bin Laden Leads to a Pentagon Investigation
LOS ANGELES -- When the movies get real, moviemakers can count on real headaches. Mark Boal and Kathryn Bigelow, the team behind a planned Hollywood film about the hunt for Osama bin Laden, were caught up this week in the kind of dispute that more often ensnares journalists. It happened when Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York, - By MICHAEL CIEPLY; Helene Cooper reported from Washington.
Do you agree or disagree with this grading of the 1st presidential debate?
Grading The First Presidential Debate
John McCain
Substance: His arguments were hard to follow at the beginning and he found his voice as the debate progressed, although he never seemed fully in control of his message. He had plenty to say about the economy, Iraq, Afghanistan and Russia and often bogged down his own answers when trying to unfurl quips and soundbites. Stuck with bumper sticker slogans on the economy and while he got a bit more detailed on foreign policy, he stayed at his usual level of abstraction. If he truly knows more about the world than Obama, he didnt show it in this debate.
Grade: B-
Style: Cluttered, jumpy and often muddled. Frequent coughing early on helped neither his arguments nor his image. Jokes about being deaf and anecdotes about Normandy and George Shultz seemed ill-advised - even his pen was old. His presentation was further hindered by his wandering discussion of the differing heights of North and South Koreans and his angry assertion about how well he knows Henry Kissinger. Fell into the classic politicians trap of inserting familiar stump speech applause lines into debate responses - which only works if done with enthusiasm and clarity (and if received by applause - a big No-No in Lehrers auditorium, which the audience obeyed seriously and silently). Keenly aware of the grand, grave occasion, McCain wavered between respectful and domineering and ended up awkward and edgy.
Grade: C-
Offense: Emphasized his bread and butter issues of taxes and spending and hit Obama on his failure to visit Iraq and his expressed willingness to meet with dictators. But while mocking his opponent on a few occasions, which reflected his acute disrespect for Obama, he did so in an insufficiently sharp and detailed manner - and unevenly worked elements of his rivals record into his attacks. Still he was utterly confident about his own experience, knowledge and policies, even when tripped by his own tongue and distracted by the strains of debate practice. The main problem: Obamas obvious preparation and sharp answers contradicted McCains frequent claims that the Democrat was uninformed and "didnt understand" key issues.
Grade: C+
Defense: He managed to ignore most of Obamas jibes and was eventually baited into giving an extended answer about his policy differences with President Bush, after his opponent repeatedly mentioned McCains regular support of Bushs budgets. Was visibly riled when clashing with Obama over a variety of issues, including Iraq, sanctions and spending. He also chose to boast about Sarah Palin (although not by name) as his maverick partner, who, after her shaky week, may no longer be his ace in the hole.
Grade: B-
Overall: McCain was McCain - evocative, intense and at times emotional and also vague, elliptical and atonal. Failed to deliver his "country first versus Obama first" message cleanly, even when offered several opportunities. Surprisingly, did not talk much about "change," virtually ceding the dominant issue of the race.
Overall grade: B-
Barack Obama
Substance: Quite manifestly immersed in the past, present and future details of policy and eager to express his views, which have been expanded, honed and solidified during the last 18 months of hard campaigning. Still, he did avoid the nitty-gritty details of policy positions in favor of broad principles and references to working Americans, thereby not presenting the kind of specifics that some voters are waiting to hear from him.
Grade: B+
Style: Polished, confident, focused. Fully prepared and able to convey a real depth of knowledge on nearly every issue. He was unhurried and rarely lost his train of thought even when the debate wended and winded - and uttered far fewer of his trademark, distracting, "ums." At times, however, Obama revealed the level of his preparation by faltering over a rehearsed answer. He seemed to deliberately focus on the moderator and the home audience, with McCain as an afterthought - except when on the attack. Chose to avoid humor, for the most part, in favor of a stern demeanor and in the process, came off as cool as a cucumber.
Grade: A
Offense: Linking McCain to Bush in his very first answer, he kept it up as his primary line of attack. Forcefully hit McCain for his early support of the Iraq War. Though he never drew blood, he did keep McCain a bit off balance, often with clever references to McCains recent statements.
Grade: B
Defense: Had a reasonable answer for every charge that came his way - with little anger, bluster or anxiety. Often interrupting McCain attacks with swift explanations and comebacks, he managed to spin accusations of being liberal as evidence of his relentless opposition to George Bush (in replies that were clearly planned). Offered a rather clumsy alternative to McCains well-known, moving story of wearing the bracelet of a soldier lost in Iraq (a gift from the soldiers mother), with a story about a bracelet of hi
Sorry, I didnt notice Y!A was limiting the amount of content in questions AGAIN.
Heres the rest.
with a story about a bracelet of his own. Fearless, without condescension, he attempted the gracious move of agreeing with or complimenting a McCain position, occasionally to his own detriment.
Grade: A-
Overall: Went for a solid, consistent performance to introduce himself to the country. He did not seem nervous, tentative or intimidated by the event and avoided mistakes from his weak debate performances during nomination season (a professorial tone and long winded answers). Standing comfortably on the stage with his rival, he showed he belonged - evocative of Reagan, circa 1980. He was so confident by the end that he reminded his biggest audience yet that his father was from Kenya. Two more performances like that and he will be very tough to beat on Election Day.
Overall grade: A-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/gradingthefirstpresidentialdebate
Answer: why does yahoo always go after you? lol, but back to the question, I do think debates should be graded on a point scale. The harder the blows the more points should be given,. Only if they make sense. Obama got what he deserved in the debate a grade A. In politics people should not be evil, arrogant, and lie which they do anyway lol, but I give points in politeness and correct facts not how much a debater doesn't like the other oponnent on how much he or she cant stand to look at him or her. Its just that simple.
Category: Elections
Real Obama Revealed In Bumbling Debate ... - RealClear Politics
1 day ago ... 2012 Campaign: President Obama's abysmal performance was a shocking revelation to many who saw it. Why were they surprised?
What is a Conspiracy Theorist?
You watched, as three WTC buildings fell into their own footprint and those who know a great deal about controlled demolition say that its impossible that those buildings came down, as a result of jet fuel and the proof is that Building #7 was not hit by a plane and there was no jet fuel
There are those who say that 19 hijackers could not have worked together, like a conspiracy, to fly those planes into those buildings, because the theory did not take one fact into account
You dont know it, but 9 of the 19 are still alive today and some of them have never been to America
You are being asked to believe in a false flag event and to accept a Conspiracy Theory that is not plausible, but if you say all the evidence points to inside job and we know that thermate was found in the residue of 9/11 and we know that the Presidents brother was in charge of security, just prior to 9/11 and we know that Mossad agents were found in the vicinity, celebrating the crashing of a plane into those buildings and the company they work for MOving SyStems IncorporAteD has MOSSAD in its name, all the letters, in the right order, and it was found that the employees were indeed Mossad agents, when they were caught dumping furniture and then suddenly, their files went classified as do all other documents that would reveal the hand of the oppressors....
........and of course, they dont want you to know about the USS Liberty event of 1967, under Johnson, in which Israelis killed many Americans and tried to blame it on Muslims and were caught and had to pay $6 billion in damages...................so they allowed this amount to be deducted from the aid the US gives them!!!
The more knowledge you collect, the more you want to reject the propaganda that is force fed
Most Americans know very little and if they speak, its propaganda feces that comes out
They vomit the same garbage they ingested and call this the truth!
There are two conspiracy theories;
1. That 19 hijackers, some of whom have never been to the USA and are still alive today, did 9/11
2. That someone with a lot of connections did 9/11 and many who participated in the murder of so many innocent people will one day step forward and tell the truth about who really did the false flag, terrorist attack
Only the second conspiracy theory makes sense and government would appreciate it if you would make fun of those who proport the second conspiracy theory, calling them, Conspiracy Theorists because the second conspiracy theory is competing with the first and it makes so much more sense that government is being exposed as the murderers that they are
Why didnt Obama ask for a real investigation? Who is his boss and why didnt he seize a chance to make the other party look bad?
Are both parties really working for the same master?
What is your conspiracy theory?
I ban stupid people, so be thoughtful about what you say here
You are welcome to debate, if you know something, but if you are a government issue, Ill ban your butt
Answer: The government really expects us to think that terrorist destroyed the twin towers and the pentagon. But guess what? Everyone who came out of the pentagon never saw an airplane or a single piece of an airplane. And for the WTC, it is IMPOSSIBLE that a single plane can destroy a whole tower. Also, Every airplane has a "yellow box" . Which is a device that records all the radio service. They can stand up to very high degrees. Only a very few amount has been burned. But the government said they could not be found. Again, a lie. Someone who worked with them saw the two yellow boxes.
Also, did they really kill Osama, or is it a lie? They gave us no evidence. They expect us to believe that they killed him with no evidence and just dumped him. They didn't even have a picture. And most Americans believed them. How sad...
Category: Current Events
Did you notice Obama extended his "xerox" acts to plans and programs of Hillary, the original, in the debate?
Obama has done it again! The debate showed how Obama practically "plagiarized" Clintons plans and programs. While watching, I cant help but get dismayed how he credited himself for plans and programs or solutions that Hillary had been saying since she started campaigning for the nomination.
He was given the first chance to make proposition on the economic issue and he rattled off statements which were very similar to what had already been announced long before by Clinton. His statements on employment, tax credits, education, social reforms and immigration were all Clinton originals. You would notice how his voice go down low when saying "Ive been working on that before" or statements like that? That low voice is a sign of inaccuracy because it is so. Check it out.
How many times did he say, "I agree with Hillary."?
The Austin debate revealed that Mr. Obama was a good spokesman of Hillary Clintons plans and programs or solutions for the countrys real change back to prosperity.
give you a nice example: the college program of Hillary was echoed by him for the first time. He never had this before. Her immigration plan that he copied, was it laid by him before this debate? Its weird to hear him saying for the first time these similar programs that HIllary had been saying long before.
The problem is he is just agreeing with many of Hillarys platforms on this debate alone. He attempted to be different but was caught naive like in talking with dictators. Now he said, "Of course, with proper preparation" which is just what Hillary said long before - with precondition.
Answer: Empty suit syndrome.
Category: Elections
Dems claim Obama lost the debate because of Mitt's hanky panky ...
A review of the debate tape reveals that, apparently, Mitt Romney needed a cheat sheet to keep the lies straight. The rules of the presidential debates are clear about not .... Let me the first to reveal that Obama didn't lose the debate, his double, Clyde, did. Obama was called back to the White House on an ... Next debate we'll see the real Obama, unless, of course he loses, in which case it will have been Clyde, again. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 ...
Dutch Government Collapses Over Its Stance on Troops for Afghanistan
A last-ditch effort to keep Dutch troops in Afghanistan brought down the government in the Netherlands early Saturday, immediately raising fears that the Western military coalition fighting the war was increasingly at risk. Even as the allied offensive in the Taliban stronghold of Marja continued Saturday, it appeared almost certain that most of - By NICHOLAS KULISH; Dexter Filkins contributed reporting from Kabul, Afghanistan, Scott Sayare from Paris, and Thom Shanker from Washington.
Who is the real Obama? Reveal yourself.?
Obama probably has the least impressive resume of any president in past 50 years. Aside from graduating from a fine university his claim to fame was one of community organizer. He then went on to become Senator where quite frankly his time served there was uninspiring and little to brag about. He had a future in mind for this country, shared it with like minded people who then propped him up as the next "big thing", whatever that thing was supposed to be. Fellow politicians and the media chose him thus devised scenarios that would put him in good faith among liberals. He essentially was coddled and protected. He won the primary and faced off against a seemingly weaker candidate in Mccain, who incidentally was propped up by the media because he was the weakest candidate thus almost fortifying Obamas chances of winning. And, he did. Obama gave a really big speech about hope and change, a brighter tomorrow, a more peaceful tomorrow but that tomorrow never came. Obama had one gift. He spoke well when the teleprompter was on. And so the likes of Oprah claimed he was "the one" however she neglected to put into proper context what "the one" meant.. I dont know. Rev Jackson was seen crying, probably vindication for him seeing as how his past attempts at becoming president were futile and readily dismissed by a more thinking public. Obama captured the "American spirit" and through that spirit America was going to be a better place. Even Mrs. Obama was moved enough to mention that "for the first time in my life I am proud of this country" perhaps not word by word but identical in sentiment. And as time went on the initial hype of Obama began to fade, a little. For sake of brevity I am skipping to the present, two days after the debate. Juxtapose what you felt about Obama when he was elected to how you feel about him now. See the contrast. It was all hype (smoke and mirrors), a manufactured presidency. Critically speaking, and based on his performance as president, Obama should never have been president. 4 years wasted on hope and change. A worsening economy under his leadership, a more unstable middle east, and a more racially divided nation. It was Obama himself who determined that if he doesnt turn the economy around it will be a one term proposition. Lets hold him to that promise. Obama is an empty suit and the liberal media continues to prop him up. He is a man of excuses. His failures are not his own. Its Bushs fault, 4 years isnt enough time, and so forth. When Clint Eastwood was talking to an empty chair it made sense. Obama is perpetrating the biggest fraud. But what you saw two nights ago was the real Obama. An inexperienced, confused and befuddled man who knew his facade was coming down in front of discerning viewers. He was embarrassed. Obama wanted to be a transformative president, give a new facelift to this nation but at the expense of our constitution. He took the liberty himself to interpret how the constitution should be applied and he did so all the while disregarding congress. Its a power grab for him and he cant get enough of it. Obamacare isnt about genuinely helping the middle class rather it is about helping the govt have expanded power over the middle class and determing a suitable punishment if you decline. Its the liberal utopia. The promise of more freedom so long as the govt can determine the appropriate freedoms. The problem is that Obama realizes his dream for this nation will not bear fruit. Obamacare eventually will be dismantled and thrown into the heap of bad legislation and he knows it. And while Obama is talking with the girls on the view, ignoring the leader of Israel, hanging out with rappers, Romney was preparing for the debate and it showed. Obamas true mediocrity was exposed. The curtain has been pulled back and the emperor wears no clothes.....
Category: Elections
President Barack Obama on Debate: That Was Not The Real Mitt ...
Will the real Mitt Romney please stand up? Making his first comments since his widely panned presidential debate performance, President Barack Obama reveals to supporters in Sloan's Lake Park in Denver, Colorado that he ...
Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News http://t.co/WuU8k463 From: ashishpanchal14 - Source: jalaram
Debate reveals real Obama http://t.co/Ubq2DL4h From: susiedean - Source: Tweet Button
They call this "opinion"? http://t.co/RAeqtnCb From: daylenyang - Source: web
Debate reveals real Obama // the author is obviously full of shit. http://t.co/eaMpdMQX From: CVDCole - Source: Safari on iOS
Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News http://t.co/4pHxLM1W From: seputarberita_ - Source: twitterfeed
Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News: LivemintDebate reveals real ObamaThe Detroit NewsDemocrats are try... http://t.co/9ihT32lo From: Keturahlbm - Source: twitterfeed
Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News: LivemintDebate reveals real ObamaThe Detroit NewsDemocrats are try... http://t.co/stmDkgTC From: bbrooks54 - Source: twitterfeed
Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News: LivemintDebate reveals real ObamaThe Detroit NewsDemocrats are try... http://t.co/uNVPaf0O From: azabrat - Source: twitterfeed
#news: Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News: LivemintDebate reveals real ObamaThe Detroit ... http://t.co/aCPS5cCO #googleupdate From: ridwanajao18 - Source: twitterfeed
Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News: LivemintDebate reveals real ObamaThe Detroit NewsDemocrats are try... http://t.co/y8ZqUVVv From: LongHQ - Source: twitterfeed
Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News: LivemintDebate reveals real ObamaThe Detroit NewsDemocrats are try... http://t.co/MvGC921q From: Araqs3 - Source: twitterfeed
GoogleNews: Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News: LivemintDebate reveals real ObamaThe Detroit NewsDemoc... http://t.co/5VYJTLhW From: The_Hanoman - Source: twitterfeed
Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News #new #news From: feelisgood - Source: twitterfeed
Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News: LivemintDebate reveals real ObamaThe Detroit NewsDemocrats are... http://t.co/trKS6OD8 #fb From: Relexridwan - Source: twitterfeed
Debate reveals real Obama - The Detroit News: LivemintDebate reveals real ObamaThe Detroit NewsDemocrats are try... http://t.co/sNnwN7fv From: juanmuriango - Source: twitterfeed